BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 694|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
Bill No: SB 694
Author: Correa (D)
Amended: 5/18/10
Vote: 21
SENATE LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE : 3-0, 1/6/10
AYES: Cox, Aanestad, Kehoe
SENATE FLOOR : 36-0, 1/25/10
AYES: Aanestad, Ashburn, Calderon, Cedillo, Cogdill,
Corbett, Correa, Cox, Denham, DeSaulnier, Ducheny,
Dutton, Hancock, Harman, Hollingsworth, Huff, Kehoe,
Leno, Liu, Lowenthal, Negrete McLeod, Oropeza, Padilla,
Pavley, Price, Romero, Runner, Simitian, Steinberg,
Strickland, Walters, Wiggins, Wolk, Wright, Wyland, Yee
NO VOTE RECORDED: Alquist, Florez, Maldonado, Vacancy
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 74-0, 8/16/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Public contracts: public works: competitive
bidding:
procedures
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill extends the time limit for the
California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission
to review and act on disputes over whether local agencies
have followed the Uniform Public Contract Construction Cost
Accounting Act. For complaints which allege that local
CONTINUED
SB 694
Page
2
officials rejected all bids and instead claimed that the
agency can do the work less expensively, this bill extends
the time limit from 30 days to 45 days. For complaints
which allege that local officials have either exceeded the
force accounts or improperly classified the work as
maintenance, this bill extends the time limit from 30 days
to 90 days.
Assembly Amendments extend the date that the California
Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission must
receive requests to review disputes in writing from five to
eight days.
ANALYSIS : Existing law allows a public agency to elect
to be subject to the Uniform Public Construction Cost
Accounting Act (Act).
The Public Contract Code spells out the procedures that
local officials follow when they build public works
projects, including limits on the contracts' values.
When counties, cities, special districts, redevelopment
agencies, school districts, and community college districts
voluntarily adopt the standards and procedures of the Act,
they can use higher limits for their contracts. The State
Controller must tell local agencies about the Act's
benefits (AB 1047 [Houston], Chapter 144, Statutes of
2007). Approximately 700 local agencies participate.
A 14-member California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting
Commission (Commission) reviews the statutory limits every
five years. If the Commission recommends higher amounts,
the State Controller promulgates the changes and the
Legislature periodically amends the Act to reflect the new
limits. Currently, local agencies can use their own
employees for projects worth $30,000 or less. This amount
is called the "force account limit." Projects worth
$125,000, or less, rely on informal bids; projects that
cost more than $125,000 require formal bids (SB 1196
[Senate Local Government Committee], Chapter 643, Statutes
of 2006).
The Commission has 30 days to review and act on disputes.
If the Commission finds that a local agency has violated
SB 694
Page
3
the Act three times within a 10-year period, it can
prohibit that agency from using the Act for five years (AB
2372 [Pavley], Chapter 192, Statutes of 2006).
This bill requires a request for a review by the Commission
from an interested party who has presented evidence that
the work is to be performed by a public agency after
rejecting all bids, claiming work can be done less
expensively by the public agency, to be in writing and sent
by certified or registered mail received by the Commission
postmarked no later than eight business days from the date
the public agency has rejected all bids.
This bill requires:
1. A request for a review by the Commission from an
interested party who has presented evidence that the
work is to be performed by a public agency after
rejecting all bids, claiming work can be done less
expensively by the public agency, to be in writing and
sent by certified or registered mail received by the
Commission postmarked no later than eight business days
from the date the public agency has rejected all bids.
2. A request for a review by the Commission from an
interested party who has presented evidence that the
work exceeded the force account limits or the work has
been improperly classified as maintenance to be in
writing and sent by certified or registered mail
received by the Commission postmarked no later than
eight days from the date an interested party formally
complains to the public agency.
3. The Commission to commence immediately and conclude
within 45 days from the receipt of the request for
Commission review of the accounting procedures of a
participating public agency when an interested party
presents evidence the work is to be performed by a
public agency after rejecting all bids, claiming work
can be done less expensively by the public agency.
4. The Commission to commence immediately and conclude
within 90 days from the receipt of the request for
Commission review of the accounting procedures of a
SB 694
Page
4
participating public agency when an interested party
present's evidence the work exceeded the force account
limits or the work has been improperly classified as
maintenance.
Comments
Because the Commission is a part-time body without
employees, it is nearly impossible for the commissioners to
investigate complaints and then schedule a publicly-noticed
hearing within the 30-day statutory time limit. This bill
extends that deadline by creating a two-tier arrangement:
45 days for one type of allegation, and 90 days for the
other two types of complaints.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 1/14/10) (Unable to reverify)
Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Contractors Association
Air Conditioning Sheet Metal Association
Associated General Contractors
California Chapter of the American Fence Contractors'
Association
California Chapters of the National Electrical Contractors
Association
California Fence Contractors' Association
California Landscape Contractors Association
California Legislative Conference of the Plumbing, Heating,
and Piping Industry
Construction Industry Force Account Council
Engineering Contractors' Association
Flasher/Barricade Association
Marin Builders' Association
Southern California Contractors Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : The Engineering Contractors'
Association states that extending the deadlines on when
requests for review can be submitted to the Commission and
the deadlines for the Commission to render a decision help
the entire process run more smoothly and efficiently.
SB 694
Page
5
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Beall, Bill
Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Block, Blumenfield, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Carter, Chesbro, Conway,
Cook, Coto, De La Torre, De Leon, DeVore, Eng, Evans,
Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines,
Galgiani, Garrick, Gatto, Gilmore, Hagman, Hall, Harkey,
Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber, Huffman, Jeffries,
Jones, Knight, Lieu, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma,
Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava, Nestande, Niello,
Nielsen, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas,
Saldana, Silva, Skinner, Smyth, Solorio, Audra
Strickland, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres, Torrico, Tran,
Villines, Yamada, John A. Perez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bass, Blakeslee, Charles Calderon,
Davis, Norby, Vacancy
AGB:mw 8/17/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****