BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 2278
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   May 14, 2014

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                  Mike Gatto, Chair

                     AB 2278 (Weber) - As Amended:  May 6, 2014 

          Policy Committee:                              JEDE Vote:8-0

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          No     Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill revises the maximum amount of a bid preference that  
          may be applied to the award of a state contract for certified  
          California small businesses and California businesses that  
          perform 50% of the work within a distressed area under the  
          Target Area Contract Preference Act (TACPA).  Specifically, this  
          bill:

          1)Increases the maximum amount of a bid preference for small  
            businesses and TACPA from $50,000 to $350,000, but also keeps  
            the maximum preference at 5% of the bid amount.

          2)Increases the maximum financial value of all combined  
            preferences from $100,000 to $400,000 for any bid that  
            includes a small business preference, but also keeps the  
            maximum preference at 5% of the bid amount.

          3)Modifies the calculation of the small business preference by  
            basing it on the bid of the lowest responsible non-small  
            business rather than just the lowest responsible bidder.  A  
            responsible bidder is a bid that is fully compliant with all  
            contract requirements.

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          It is unknown how many bidders would win a contract based on the  
          new $350,000 maximum small business/TACPA preference, or  
          $400,000 maximum for combined preferences, provided under this  
          bill, although each occurrence would result in a cost of up to  
          $300,000 (the difference between the $50,000 and $350,000).

          Because the bill maintains the 5% bid preference, it appears the  








                                                                  AB 2278
                                                                  Page  2

          bill would only impact contracts over $1 million. For 2013-14,  
          year-to-date the state has awarded 164 goods, services, IT and  
          construction contracts above $1 million to small businesses.   
          For 2011 and 2012 (most recent data), 10 contracts have been  
          awarded to bidders that used the TACPA preference.  

           Costs from the General Fund and various special funds are  
          unknown, however given the significant expansion in bid  
          preference, could be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars  
          annually.
           
          COMMENTS  :    

           1)Purpose  .  Currently, California small businesses receive a 5%  
            preference when bidding on state contracts limited to $50,000.  
            According to the author, as the contracts increase, the value  
            of this preference loses its benefit.  By increasing the  
            ceiling to $350,000, the author contends small businesses will  
            be able to better compete to win large contracts.

           2)Small Business Bid Preference  . Current law requires state  
            agencies, when awarding contracts using the lowest responsible  
            bidder method, to provide a 5% bid preference to certified  
            (and qualified) small businesses or to non-small businesses  
            that subcontract with small businesses.  The 5% bid preference  
            that is used for evaluation purposes refers to the 5% of the  
            lowest responsible bidder meeting specifications.  Below is an  
            example of how the preference would be applied for evaluation  
            purposes.  

             ------------------------------------------------------------ 
            |Bidder   |Bid       |5% Bid         |Bid Amount   |Actual   |
            |         |Amount    |Preference     |for          |Contract |
            |         |          |               |Evaluation   |Award    |
            |         |          |               |Purposes     |(i.e.,   |
            |         |          |               |             |Bid      |
            |         |          |               |             |Amount   |
            |---------+----------+---------------+-------------+---------|
            |Bidder A |$1,035,000|$1,000,000 *   |$1,000,000 - |$1,035,00|
            |         |          |.05 = $50,000  |$50,000 =    |0        |
            |(small   |          |               |$985,000     |         |
            |business)|          |               |             |         |
            |         |          |               |             |         |
            |---------+----------+---------------+-------------+---------|
            |Bidder B |$1,000,000|Ineligible for |$1,000,000   |Did not  |








                                                                  AB 2278
                                                                  Page  3

            |         |          |a small        |             |win      |
            |(non-smal|          |business bid   |             |         |
            |l        |          |preference     |             |         |
            |business)|          |               |             |         |
            |         |          |               |             |         |
             ------------------------------------------------------------ 
                  Source: DGS

               Note that the bid preference is only used to evaluate, or  
               "score" the bid, and does not affect the actual amount of  
               the contract award.  Therefore, the small business is  
               awarded the contract at $1,035,000.     

           3)Target Area Contract Preference Act (TACPA)  . TACPA provides a  
            5% bid preference on service and commodity contracts valued at  
            more than $100,000 if the business work site is located in a  
            distressed area. Companies qualifying for the 5% work site  
            preference may request an additional 1% to 4% workforce  
            preference by certifying to hire a specified percent of their  
            contract workforce labor hours from a targeted employment  
            area.

           4)Disabled Veteran Business Enterprises (DVBE)  . The state also  
            offers a DVBE business incentive.  The DVBE has a maximum bid  
            preference of $50,000. This bill may or may not impact DVBEs  
            that are large businesses.  While this bill increases the  
            maximum bid preference amount from $50,000 to $350,000 for  
            small businesses and TACPA-eligible businesses, the maximum  
            preference remains the same for DVBEs at $50,000.  However,  
            most certified DVBEs are also certified small businesses;  
            currently, 1,326 out of 1,482 certified DVBEs, or 89% of  
            DVBEs, are small businesses that would be eligible for the  
            $350,000 preference under this bill, and for the $400,000  
            maximum for combined (SB and DVBE) preferences.  The remaining  
            156 large DVBE firms, or 11% of certified DVBEs would be only  
            eligible for the maximum $50,000 DVBE bid preference (and  
            potentially a TACPA preference) and may affect the decision of  
            contract awards that have a spread of $350,000 or less.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Misty Feusahrens / APPR. / (916)  
          319-2081 












                                                                  AB 2278
                                                                  Page  4