SB 4 — Public contract: design-build: public private partnerships.

Summary

(1) Existing law designates the Judicial Council as the entity having full responsibility, jurisdiction, control, and authority over trial court facilities for which title is held by the state, including the acquisition and development of facilities. Existing law requires the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to design, construct, or renovate prison housing units, prison support buildings, and programming space as specified. Existing law authorizes the Director of General Services, when authorized by the Legislature, to use the design-build procurement process for a specific project to contract and procure state office facilities, other buildings, structures, and related facilities. Existing law requires a bidder participating in the process to provide written declarations, subject to misdemeanor penalties. This bill would also authorize the Director of General Services or the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, as appropriate, to use the design-build procurement process in contracting and procuring a state office facility or prison facility, and would authorize the Judicial Council to use that same process in contracting and procuring a court facility, but would limit this authorization to 5 total projects, to be approved by the Department of Finance, as specified. The bill would require the Department of General Services, the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, and the Judicial Council to submit to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee, before January 1, 2014, a report containing a description of each public works project procured through the design-build process, as specified. The bill would require a bidder participating in the process to provide written declarations, subject to misdemeanor penalties, and would thereby impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law sets forth requirements for the solicitation and evaluation of bids and the awarding of contracts by public entities for the erection, construction, alteration, repair, or improvement of any public structure, building, road, or other public improvement. Existing law also authorizes specified state agencies, cities, and counties to implement alternative procedures for the awarding of contracts on a design‑build basis. Existing law, until January 1, 2011, authorizes transit operators to enter into a design-build contract, as defined, according to specified procedures. This bill would, until January 1, 2014, allow certain state and local transportation entities, if authorized by the California Transportation Commission, to use a design‑build process for contracting on transportation projects, as specified. The bill would require a transportation entity to implement, or contract with a third-party to implement, a labor compliance program for design-build projects, except as specified. The bill would also require these transportation entities to report to the commission, and the commission to submit a mid-term and a final report to the Legislature, regarding the design-build process as specified. The bill would establish a procedure for submitting bids that includes a requirement that design-build entities provide a statement of qualifications submitted to the transportation entity that is verified under oath. Because a verification under oath is made under penalty of perjury, the bill would, by requiring a verification, create a new crime and thereby impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Under existing law, any work of grading, clearing, demolition, or construction undertaken by a redevelopment agency is required to be done by contract after competitive bidding if the cost of that work exceeds a specified amount. This bill would, until January 1, 2016, authorize a redevelopment agency, with the approval of its duly constituted board in a public hearing, to enter into design-build contracts for projects, as defined, in excess of $1,000,000, in accordance with specified provisions. This bill would authorize up to 10 design-build contracts, would require an agency to apply to the State Public Works Board for authorization to enter a design-build contract, as provided, and would require the State Public Works Board to notify the Legislative Analyst's Office when 10 projects have been approved. This bill would also require an agency using the design-build method to submit a report to the Legislative Analyst's Office, as provided, and for the Legislative Analyst to report to the Legislature before January 1, 2015, on the agency's use of the design-build method, as provided. This bill would require specified information to be verified under oath, thus imposing a state-mandated local program by expanding the scope of existing crime. (4) Existing law authorizes the Department of Transportation and regional transportation agencies, as defined, until January 1, 2012, to enter into comprehensive development lease agreements with public and private entities, or consortia of those entities, for certain transportation projects that may charge certain users of those projects tolls and user fees, subject to various terms and requirements. Existing law limits the number of projects authorized pursuant to these provisions to 2 in northern California and 2 in southern California. This bill would extend the authorization for these agreements to January 1, 2017, and would delete the restriction on the number of projects that may be undertaken pursuant to these provisions. The bill would require the projects to be primarily designed to achieve improved mobility, improved operations or safety, and quantifiable air quality benefits. (5) Existing law requires that the negotiated lease agreements be submitted to the Legislature for approval or rejection. Under existing law, the Legislature has 60 legislative days to act after submittal of the agreement and the agreement is deemed approved unless both houses of the Legislature concur in the passage of a resolution rejecting the agreement. Existing law prohibits the Legislature from amending these lease agreements. The bill would eliminate that prohibition and the provision requiring approval or rejection by the Legislature. The bill would require that all lease agreements first be submitted to the California Transportation Commission for approval, then to the Legislature and the Public Infrastructure Advisory Commission, as defined, for review, as specified. The bill would also require the Public Infrastructure Advisory Commission to perform specified acts and would authorize that commission to charge the department and regional transportation agencies a fee for specified services. (6) Existing law authorizes the department and regional transportation agencies to utilize various procurement approaches, including, among other things, acceptance of unsolicited proposals, as specified. This bill would prohibit the department or a regional transportation agency from awarding a contract to an unsolicited bidder without receiving at least one other responsible bid. (7) Under existing law, for these projects, tolls and user fees may not be charged to noncommercial vehicles with 3 or fewer axles. This bill would eliminate that prohibition. (8) Existing law imposes various contract requirements for these projects, including permitting compensation for a leaseholder for losses in toll or fee revenues in certain instances if caused by the construction of supplemental transportation projects, but prohibits the compensation to exceed the reduction in revenues. This bill would prohibit that compensation from exceeding the difference between the reduction in revenues and the amount necessary to cover the costs of debt service, as specified. The bill would additionally require the agreements to include an indemnity agreement, as specified, and to authorize the contracting entity or lessee to utilize the design-build method of procurement for transportation projects, subject to specified conditions. The bill would also require contracting entities or lessees to have specified qualifications. The bill would authorize the department or the regional transportation agency, when evaluating a proposal submitted by a contracting entity or lessee, to award a contract on the basis of the lowest bid or best value, as defined. The bill would provide that the Department of Transportation is the responsible agency for the performance of certain tasks and the preparation of certain documents, relative to projects on the state highway system, where a regional transportation agency is otherwise the sponsor of the project. The bill would state that the department may perform those functions with department employees or with consultants contracted by the department. (9) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

• Chaptered 02/20/09 - Chaptered Current pdf February 20, 2009
• Enrolled 02/15/09 - Enrolled pdf February 15, 2009
• Amended 02/14/09 - Amended Senate pdf February 14, 2009
• Introduced 02/11/09 - Introduced pdf February 11, 2009
• SB4 View text html

Action History

1. February 20, 2009

   Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 2, Statutes of 2009-10 Second Extraordinary Session.

2. February 20, 2009

   Approved by Governor.

3. February 19, 2009

   Enrolled. To Governor at 4 p.m.

4. February 15, 2009

   In Senate. To enrollment.

5. February 15, 2009

   Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 43. Noes 29. Page 53.) To Senate.

6. February 15, 2009

   Read second time.

7. February 15, 2009

   (Ayes 71. Noes 1. Page 51.)

8. February 15, 2009

   Art. IV, Sec. 8(b), of Constitution dispensed with.

9. February 15, 2009

   Read first time.

10. February 15, 2009

    In Assembly.

11. February 14, 2009

    Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 30. Noes 4. Page 31.) To Assembly.

12. February 14, 2009

    Read third time. Amended. (Page 30.)

13. February 14, 2009

    Placed on third reading.

14. February 14, 2009

    From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 22. Noes 13. Page 41.)

15. February 14, 2009

    Re-referred to Com. on B. & F.R.

16. February 14, 2009

    Senate Rule 29.3 suspended. (Ayes 23. Noes 13. Page 28.)

17. February 12, 2009

    Placed on third reading.

18. February 12, 2009

    Read second time.

19. February 12, 2009

    Withdrawn from committee.

20. February 11, 2009

    Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS.

Sponsors

• Cogdill · Primary

Votes

Subjects