Public contracts: local water infrastructure projects: Construction Manager/General Contractor project delivery method.
Impact
The bill explicitly expands the capability of local agencies to address urgent water issues by allowing them to undertake up to 15 capital outlay projects utilizing the CM/GC method. This method not only enhances the local capacity to manage water challenges but also positions local governments to respond effectively to environmental factors such as climate change. The new framework encourages agencies to award contracts based on the best value or to the lowest responsible bidder, which could contribute to cost-effectiveness in project implementation.
Summary
Senate Bill 598, introduced by Senator Durazo, amends the Public Contract Code to allow local agencies in California the authority to use the Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC) project delivery method for certain water infrastructure projects. This bill aims to address water supply shortages caused by drought and climate change by enabling local agencies to procure construction and preconstruction services within the same contract framework, facilitating a more efficient and streamlined approach to projects. The provisions enacted by this bill are set to remain in effect until January 1, 2031.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding SB 598 has been largely favorable, particularly in light of California's ongoing water challenges. Many stakeholders view this bill as a proactive measure to enhance local responses to water shortages and improve project delivery efficiency. However, there are some concerns regarding the potential for increased complexity in contracting processes and the potential strain on local agency resources.
Contention
A point of contention is the bill's provision that expands the definition of perjury, which is seen by some as creating a state-mandated local program that could impose additional burdens on local agencies. Furthermore, the bill includes a clause stating that the state is not required to reimburse local agencies for costs associated with the new requirements, which raises concerns about unfunded mandates and the impact on local budgets while managing new regulatory responsibilities. Stakeholders advocate for a balanced approach that ensures accountability without hampering local operational capabilities.