Wisconsin Assembly Bill AB956

Wisconsin 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/16/24
• Refer: 1/16/24
• Report Pass: 2/2/24
• Refer: 2/2/24
• Report Pass: 2/8/24
• Refer: 2/8/24
• Failed: 4/15/24

Caption

Modifications to building program project budgets, selection of project architects and engineers, single prime contracting, agency cooperation with energy conservation contractors, timeline for claims before the Claims Board, and making a transfer to the state building trust fund. (FE)

Impact

The bill mandates that for construction projects exceeding $200 million, the Building Commission will be required to waive certain single prime contracting requirements upon request from the relevant agency. Additionally, it modifies the existing limitations concerning the threshold for using a request-for-proposal process for selecting architects and engineers, raising it from $7.4 million to $15 million. This amendment is intended to streamline project management and potentially encourage more competition among firms bidding for large projects.

Summary

Assembly Bill 956 introduces significant modifications to the processes governing state building projects, impacting budget management, contract selection for architects and engineers, single prime contracting, energy conservation projects, and claims against the state. One of the prominent changes is that the Building Commission will be restricted from increasing the budget of any project by more than 10% without prior approval from the Joint Committee on Finance. This aims to enhance fiscal responsibility while providing flexibility in managing unforeseen conditions in project development.

Contention

A notable point of contention could arise around the bill's approach to claims made against the state regarding construction contracts. Under the new provisions, the Claims Board is tasked with making determinations on specific claims within a six-month window, including scenarios where the claim might be better adjudicated in court. This introduces tighter timelines for claim decisions, which could lead to concerns about the rights of contractors and the efficiency of the claims process, particularly given the complexity typically involved in construction-related disputes.