Title: An act relating to alternative public works contracting for school district capital demonstration projects.

Brief Description: Increasing the number of demonstration projects that may be authorized by the school district project review board.

Sponsors: Senators Kastama, Schmidt, McAuliffe, Rockefeller, Pflug, Weinstein, Rasmussen, Finkbeiner and Poulsen.

Brief History:

Committee Activity: Government Operations & Elections: 1/31/06, 2/2/06 [DPS, w/oRec].

SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS & ELECTIONS

Majority Report: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 6682 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass.Signed by Senators Kastama, Chair; Berkey, Vice Chair; Roach, Ranking Minority Member; Benton, Fairley, Haugen, Kline, McCaslin and Pridemore.

Minority Report: That it be referred without recommendation.Signed by Senator Mulliken.

Staff: Diane Smith (786-7410)

Background: Until July 1, 2007, school districts are allowed to use the general contractor/construction manager method of alternative public works contracting if certain conditions are met. These conditions are that the project must be approved by the school district project review board; no more that 16 demonstration projects valued over ten million dollars may be authorized; and no more than two demonstration projects valued between five and ten million dollars may be authorized.

The Capital Projects Review Board (Board) was created in 2005 to evaluate public capital projects construction processes and to advise the Legislature on policies related to alternative public works. The Board is staffed by the Department of General Administration and consists of 11 voting members and 6 nonvoting members who serve four-year terms.

Summary of Substitute Bill: The number of projects valued over ten million dollars that may be approved by the school project review board is raised to 23.

The school district project review board must prepare and issue a report reviewing the use of the alternative public works contracting procedures by school districts. The school district project review board shall report to the Capital Projects Advisory Review Board at least thirty days before January 8, 2007.

Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill: The substitute bill requires a report from the school district project review board to be made to the Capital Projects Review Board.

Appropriation: None.

Fiscal Note: Not requested.

Committee/Commission/Task Force Created: No.

Effective Date: Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Testimony For: This is a reasonable compromise worked out with the schools. The Board also considers the bill reasonable. The School Project Review Board is a model we like: it is evaluation for the merits of the project and gives helpful feed back. Though out of projects now, the School Projects Review Board can continue, with the bill. A data call component is desired. There are $2.37 billion dollars of bond issues in the Puget Sound area alone that will fund 10 new schools and 29 renovations. These could qualify for the seven new projects.

Testimony Against: None.

Who Testified: PRO: Stan Bowman, American Institute of Architects, Washington Council; Chris Hirst, Preston Gates and Ellis; Charlie Brown, King County School Coalition.