CCFC End-of-Session Legislative Update

Monday, September 30 was the final day for the Governor to sign or veto bills passed by the Legislature in 2024. While the biggest news this year was the passage of AB 247 (Muratsuchi), which placed state school bond Prop 2 on the November ballot, the Legislature has been busy considering other policy proposals that could impact community college facilities.

Below is a selection of bills and their final outcomes in the legislative process.

Procurement & Contracting

AB 2192 (Juan Carrillo) – CUPCCAA Bid Limits
Status: Signed by Governor
CCFC Position: Watch

AB 2192 updates the CUPCCAA bid limits, which are set in statute and may be adjusted every five years based on a recommendation from the California Uniform Construction Cost Accounting Commission (Commission). AB 2192 makes the following changes:

• Force account/negotiated contract/purchase order limit – increase from $60,000 to $75,000
• Informal bid limit – increase from $200,000 to $220,000

AB 2192 also expands the Commission’s authority to review potential violations when an “interested party presents evidence,” adding potential violations related to bid splitting or exceeding the CUPCCAA bid limits. AB 2192 does not provide details on what this proceeding would look like, such as whether the local agency would be able to address the Commission to provide an explanation of its contracting decisions. AB 2192 also adds “installation” to the definition of a public project under CUPCCAA. Prior versions of the bill proposed to add a new limit for projects performed by negotiated contract or purchase order, but the final version of the bill did not include this new limit category.

SB 984 (Wahab) – PLAs for State-Funded Projects
Status: No longer pertains to community colleges; vetoed by Governor
CCFC Position: Neutral (previously Oppose Unless Amended)

SB 984 required a Project Labor Agreement (PLA) for “major state construction projects.” The original version of this bill applied to community college projects funded by state bonds. CCFC requested and received an amendment to remove community colleges from the bill, due to concerns that this bill could inhibit the participation of some colleges in the state capital outlay program, and potential effects on student housing projects. The final bill required the Judicial Council and CSU to select a minimum of 3 major construction projects to require a PLA. The Governor vetoed the bill due to concerns that it could result in additional cost pressures that were not accounted for in this year’s budget.

SB 1325 (Durazo) – Best Value Procurement
Status: Died on Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file
CCFC Position: Watch

SB 1325 permitted a state or local agency to use best value procurement for the purchase of equipment with a base value of $250,000 or more. SB 1325 specified that a contract award could be determined by objective criteria related to price, quality, and other qualifications including environmental, community, and job quality benefits. SB 1325 intended to simplify the patchwork of best value authorizations and allow for consideration of values such as high-quality job creation.

Energy & Climate

SB 1374 (Becker) – Energy Generation for Customers with Multiple Meters
Status: Vetoed by Governor
CCFC Position: Support

SB 1374 attempted to address inequities in the Net Billing Tariff Aggregation that make it difficult for energy generation projects to pencil out. Currently, based on a recent Public Utilities Commission (PUC) action, non-residential customers (including community colleges) with multiple meters have to sell the power they generate back to the utility at low prices and immediately buy it back at higher retail prices. SB 1374 required the PUC to update its tariffs for non-residential utility customers with multiple meters to give credit for self-consumption similar to the tariff for residential/single meter customers. While this bill faced an uphill battle in the Legislature, the Governor ultimately vetoed it due to concerns that SB 1374 would shift costs to residential ratepayers.

Student Housing

 AB 1818 (Jackson) – Student Overnight Parking on Campus
Status: Died on Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file
CCFC Position: Watch

AB 1818 was a reintroduction of a concept from AB 302 (Berman) [2019], which previously stalled in the Legislature. AB 1818 created a pilot program at 20 community college campuses to allow overnight parking in a campus-owned or controlled parking lot or structure by a student enrolled at one of its campuses. The college could not cite the student if the student used the vehicle for housing and had a valid parking permit issued by the campus. CCFC did not have a formal position on the bill but we did have concerns about impacts to facilities, such as restrooms/showers, maintenance, security, custodial, and more.

AB 2076 (McCarty) – Student and Workforce Revolving Loan Fund
Status: Died on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file
CCFC Position: Watch

AB 2076 required the Controller to transfer $200 million from the Pooled Money Investment Account to the Student Housing Revolving Loan Fund in FY 2024-25, to allow the program to be funded using internal state borrowing. The RLF program would provide low-interest loans for student and workforce housing projects at community colleges, UC, and CSU. The FY 24-25 budget eliminated planned funding for the RLF program, including pulling back $300 million (one-time General Fund) previously intended to be appropriated each year from 2024-25 through 2028-29, and reverting $194 million of $200 million that was appropriated in 2023-24.

AB 2567 (Mathis) – Annual Student Housing Data Reporting
Status: Signed by Governor
CCFC Position: Watch

AB 2567 expands existing annual student housing data reporting to specify how many students in each category are veterans. This data reporting applies to campus-owned, campus-operated, or campus-affiliated student housing facilities, and includes information such as how many enrolled students are veterans, and how many students on campus housing waiting lists – or have removed themselves from these waiting lists – are veterans.

Other

SB 986 (Seyarto) – State and Local Ballot Label Language
Status: Died in Senate Elections and Constitutional Amendments Committee
CCFC Position: Watch

SB 986 required the ballot label for state and local bond measures to include a specific fiscal impact statement that identifies the principal and interest on the bonds and the annual payment amount. This would be done with a specific 27-word (or more) statement and would be in addition to the fiscal disclosure information that is already required by AB 195 (chaptered 2017), which requires local bonds to state the rate, duration, and amount expected to be raised annually for a proposed tax measure. The bill failed in its first committee before CCFC was able to take a formal position, however we had significant concerns that the bill could exacerbate voter confusion about bond measures while reducing the space available to explain how bond proceeds would be used to benefit the community.

Rebekah Kalleen
CCFC Executive Director