Public contracts: school districts: bidding requirements.
Summary
Under existing law, the governing board of a school district may require each prospective bidder for certain contracts involving an expenditure of more than $50,000 to submit a standardized questionnaire and financial statement, including information relating to financial ability and experience in performing public works. Existing law further requires a school district requiring the above information to adopt and apply a uniform system of rating bidders on the basis of the completed questionnaires and financial statements, as specified. This bill would require the questionnaire and the uniform system of rating bidders described above to contain, at a minimum, substantially similar information, questions, and requirements as that of the standardized questionnaire and model guidelines for rating bidders developed by the Department of Industrial Relations for public entities, as specified. The bill would also require the governing board of a school district, for contracts involving projects valued at $1,000,000 or more, if the district chooses not to follow specified bidding procedures for school districts, to use other procedures for bidding applicable to public entities, as prescribed. By imposing new duties on local officials, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. 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, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Bill status
failed
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2009
Committee Review
Aug 2010
Senate Passage
Jun 2009
Assembly Passage
Governor
Introduced Feb 24, 2009
Last action Nov 30, 2010
Floor votes · Senate Jun 1, 2009
How they voted
21–13
Passed · 1 other
Total votes 35
Jun 1, 2009
D
Democratic22
95% Yea
R
Republican13
100% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
23
Key actions
4
Committee
5
Amendments
1
Aug 13, 2010
Lower · Passed
Set, second hearing. Held in committee and under submission.
lower
Aug 5, 2010
Committee
Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Jun 30, 2010
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee on June 29.)
lower
Jun 30, 2010
Committee
From committee: Do pass, but first be re-referred to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 3.) Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jun 1, 2009
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (21-13-1)
senate
May 13, 2009
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 8. Noes 4. Page 848.)
upper
Apr 28, 2009
Committee
From committee: Do pass, but first be re-referred to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 3. Page 675.) Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Feb 24, 2009
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
JO
Jenny Oropeza
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 258
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 258. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline