Laserfiche WebLink
6A-20 <br />Legislative Bill Action <br />................................ ............................... <br />comply with all applicable laws or regulations <br />governing the labor or services to be provided <br />under the contract. SB 179 establishes a rebut- <br />table presumption that those businesses entering <br />into such a contract for labor or services do not <br />violate the bill's provisions if the labor contract or <br />material change to the contract meets specific <br />requirements. The author's office noted that in <br />2002 Senator Alarcon authored a similar measure, <br />SB 1466, which was vetoed by the Governor. The <br />Governor was not opposed to the merits of the <br />particular measure, but stated that he wanted <br />more time for other new labor law protections to <br />work. The sponsors on SB 179 are California <br />Labor Federation, AFL -CIO, Service Employees <br />International Union, State Building and Construc- <br />tion Trades Council, California Teamsters Public <br />Affairs Council, and the California Rural Legal <br />Assistance Foundation. Staff: Natasha Fooman, <br />Status: SenLbr &indRel, Position: Review and <br />Comment. <br />AB 229 (Pacheco). School Districts. Public <br />Project Contracts. AB 229 requires a School <br />District public project contract involving an expen- <br />diture of $50,000 or more to be competitively bid. <br />AB 229 also requires the Superintendent of Public <br />Instruction to adjust the $50,000 threshold annu- <br />ally beginning in 1/1/04 with the California Con- <br />struction Index. Staff: Natasha Fooman, Status: <br />AsBus &Prof; Hrg -4/1, Position: Review and <br />Comment. <br />AB 286 (Dutra). Mechanics' Liens. AB 286 <br />enacts the Home Improvement Consumer Protec- <br />tion Act of 2003, which provides that if a home <br />improvement contract exceeds $20,000 (regard- <br />less of later increases in price) the homeowner <br />may setoff the amount of good -faith payments to <br />the original contractor against the aggregate <br />amount of enforceable mechanics' liens and stop <br />notice claims, in an amount not exceeding <br />$20,000. AB 286 provides that a homeowner's <br />receipt of a preliminary 20 -day notice does not <br />affect the good -faith nature of a payment by the <br />owner. Staff: Natasha Fooman, Status: AsJud; <br />Hrg -4/1, Position: Review and Comment. <br />SB 780 (Torlakson)._ Vehicles. Violations. <br />Automated Enforcement Systems. SB 780 <br />revises the definition of "automated enforcement <br />system" to delete the requirement that the system <br />be designed to obtain a Gear photograph of the <br />driver of the vehicle. SB 780 requires those <br />violations to be cited as civil violations, subject to a <br />civil penalty of not more than $200 and a specified <br />administrative adjudication process. Staff: <br />Natasha Fooman, Status: SenJud; Hrg -4/1, <br />Position: Review and Comment. <br />ENVIRONMENTAL <br />AB 1051 (Goldberg). Capital Facility Fees. <br />AB 1051 sponsored by the City of Los Angeles; <br />the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, <br />and the East Bay Municipal Utility District, would <br />address a serious problem facing numerous <br />cities. A fact sheet about the bill is available on the <br />League's website at hftp: / /www.cacities.org/ click <br />on 'Issues and Advocacy' and from the Legislation <br />section click on 'General Legislation Search' and <br />enter bill number AB 1051 <br />Throughout the state, educational institutions <br />and other public agencies are seeking refunds of <br />moneys paid for utility services, as well as pro- <br />spective relief from future utility bills. These agen- <br />cies assert that each of the different types of fees <br />— connection fee, capacity fee, and utility service <br />rate — constitute "capital facilities fees" and are <br />thus subject to the provisions of the Government <br />Code. Further, these agencies contend that utility <br />rates, which include a component that is used to <br />finance ongoing capital maintenance, repairs, <br />replacement, or rehabilitation of utility infrastruc- <br />ture, are being illegally charged since the public <br />utility is not negotiating those utility rates, and the <br />public utilities have increased utility rates beyond <br />the statutorily- provided economic index. <br />Existing law states that "capital facilities fees" <br />must be negotiated between a utility and a school <br />district or public agency and increases in such <br />fees are limited by a statutorily- provided economic <br />PAGE 10 /PRIORITY FOCUS Visit the League's Official Web Site -- www.cacities.org <br />