In the item below, they reference a "trailer bill," SB 132, a bill that supplements the basic budget bill.* In fact SB 132 is a grab bag, with many provisions regarding many funding issues. The part of the bill to which they refer is reproduced below.** It is apparently supported by a union within UC but opposed by building trades unions.
Note: To illustrate the "grab bag" nature of the bill, consider that the previous section deals with financial aid in summer school and the section after the one of concern deals with animal shelters.
Excerpt (from CalMatters): Senate Bill 132 would stop the University of California from moving ahead with badly needed capital improvement projects unless the university submits to a costly and cumbersome annual certification process sought by one public employee union...
(The) bill would withhold funds for all construction and capital improvements each year until a lengthy audit can certify that no contracted support service labor is – or ever was – employed across most UC capital projects, with no exceptions, even for emergencies or other unexpected circumstances.
Such legislation should never have made it out of committee. But it is a budget “trailer bill,” which is legislation drafted after the state budget’s approval without any meaningful public notice or debate. This legislation is simply unnecessary. Senate Bill 820, which was signed into law just last year, requires the university to certify each year that UC has not contracted out any portion of work that is traditionally performed by people represented by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. The law applies to certain university facilities built after 2017.
Instead of giving SB 820 a chance to work, proponents of SB 132 want to impose a brand-new set of requirements. They would expand certification requirements to include all capital expenditures, even those secured without state support, such as grants, private gifts and campus and hospital funds.
UC would have to provide a complete certification of direct employment for all service work as a condition of being allowed to encumber funds for any of the university’s new or ongoing capital projects. That means critical seismic or life safety improvements and student housing projects could be halted every year for months at a time while awaiting the audit.
UC also would have to provide a look-back — or retrospective certification — of direct employment since the year in which each UC site benefited from an allocation of public funds. This would require an independent audit and certification that includes the names, hours worked and start and end dates for each contract worker.
The audit would tie up UC projects in red tape and delay much-needed construction projects, leading to increased costs, more deferred maintenance and less earthquake safety on campuses... California’s building trade unions have joined UC and the California Coalition for Public Higher Education in opposing SB 132. The bill would discourage economic activity, postpone needed improvements and compromise the university’s ability to train and prepare students. We urge the Legislature to reject it.
Full article at https://calmatters.org/commentary/2021/07/burdensome-legislation-would-stall-construction-at-university-of-california/
===
*https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220SB132
===
***(21) The University of California Dormitory Revenue Bond Act of 1947 authorizes the University of California to issue revenue bonds, secured by a specified pledge of revenues. Existing law authorizes the university to pledge its annual General Fund support appropriation, less certain amounts, to secure the payment of its general revenue bonds or commercial paper associated with the general revenue bond program. Existing law authorizes the university to fund debt service for capital expenditures and pay-as-you-go capital outlay projects from its General Fund support appropriation, as specified. Existing law authorizes the university to proceed with capital expenditures or capital outlay projects only upon certification that all work traditionally performed by persons with University of California Service Unit (SX) job classifications is performed only by employees of the university at each beneficially affected facility, building, or other property.
This bill would require the university, as a condition of receipt of public funds to pay costs associated with a capital expenditure or capital outlay project, to complete prospective certifications, as defined, and retrospective certifications, as defined, as applicable, for direct employment of workers who perform work traditionally performed by persons with SX job classifications. The bill would require the Controller to make payment on a university claim or warrant of public funds to the university for a capital expenditure or capital outlay project only upon receiving from the university a copy of the applicable prospective and retrospective certifications for the capital expenditure or capital outlay project. The bill would prohibit the university, as a condition of receipt of public funds to pay costs associated with a capital expenditure or capital outlay project, from using or pledging any public funds to pay costs associated with the capital expenditure or capital outlay project before providing the applicable prospective and retrospective certifications and complying with other existing requirements, as applicable. The bill would authorize the university to proceed with a new or ongoing capital expenditure or capital outlay project only after submission of the applicable prospective and retrospective certifications to the Controller and making the certifications available on the university’s internet website.
[Other related provisions can be found in the bill by searching for the word "capital."]
No comments:
Post a Comment