SB 768: Transportation projects: comprehensive development lease agreements.
- Session Year: 2017-2018
- House: Senate
- Latest Version Date: 2017-03-27
Existing law authorizes the Department of Transportation and regional transportation agencies to enter into comprehensive development lease agreements with public and private entities, or consortia of those entities, for certain transportation projects that may charge certain users of those projects tolls and user fees, subject to various terms and requirements. These arrangements are commonly known as public-private partnerships. Existing law provides that a lease agreement may not be entered into under these provisions on or after January 1, 2017.
This bill would extend this authorization indefinitely. The bill would also make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions by correcting obsolete cross-references.
Existing law requires the Department of Transportation and the California Transportation Commission to develop estimates of available state and federal funds and provides that, after deducting expenditures for administration, operation, maintenance, local assistance, safety, rehabilitation, and certain environmental enhancement and mitigation expenditures, the remaining funds are to be available for capital improvement projects to be programmed in the State Transportation Improvement Program.This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.Existing law requires the Department of Transportation and the California Transportation Commission to develop estimates of available state and federal funds and provides that, after deducting expenditures for administration, operation, maintenance, local assistance, safety, rehabilitation, and certain environmental enhancement and mitigation expenditures, the remaining funds are to be available for capital improvement projects to be programmed in the State Transportation Improvement Program.
This bill would make nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.
(a)(1)Best value means a value determined by objective criteria, including, but not limited to, price, features, functions, life-cycle costs, and other criteria deemed appropriate by the department or the regional transportation agency.
(2)Contracting entity or lessee means a public or private entity, or consortia thereof, that has entered into a comprehensive development lease agreement with the department or a regional transportation agency for a transportation project pursuant to this section.
(3)Design-build means a procurement process in which both the design and construction of a project are procured from a single entity.
(4)Regional transportation agency means any of the following:
(A)A transportation planning agency as defined in Section 29532 or 29532.1 of the Government Code.
(B)A county transportation commission as defined in Section 130050, 130050.1, or 130050.2 of the Public Utilities Code.
(C)Any other local or regional transportation entity that is designated by statute as a regional transportation agency.
(D)A joint exercise of powers authority as defined in Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 6500) of Division 7 of Title 1 of the Government Code, with the consent of a transportation planning agency or a county transportation commission for the jurisdiction in which the transportation project will be developed.
(5)Public Infrastructure Advisory Commission means a unit or auxiliary organization established by the Transportation Agency that advises the department and regional transportation agencies in developing transportation projects through performance-based infrastructure partnerships.
(6)Transportation project means one or more of the following: planning, design, development, finance, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, improvement, acquisition, lease, operation, or maintenance of highway, public street, rail, or related facilities supplemental to existing facilities currently owned and operated by the department or regional transportation agencies that is consistent with the requirements of subdivision (c).
(b)(1)The Public Infrastructure Advisory Commission shall do all of the following:
(A)Identify transportation project opportunities throughout the state.
(B)Research and document similar transportation projects throughout the state, nationally, and internationally, and further identify and evaluate lessons learned from these projects.
(C)Assemble and make available to the department or regional transportation agencies a library of information, precedent, research, and analysis concerning infrastructure partnerships and related types of public-private transactions for public infrastructure.
(D)Advise the department and regional transportation agencies, upon request, regarding infrastructure partnership suitability and best practices.
(E)Provide, upon request, procurement-related services to the department and regional transportation agencies for infrastructure partnership.
(2)The Public Infrastructure Advisory Commission may charge a fee to the department and regional transportation agencies for the services described in subparagraphs (D) and (E) of paragraph (1), the details of which shall be articulated in an agreement entered into between the Public Infrastructure Advisory Commission and the department or the regional transportation agency.
(c)(1)Notwithstanding any other provision of law, only the department, in cooperation with regional transportation agencies, and regional transportation agencies, may solicit proposals, accept unsolicited proposals, negotiate, and enter into comprehensive development lease agreements with public or private entities, or consortia thereof, for transportation projects.
(2)Projects proposed pursuant to this section and associated lease agreements shall be submitted to the California Transportation Commission. The commission, at a regularly scheduled public hearing, shall select the candidate projects from projects nominated by the department or a regional transportation agency after reviewing the nominations for consistency with paragraphs (3) and (4). Approved projects may proceed with the process described in paragraph (5).
(3)The projects authorized pursuant to this section shall be primarily designed to achieve the following performance objectives:
(A)Improve mobility by improving travel times or reducing the number of vehicle hours of delay in the affected corridor.
(B)Improve the operation or safety of the affected corridor.
(C)Provide quantifiable air quality benefits for the region in which the project is located.
(4)In addition to meeting the requirements of paragraph (3), the projects authorized pursuant to this section shall address a known forecast demand, as determined by the department or regional transportation agency.
(5)At least 60 days prior to executing a final lease agreement authorized pursuant to this section, the department or regional transportation agency shall submit the agreement to the Legislature and the Public Infrastructure Advisory Commission for review. Prior to submitting a lease agreement to the Legislature and the Public Infrastructure Advisory Commission, the department or regional transportation agency shall conduct at least one public hearing at a location at or near the proposed facility for purposes of receiving public comment on the lease agreement. Public comments made during this hearing shall be submitted to the Legislature and the Public Infrastructure Advisory Commission with the lease agreement. The Secretary of Transportation or the chairperson of the Senate or Assembly fiscal committees or policy committees with jurisdiction over transportation matters may, by written notification to the department or regional transportation agency, provide any comments about the proposed agreement within the 60-day period prior to the execution of the final agreement. The department or regional transportation agency shall consider those comments prior to executing a final agreement and shall retain the discretion for executing the final lease agreement.
(d)For the purpose of facilitating those projects, the agreements between the parties may include provisions for the lease of rights-of-way in, and airspace over or under, highways, public streets, rail, or related facilities for the granting of necessary easements, and for the issuance of permits or other authorizations to enable the construction of transportation projects. Facilities subject to an agreement under this section shall, at all times, be owned by the department or the regional transportation agency, as appropriate. For department projects, the commission shall certify the departments determination of the useful life of the project in establishing the lease agreement terms. In consideration therefor, the agreement shall provide for complete reversion of the leased facility, together with the right to collect tolls and user fees, to the department or regional transportation agency, at the expiration of the lease at no charge to the department or regional transportation agency. At the time of the reversion, the facility shall be delivered to the department or regional transportation agency, as applicable, in a condition that meets the performance and maintenance standards established by the department or regional transportation agency and that is free of any encumbrance, lien, or other claims.
(e)Agreements between the department or regional transportation agency and the contracting entity or lessee shall authorize the contracting entity or lessee to use a design-build method of procurement for transportation projects, subject to the requirements for utilizing such a method contained in Chapter 6.5 (commencing with Section 6800) 6820) of Part 1 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, other than Sections 6802, 6803, and 6813 of that code, if those provisions are enacted by the Legislature during the 200910 Regular Session, or a 200910 extraordinary session. 6821 and 6822 of that code.
(f)(1)(A)Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, for projects on the state highway system, the department is the responsible agency for the performance of project development services, including performance specifications, preliminary engineering, prebid services, the preparation of project reports and environmental documents, and construction inspection services. The department is also the responsible agency for the preparation of documents that may include, but need not be limited to, the size, type, and desired design character of the project, performance specifications covering the quality of materials, equipment, and workmanship, preliminary plans, and any other information deemed necessary to describe adequately the needs of the department or regional transportation agency.
(B)The department may use department employees or consultants to perform the services described in subparagraph (A), consistent with Article XXII of the California Constitution. Department resources, including personnel requirements, necessary for the performance of those services shall be included in the departments capital outlay support program for workload purposes in the annual Budget Act.
(2)The department or a regional transportation agency may exercise any power possessed by it with respect to transportation projects to facilitate the transportation projects pursuant to this section. The department, regional transportation agency, and other state or local agencies may provide services to the contracting entity or lessee for which the public entity is reimbursed, including, but not limited to, planning, environmental planning, environmental certification, environmental review, preliminary design, design, right-of-way acquisition, construction, maintenance, and policing of these transportation projects. The department or regional transportation agency, as applicable, shall regularly inspect the facility and require the contracting entity or lessee to maintain and operate the facility according to adopted standards. Except as may otherwise be set forth in the lease agreement, the contracting entity or lessee shall be responsible for all costs due to development, maintenance, repair, rehabilitation, and reconstruction, and operating costs.
(g)(1)In selecting private entities with which to enter into these agreements, notwithstanding any other provision of law, the department and regional transportation agencies may utilize, but are not limited to utilizing, one or more of the following procurement approaches:
(A)Solicitations of proposals for defined projects and calls for project proposals within defined parameters.
(B)Prequalification and short-listing of proposers prior to final evaluation of proposals.
(C)Final evaluation of proposals based on qualifications and best value. The California Transportation Commission shall develop and adopt criteria for making that evaluation prior to evaluation of a proposal.
(D)Negotiations with proposers prior to award.
(E)Acceptance of unsolicited proposals, with issuance of requests for competing proposals. Neither the department nor a regional transportation agency may award a contract to an unsolicited bidder without receiving at least one other responsible bid.
(2)When evaluating a proposal submitted by the contracting entity or lessee, the department or the regional transportation agency may award a contract on the basis of the lowest bid or best value.
(h)The contracting entity or lessee shall have the following qualifications:
(1)Evidence that the members of the contracting entity or lessee have completed, or have demonstrated the experience, competency, capability, and capacity to complete, a project of similar size, scope, or complexity, and that proposed key personnel have sufficient experience and training to competently manage and complete the design and construction of the project, and a financial statement that ensures that the contracting entity or lessee has the capacity to complete the project.
(2)The licenses, registration, and credentials required to design and construct the project, including, but not limited to, information on the revocation or suspension of any license, credential, or registration.
(3)Evidence that establishes that members of the contracting entity or lessee have the capacity to obtain all required payment and performance bonding, liability insurance, and errors and omissions insurance.
(4)Evidence that the contracting entity or lessee has workers compensation experience, history, and a worker safety program of members of the contracting entity or lessee that is acceptable to the department or regional transportation agency.
(5)A full disclosure regarding all of the following with respect to each member of the contracting entity or lessee during the past five years:
(A)Any serious or willful violation of Part 1 (commencing with Section 6300) of Division 5 of the Labor Code or the federal Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-596).
(B)Any instance where members of the contracting entity or lessee were debarred, disqualified, or removed from a federal, state, or local government public works project.
(C)Any instance where members of the contracting entity or lessee, or its owners, officers, or managing employees submitted a bid on a public works project and were found to be nonresponsive or were found by an awarding body not to be a responsible bidder.
(D)Any instance where members of the contracting entity or lessee, or its owners, officers, or managing employees defaulted on a construction contract.
(E)Any violations of the Contractors State License Law (Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 7000) of Division 3 of the Business and Professions Code), including, but not limited to, alleged violations of federal or state law regarding the payment of wages, benefits, apprenticeship requirements, or personal income tax withholding, or Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) withholding requirements.
(F)Any bankruptcy or receivership of any member of the contracting entity or lessee, including, but not limited to, information concerning any work completed by a surety.
(G)Any settled adverse claims, disputes, or lawsuits between the owner of a public works project and any member of the contracting entity or lessee during the five years preceding submission of a bid under this article, in which the claim, settlement, or judgment exceeds fifty thousand dollars ($50,000). Information shall also be provided concerning any work completed by a surety during this five-year period.
(H)If the contracting entity or lessee is a partnership, joint venture, or an association that is not a legal entity, a copy of the agreement creating the partnership or association that specifies that all general partners, joint venturers, or association members agree to be fully liable for the performance under the agreement.
(i)No agreement entered into pursuant to this section shall infringe on the authority of the department or a regional transportation agency to develop, maintain, repair, rehabilitate, operate, or lease any transportation project. Lease agreements may provide for reasonable compensation to the contracting entity or lessee for the adverse effects on toll revenue or user fee revenue due to the development, operation, or lease of supplemental transportation projects with the exception of any of the following:
(1)Projects identified in regional transportation plans prepared pursuant to Section 65080 of the Government Code.
(2)Safety projects.
(3)Improvement projects that will result in incidental capacity increases.
(4)Additional high-occupancy vehicle lanes or the conversion of existing lanes to high-occupancy vehicle lanes.
(5)Projects located outside the boundaries of a public-private partnership project, to be defined by the lease agreement.
However, compensation to a contracting entity or lessee shall only be made after a demonstrable reduction in use of the facility resulting in reduced toll or user fee revenues, and may not exceed the difference between the reduction in those revenues and the amount necessary to cover the costs of debt service, including principal and interest on any debt incurred for the development, operation, maintenance, or rehabilitation of the facility.
(j)(1)Agreements entered into pursuant to this section shall authorize the contracting entity or lessee to impose tolls and user fees for use of a facility constructed by it, and shall require that over the term of the lease the toll revenues and user fees be applied to payment of the capital outlay costs for the project, the costs associated with operations, toll and user fee collection, administration of the facility, reimbursement to the department or other governmental entity for the costs of services to develop and maintain the project, police services, and a reasonable return on investment. The agreement shall require that, notwithstanding Sections 164, 188, and 188.1, any excess toll or user fee revenue either be applied to any indebtedness incurred by the contracting entity or lessee with respect to the project, improvements to the project, or be paid into the State Highway Account, or for all three purposes, except that any excess toll revenue under a lease agreement with a regional transportation agency may be paid to the regional transportation agency for use in improving public transportation in and near the project boundaries.
(2)Lease agreements shall establish specific toll or user fee rates. Any proposed increase in those rates not otherwise established or identified in the lease agreement during the term of the agreement shall first be approved by the department or regional transportation agency, as appropriate, after at least one public hearing conducted at a location near the proposed or existing facility.
(3)The collection of tolls and user fees for the use of these facilities may be extended by the commission or regional transportation agency at the expiration of the lease agreement. However, those tolls or user fees shall not be used for any purpose other than for the improvement, continued operation, or maintenance of the facility.
(k)Agreements entered into pursuant to this section shall include indemnity, defense, and hold harmless provisions agreed to by the department or regional transportation agency and the contracting entity or lessee, including provisions for indemnifying the State of California or the regional transportation agency against any claims or losses resulting or accruing from the performance of the contracting entity or lessee.
(l)The plans and specifications for each transportation project on the state highway system developed, maintained, repaired, rehabilitated, reconstructed, or operated pursuant to this section shall comply with the departments standards for state transportation projects. The lease agreement shall include performance standards, including, but not limited to, levels of service. The agreement shall require facilities on the state highway system to meet all requirements for noise mitigation, landscaping, pollution control, and safety that otherwise would apply if the department were designing, building, and operating the facility. If a facility is on the state highway system, the facility leased pursuant to this section shall, during the term of the lease, be deemed to be a part of the state highway system for purposes of identification, maintenance, enforcement of traffic laws, and for the purposes of Division 3.6 (commencing with Section 810) of Title 1 of the Government Code.
(m)Failure to comply with the lease agreement in any significant manner shall constitute a default under the agreement and the department or the regional transportation agency, as appropriate, shall have the option to initiate processes to revert the facility to the public agency.
(n)The assignment authorized by subdivision (c) of Section 130240 of the Public Utilities Code is consistent with this section.
(o)A lease to a private entity pursuant to this section is deemed to be public property for a public purpose and exempt from leasehold, real property, and ad valorem taxation, except for the use, if any, of that property for ancillary commercial purposes.
(p)Nothing in this section is intended to infringe on the authority to develop high-occupancy toll lanes pursuant to Section 149.4, 149.5, or 149.6.
(q)Nothing in this section shall be construed to allow the conversion of any existing nontoll or nonuser-fee lanes into tolled or user fee lanes with the exception of a high-occupancy vehicle lane that may be operated as a high-occupancy toll lane for vehicles not otherwise meeting the requirements for use of that lane.
(r)The lease agreement shall require the contracting entity or lessee to provide any information or data requested by the California Transportation Commission or the Legislative Analyst. The commission, in cooperation with the Legislative Analyst, shall annually prepare a report on the progress of each project and ultimately on the operation of the resulting facility. The report shall include, but not be limited to, a review of the performance standards, a financial analysis, and any concerns or recommendations for changes in the program authorized by this section.
(s)Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, no lease agreement may be entered into pursuant to the section that affects, alters, or supersedes the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), dated November 26, 2008, entered into by the Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and the San Francisco County Transportation Authority, relating to the financing of the U.S. Highway 101/Doyle Drive reconstruction project located in the City and County of San Francisco.
(t)No lease agreements may be entered into under this section on or after January 1, 2017.SECTION 1.Section 163 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read:163.The Legislature, through the enactment of this section, intends to establish a policy for the use of all transportation funds that are available to the state, including, but not limited to, the State Highway Account, the Public Transportation Account, and federal funds. For the purposes of this section, federal funds means any obligational authority to be provided under annual federal transportation appropriations acts. The department and the commission shall prepare fund estimates pursuant to Sections 14524 and 14525 of the Government Code based on the following:(a)Annual expenditures for the administration of the department shall be the same as the most recent Budget Act, adjusted for inflation.(b)Annual expenditures for the maintenance and operation of the state highway system shall be the same as the most recent Budget Act, adjusted for inflation and inventory, or, when a maintenance plan has been enacted pursuant to Section 164.6, maintenance expenditures shall be based on planned expenditures in that plan.(c)Annual expenditures for the rehabilitation of the state highway system shall be the same as the most recent Budget Act, or, when a long-range rehabilitation plan has been enacted pursuant to Section 164.6, shall be based on planned expenditures in that long-range plan.(d)Annual expenditures for local assistance shall be the amount required to fund local assistance programs required by state or federal law or regulations, including, but not limited to, railroad grade crossing maintenance, active transportation, congestion mitigation and air quality, regional surface transportation programs, local highway bridge replacement and rehabilitation, local seismic retrofit, local hazard elimination and safety, and local emergency relief.(e)After deducting expenditures for administration, operation, maintenance, local assistance, safety, and rehabilitation pursuant to subdivisions (a), (b), (c), and (d), and for expenditures pursuant to Section 164.56, the remaining funds shall be available for capital improvement projects to be programmed in the State Transportation Improvement Program.The Legislature, through the enactment of this section, intends to establish a policy for the use of all transportation funds that are available to the state, including including, but not limited to, the State Highway Account, the Public Transportation Account, and federal funds. For the purposes of this section, federal funds means any obligational authority to be provided under annual federal transportation appropriations acts. The department and the commission shall prepare fund estimates pursuant to Sections 14524 and 14525 of the Government Code based on the following:
(a)Annual expenditures for the administration of the department shall be the same as the most recent Budget Act, adjusted for inflation.
(b)Annual expenditures for the maintenance and operation of the state highway system shall be the same as the most recent Budget Act, adjusted for inflation and inventory, or, when a maintenance plan has been enacted pursuant to Section 164.6, maintenance expenditures shall be based on planned expenditures in that plan.
(c)Annual expenditure expenditures for the rehabilitation of the state highway system shall be the same as the most recent Budget Act, or, when a long-range rehabilitation plan has been enacted pursuant to Section 164.6, shall be based on planned expenditures in that long-range plan.
(d)Annual expenditures for local assistance shall be the amount required to fund local assistance programs required by state or federal law or regulations, including, but not limited to, railroad grade crossing maintenance, bicycle transportation account, active transportation, congestion mitigation and air quality, regional surface transportation programs, local highway bridge replacement and rehabilitation, local seismic retrofit, local hazard elimination and safety, and local emergency relief.
(e)After deducting expenditures for administration, operation, maintenance, local assistance, safety, and rehabilitation pursuant to subdivisions (a), (b), (c), and (d), and for expenditures pursuant to Section 164.56, the remaining funds shall be available for capital improvement projects to be programmed in the state transportation improvement program. the State Transportation Improvement Program.
|
Date
|
Status
|
|---|---|
| Feb 1, 2018 | Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56. |
| May 25, 2017 | May 25 hearing: Held in committee and under submission. |
| May 23, 2017 | Set for hearing May 25. |
| May 22, 2017 | May 22 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file. |
| May 16, 2017 | Set for hearing May 22. |
| May 11, 2017 | May 15 hearing postponed by committee. |
| May 4, 2017 | Set for hearing May 15. |
| Apr 26, 2017 | From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 0. Page 858.) (April 25). Re-referred to Com. on APPR. |
| Apr 13, 2017 | Set for hearing April 25. |
| Apr 5, 2017 | Re-referred to Com. on T. & H. |
| Mar 27, 2017 | From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. |
| Mar 9, 2017 | Referred to Com. on RLS. |
| Feb 21, 2017 | From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 23. |
| Feb 17, 2017 | Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print. |
|
Date
|
Description
|
Location
|
Votes
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 22, 2017 | Placed on suspense file | Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations |
Passed |
|
| Apr 25, 2017 | Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] | Senate Standing Committee on Transportation and Housing |
Passed |
This list shows positions taken on this bill by organizations on the date displayed, which is linked to the original source.
Positions by individuals are not included.
|
Organization
|
Position
|
Date
|
|---|---|---|
| American Federation Of State County And Municipal Employees Afl-Cio | * Against | Apr 25, 2017 |
| California Conference of Carpenters | ** Support | Apr 20, 2017 |
| California State Council Of Laborers | * Support | Apr 25, 2017 |
| Kpmg LLP | * Support | Apr 25, 2017 |
| Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority | * Support | Apr 25, 2017 |
| Professional Engineers In California Government | * Against | Apr 25, 2017 |
| Professional Engineers In California Government | * Support | Apr 25, 2017 |
| Southern California Contractors' Association | * Support | Apr 25, 2017 |
| State Building & Construction Trades Council Of California | * Support | Apr 25, 2017 |
| Suffolk County's Coalition Executive Director, Keith Dunn | * Support | Apr 25, 2017 |
SENATE COMMITTEE ON
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2017 - 2018 Regular Session
SB 768 (Allen) - Transportation projects: comprehensive development lease agreements
Version: | Policy Vote: |
Urgency: | Mandate: |
Hearing Date: | Consultant: |
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill Summary:
SB 768 would authorize the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and regional transportation agencies to enter into public-private partnerships (P3s) for transportation projects
Fiscal Impact:
- Unknown, potentially significant impact on project costs (State Highway Account). The actual impact on project costs would depend on the specifics of each P3 contract, including assumptions used to compare the net present value of P3 project costs compared to other project delivery methods, the specified rate of return provided to the contracting entity, analysis of risks retained by Caltrans and transferred to the contractor, and life cycle cost efficiency, among other factors. In addition, P3 contractors may be selected using “best value” criteria, which may result in a contract not being awarded to the lowest bidder.
- Caltrans indicates it would not incur any immediate costs. Future administrative costs would depend upon demand for P3 contracting from within the department and among RTPAs. (State Highway Account)
- The California Transportation Commission (CTC) indicates that any costs to evaluate P3 contracts would be absorbable. Staff estimates that CTC may require funding in future years to contract for outside expertise in order to evaluate P3 contracts, depending on the demand for the program (State Highway Account). See Staff Comments.
Background:
P3 contracts are comprehensive development lease agreements between a government agency and a private-sector company where the private entity is responsible for designing, completing, implementing and funding the project. Under a P3 project, procurement of two or more of the project phases are integrated. These project phases range from design and construction to operation and maintenance. Often a consortium of companies with different areas of expertise relating to the various phases is organized to complete the project. Additionally, P3 contracts typically have outcome-based specifications, meaning that the public sector owner specifies their requirements and the private sector partner determines the best way to meet them. Another key characteristic of P3s is that the payment structure is normally such that payments are made upon completion of a specific activity, milestone, or after the project is completed (e.g. toll revenues). For public agencies, one of the most attractive features of P3 contracts is that they are intended to distribute the financial, technical, and operational risk optimally between both the private and public sector partners.
Existing law, until January 1, 2017, granted Caltrans and regional transportation agencies (RTPAs), as defined, authority to enter into P3 agreements which are comprehensive development lease agreements with public or private entities, or consortia thereof, under the following conditions:
- The CTC must review and approve proposed P3 projects.
- Proposed projects must be primarily designed to improve mobility, improve the operations or safety of the affected corridor, and provide quantifiable air quality benefits.
- Proposed projects must also address known forecast demands.
Existing P3 statutes apply to transportation projects that include one or more of the following: planning, design, development, finance, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, improvement, acquisition, lease, operation, or maintenance of highway, public streets, rail, or related facilities supplemental to existing facilities currently owned and operated by Caltrans or regional transportation agencies.
Existing law prescribes the review and approval process for proposed P3 agreements. For projects on the state highway system, P3 statutes require Caltrans to be the responsible agency for performance of project development work, including the development of performance specifications, preliminary engineering, prebid services, environmental documents, and construction inspection services. Caltrans is authorized to perform this work using in-house employees or contractors.
Existing law requires that P3 agreements authorize the contracting entity to impose tolls and user fees for the use of the constructed facility. Over the term of the lease, toll revenues and user fees must be applied to payment of capital outlay costs for the project, operations costs, toll and user fee collection, administration of the facility, reimbursement to Caltrans or other governmental entity for costs of services to develop and maintain the project, police services, and a reasonable rate of return on the investment. Under existing law, lease agreements may provide for reasonable compensation to the contracting entity for the adverse effects on toll or user fee revenues due to the development, operation, or lease of supplemental transportation projects, except as specified.
The state's first venture into P3s for transportation followed the enactment of AB 680 (Baker), Chap. 107/1989, which authorized Caltrans to enter into P3 agreements for up to four projects. Caltrans built two projects under this authorization. The first project was ten miles of tolled express lanes in the median of the existing State Route (SR) 91 in Orange County and the subsequent project was SR 125 in San Diego County to connect the area near the Otay Mesa border crossing with the state highway system. For each project, Caltrans used a single contract with a private partner to design, construct, finance, operate, and maintain the facility.
In 2009, authority to enter into P3 agreements for transportation was expanded. Specifically, SBx2 4 (Cogdill), Chap. 2/2009, authorized Caltrans and regional transportation agencies to enter into an unlimited number of P3 agreements for a broad range of highway, road, and transit projects, until January 1, 2017. In January 2011, Caltrans entered into its first P3 under this authority for the Presidio Parkway project, a 1.6-mile segment of SR 101 that connects the Golden Gate Bridge to city streets in San Francisco. This particular P3 requires the private partner to complete the second phase of the design and reconstruction of the southern approach to the Golden Gate Bridge and to operate and maintain the roadway for 30 years. In exchange, the state will make payments estimated to total roughly $1.1 billion to the private partner over the life of the contract. The Presidio Parkway was the only project approved under SBx2 4, and it does not include a tolling element.
Proposed Law:
SB 768 would eliminate the sunset on the authority for Caltrans and RTPAs to enter into P3 contracts for transportation projects, thereby indefinitely extending the authority for an unlimited number of projects.
Staff Comments:
Granting broad authority for Caltrans and RTPAs to enter into P3 contracts would likely result in some projects being constructed sooner than would otherwise be the case with existing financing mechanisms. As noted above, however, use of P3 could increase the costs of individual projects, the extent to which is unknown and dependent upon the specifics of each P3 agreement.
The CTC indicates that it could absorb any workload associated with evaluating proposals by Caltrans and regional transportation agencies for entering into P3 contracts. Staff estimates that the CTC may require funding in future years to contract for outside expertise for evaluating P3 contracts, depending on the number of proposals submitted by transportation entities. Staff notes that the CTC requested $400,000 annually for three years in the 2011-12 budget process for evaluating P3 projects under the previously authority to use P3s.
Recommended Amendments:
Considering the limited experience and use of P3 contracting in the past, the Committee may wish to consider reinstating a sunset on the authority for Caltrans and regional transportation agencies to enter into P3 contracts, and requiring an evaluation of the program, before extending the authority indefinitely.
-- END --
SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING
Senator Jim Beall, Chair
2017 - 2018 Regular
Bill No: SB 768 Hearing Date: 4/25/2017
Author: | Allen | ||
Version: | 3/27/2017 | ||
Urgency: | No | Fiscal: | Yes |
Consultant: | Manny Leon | ||
SUBJECT: Transportation projects: comprehensive development lease agreements.
DIGEST: This bill authorizes the use of public-private partnership (P3) agreements for transportation projects.
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
- Until January 1, 2017, granted the State Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and regional transportation agencies (RTPA), as defined, authority to enter into P3 agreements which are comprehensive development lease agreements with public or private entities, or consortia thereof, under the following conditions:
- The California Transportation Commission must review and approve proposed P3 projects;
- Proposed projects must be primarily designed to improve mobility, improve the operations or safety of the affected corridor, and provide quantifiable air quality benefits; and,
- Proposed projects must also address known forecast demands.
- Defines key terms. Transportation project means one or more of the following: planning, design, development, finance, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, improvement, acquisition, lease, operation, or maintenance of highway, Public Street, rail, or related facilities supplemental to existing facilities currently owned and operated by Caltrans or regional transportation agencies.
- Prescribes the review and approval process for proposed P3 agreements.
- For projects on the state highway system, requires Caltrans to be the responsible agency for performance of project development work, including the development of performance specifications, preliminary engineering, prebid services, environmental documents, and construction inspection services; authorizes Caltrans to do the work using in-house employees or contractors.
- Requires P3 agreements to authorize the use of tolls and user fees.
This bill:
- Provides Caltrans and RTPAs the authority to use public-private partnerships for transportation projects, as specified.
- Makes technical nonsubstantive changes by correcting obsolete cross-references.
COMMENTS:
- Author’s statement. According to the author, “SB 768 permits regional transportation agencies and Caltrans to enter into an unlimited number of Public-Private Partnerships (P3s), with no restrictions on the number or type of projects that could be undertaken. Specifically, the bill deletes a restriction that forbids any P3 lease agreements authorized under existing statute from being entered into after January 1, 2017.
A Public-Private Partnership is a mutually beneficial collaboration between a public agency and the private sector. Through a carefully negotiated contractual arrangement, the skills and assets of each party are shared in delivering a service or facility for the use of the general public. Everyone shares in the risks and potential rewards by partnering to build, maintain and operate a service and/or facility.
A classic P3 transportation project is a toll road. Rather than Caltrans assuming all the costs and risks attached the project, it splits expenses with a private partner, who is typically also required to help build, maintain and operate the road for a specified period of time. In return, the private party gets a limited opportunity to make a reasonable return from the revenue collected by the toll road, thus justifying its investment. At the end of the partnership, the toll road is turned over to the public in a state of good repair, along with the risks and revenue-generating opportunities posed by taking responsibility for its maintenance and operation.
Projects with the greatest likelihood of success are those high priority projects that are clearly defined and have a demonstrated public sector commitment. Projects delivered through a P3 must allocate the risks fairly between the parties, with each sector assuming the risks that they are best able to manage. The public agency usually assumes the project definition risk by undertaking the environmental clearance effort, assessing financial feasibility and garnering stakeholder and political commitment. The private sector can best assume the financial risk, such as project financing, construction and potentially facility management.”
- What are P3’s? P3’s are typically used in transportation infrastructure projects such as highways, airports, railroads, bridges and tunnels. P3’s are set up between a government agency and a private-sector company where the private entity is responsible for designing, completing, implementing and funding the project. Under a P3 project, procurement of two or more of the project phases are integrated. These project phases range from design and construction to operation and maintenance. Often a consortium of companies with different areas of expertise relating to the various phases is organized. This consortium determines how to complete the project. Additionally, P3 contracts typically have outcome-based specifications, meaning that the public sector owner specifies their requirements and the private sector partner determines the best way to meet them. Another key characteristic of P3’s is that the payment structure is normally such that payments are made upon completion of a specific activity, milestone, or after the project is completed (e.g. toll revenues). For public agencies, one of the most attractive features of P3’s is that these arrangements aim to distribute the financial, technical, and operational risk optimally between both the private and public sector partners.
- Previous P3 projects. The state's first venture into P3s for transportation was with AB 680 (Baker), Chapter 107, Statutes of 1989, which authorized Caltrans to enter into P3 agreements for up to four projects. Caltrans built two projects under this authorization. The first project was ten miles of tolled express lanes in the median of the existing State Route (SR) 91 in Orange County and the subsequent project was SR 125 in San Diego County to connect the area near the Otay Mesa border crossing with the state highway system. For each project, Caltrans used a single contract with a private partner to design, construct, finance, operate, and maintain the facility.
In 2009, authority to enter into P3 agreements for transportation was expanded. Specifically, SBX2 4 (Cogdill), Chapter 2, Statutes of 2009, authorized Caltrans and regional transportation agencies to enter into an unlimited number of P3 agreements for a broad range of highway, road, and transit projects, through December 31, 2016. In January 2011, Caltrans entered into its first P3 under this new authority for the Presidio Parkway project, a 1.6-mile segment of SR 101 that connects the Golden Gate Bridge to city streets in San Francisco. This particular P3 requires the private partner to complete the second phase of the design and reconstruction of the southern approach to the Golden Gate Bridge and to operate and maintain the roadway for 30 years. In exchange, the state will make payments estimated to total roughly $1.1 billion to the private partner over the life of the contract.
- Are P3’s effective? While proponents contend that P3s can be an effective project delivery tool, the projects that have been constructed and operated under P3 authority have been contentious. For example, the 91 Express Lanes in Orange County were ultimately purchased by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) in order to eliminate a non-compete provision that prohibited OCTA from making any corridor improvements along State Route 91. Additionally, the Presidio Parkway Project in San Francisco, the only P3 project constructed under SBX2 4, was challenged with cost increases and litigation. This litigation surrounded whether the Presidio Parkway Project was an authorized P3 project under SBX2 4 and also whether Caltrans employees were to be responsible to carry out various project delivery functions. The courts ruled in favor of the project which ultimately allowed the project to proceed.
However, the number of P3 projects that have been constructed and operated in the state has been minimal. Despite the challenges relative to these projects, employing P3 on such a small number projects does not provide an adequate sample size in determining the effectiveness of this project delivery method. With that, a number of RTPA’s have expressed interest in reinstating P3 authority in order to ensure this project delivery tool is available for future transportation projects.
- Support. Writing in support for the bill, the California Conference of Carpenters assert,
“Public-private partnerships (PPP) involve the investment of private funds in public infrastructure development. It is a form of project delivery that allows the best elements of private enterprise to be blended with public ownership of basic infrastructure development.
This funding process ensures reliability and frees-up public money which would otherwise be needed to build and maintain a project to instead be used for other needed projects. The operational and maintenance risk, ordinarily shouldered by the public sector, would be the responsibility of the private PPP team for the duration of the lease. In fact, Rte. 91 in Orange County, a PPP project, continues to provide income to the OCTA, on top of paying for its maintenance and operation costs.
Another important feature to PPP projects is the injection of private sector design innovation into California’s transportation infrastructure. PPP teams include cutting edge design, engineering and construction firms that bring world-wide experience to large-scale infrastructure projects. SR 125 in San Diego County has been criticized as a PPP failure by some because there was a significant financial loss incurred by a private-sector financing partner in the project. In fact, SR 125 included an award-winning bridge design for a project that is fully built and currently providing a revenue stream that pays for the operation and maintenance of the project. Since the private sector absorbed the financial risk of SR 125, the public sector is now operating a project that literally pays for itself. While SR 125 was in long-term transportation planning in San Diego County it was not expected to be built for decades under normal project delivery because of public funding constraints.”
- Opposition. Writing in opposition to the bill, the Professional Engineers in California Government (PECG) assert,
“PECG opposes reauthorization of the P3 legislation unless the bill is amended to restore the requirement that the state perform construction. That requirement was nullified in the existing statutory language by a court decision in 2011. In 2013, the design-build statute was reauthorized in AB 401 (Daly). Corrective language to address the 2011 court decision was included in the bill to specifically mandate that the state perform construction inspection on design-build projects.
It is appropriate now to adopt identical corrective language in the P3 reauthorization to ensure that P3 projects are also inspected by the state. Failing to do so would allow the private design and construction concessionaire on a P3 to approve and inspect their own work. That is simply bad public policy.
PECG believes the role of inspection is a critical government function that is absolutely necessary on public works project. It is particularly critical on P3 projects, which are designed and constructed by the private sector for profit.”
Related Legislation:
AB 1454 (Bloom) — is identical to this bill, authorizes the use of P3s for transportation projects. This bill is set to be heard in the Assembly Transportation Committee on April 24, 2017.
Previous Legislation:
SBX2 4 (Cogdill, Chapter 2, Statutes of 2009) — authorized, until January 1, 2017, Caltrans and regional transportation agencies to enter into an unlimited number of P3 agreements. To date, only one project, the Presidio Parkway, has been approved under this authority.
AB 1467 (Nunez, Chapter 32, Statutes of 2006) — authorized, until January 1, 2012, Caltrans and regional transportation agencies to enter into P3 agreements for certain transportation projects.
AB 680 (Baker, Chapter 107, Statutes of 1989) — authorized Caltrans to enter into P3 agreements for up to four projects. Caltrans built two projects under this authorization.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on Wednesday,
April 19, 2017.)
SUPPORT:
Associated General Contractors (AGC), California and San Diego chapters
California Conference of Carpenters
California State Council of Laborers
OPPOSITION:
American Federation of State, County, Municipal Employees (AFSCME), AFL-CIO
Professional Engineers in California Government (PECG)
-- END --
Discussed in Hearing
Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations
Senate Standing Committee on Appropriations
Senate Standing Committee on Transportation and Housing
Bill Author
Bill Co-Author(s):