Design-build projects shall progress as follows:
(a) (1) The community college district governing board shall prepare a request for proposal setting forth the scope of the project that may include, but is not limited to, the size, type, and desired design character of the buildings and site, performance specifications covering the quality of materials, equipment, and workmanship, preliminary plans or building layouts, or any other information deemed necessary to describe adequately the community college district's needs. The performance specifications and any plans shall be prepared by a design professional duly licensed or registered in this state to perform the services required by the Field Act, as defined in Section 17281. The request for proposal shall not include a design-build-operate contract for educational facilities pursuant to this chapter.
(2) Each request for proposal shall do all of the following:
(A) Identify the basic scope and needs of the project or contract, the expected cost range, and other information deemed necessary by the community college district to inform interested parties of the contracting opportunity.
(B) Invite interested parties to submit competitive sealed proposals in the manner prescribed by the community college district.
(C) Include a section identifying and describing the following:
(i) All significant factors and subfactors that the community college district reasonably expects to consider in evaluating proposals, including cost or price and all nonprice related factors and subfactors.
(ii) The methodology and rating or weighting scheme that will be used by the community college district governing board in evaluating competitive proposals and specifically whether proposals will be rated according to numeric or qualitative values.
(iii) The relative importance or weight assigned to each of the factors identified in the request for proposal.
(iv) As an alternative to clause (iii), the governing board of a community college district shall specifically disclose whether all evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined, are any of the following:
(I) Significantly more important than cost or price.
(II) Approximately equal in importance to cost or price.
(III) Significantly less important than cost or price.
(v) If the community college district governing board wishes to reserve the right to hold discussions or negotiations with responsive bidders, it shall so specify in the request for proposal and shall publish separately or incorporate into the request for proposal applicable rules and procedures to be observed by the community college district to ensure that any discussions or negotiations are conducted in a fair and impartial manner.
(3) Notwithstanding Section 4-315 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, an architect or structural engineer who is party to a design-build entity may perform the services set forth in Section 81138.
(b) The community college district shall establish a procedure to prequalify design-build entities using a standard questionnaire developed by the Director of the Department of Industrial Relations pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 17250.25.
(c) The community college district shall establish a procedure for final selection of the design-build entity. Selection shall be based on either of the following criteria:
(1) A competitive bidding process resulting in lump-sum bids by the prequalified design-build entities. Award shall be made on the basis of the lowest responsible bid.
(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this code or of Section 20650 of the Public Contract Code, a community college district may use a design-build competition based upon performance and other criteria set forth by the governing board of the community college district in the solicitation of proposals. Criteria used in this evaluation of proposals may include, but need not be limited to, the proposed design approach, life cycle costs, project features, and project functions. However, competitive proposals shall be evaluated by using the criteria and source selection procedures specifically identified in the request for proposal. Once the evaluation is complete, all responsive bidders shall be ranked from the most advantageous to least advantageous to the community college district. A community college district that limits the number of responsible bidders participating in the design-build competition, at any time after a request for a proposal has been issued, shall use the source selection procedures and minimum factors set forth in subparagraph (C).
(A) An architectural firm, engineering firm, construction manager, contractor, subcontractor, consultant, or individual retained by the governing board of the community college district directly or indirectly before the award of the project to assist in the planning of the project, including, but not necessarily limited to, the development criteria or preparation of the request for proposal, shall not be eligible to participate in the competition with the design-build entity or to perform work on the project as a subcontractor.
(B) The award of the contract shall be made to the responsible bidder whose proposal is determined, in writing by the community college district, to be the best value to the community college district.
(C) Proposals shall be evaluated and scored solely on the basis of the factors and source selection procedures identified in the request for proposal. However, the following minimum factors shall each represent at least 10 percent of the total weight or consideration given to all criteria factors: price, technical expertise, life cycle costs over 15 years or more, skilled labor force availability, and acceptable safety record.
(D) The community college district governing board shall issue a written decision supporting its contract award and stating in detail the basis of the award. The decision and the contract file must be sufficient to satisfy an external audit.
(E) Notwithstanding any provision of the Public Contract Code, upon issuance of a contract award, the community college district governing board shall publicly announce its awards identifying the contractor to whom the award is made, the winning contractor's price proposal and its overall combined rating on the request for proposal evaluation factors. The notice of award shall also include the agency' s ranking in relation to all other responsive bidders and their respective price proposals and a summary of the community college district's rationale for the contract award.
(F) For purposes of this chapter, "skilled labor force availability" means that an agreement exists with a registered apprenticeship program, approved by the California Apprenticeship Council, which has graduated apprentices in each of the immediately preceding five years. This graduation requirement shall not apply to programs providing apprenticeship training for any craft that has not been deemed by the Department of Labor and the Department of Industrial Relations to be an apprenticable craft in the five years before enactment of the act adding this section.
(G) For purposes of this chapter, a bidder's "safety record" shall be deemed "acceptable" if its experience modification rate for the most recent three-year period is an average of 1.00 or less, and its average total recordable injury or illness rate and average lost work rate for the most recent three-year period does not exceed the applicable statistical standards for its business category, or if the bidder is a party to an alternative dispute resolution system as provided for in Section 3201.5 of the Labor Code.
(H) For purposes of this chapter, when a community college district determines a design-build entity's "experience," the community college district shall give credit only to design-build experience and to California school design and construction experience.
(Amended by Stats. 2012, Ch. 736, Sec. 4.)