CA AB 1809
enactedPublic contracts: school and community college districts.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · lower
Subscribe in a feed reader. The feed covers recorded actions from the last 30 days; Bill Commons may record an action after it happened at the legislature.
Quick answers
Did CA AB 1809 pass?
Yes. CA AB 1809 has been enacted into law. Latest recorded action (2026-09-27): Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 548, Statutes of 2026.
What is CA AB 1809 about?
(1) Existing law, the Local Agency Public Construction Act, authorizes job order contracting, as defined, for school districts until January 1, 2027. Existing law requires job order contractors to submit a questionnaire to the school district containing specified information verified under oath, under penalty of perjury. This bill would extend the termination date for these provisions until January 1, 2037. Existing law authorizes a school district to utilize job order contracting only if the school district has entered into a project labor agreement or agreements that will apply to all public works awarded through job order contracting and to all other public works of the school district that exceed a monetary threshold set by the school district until January 1, 2027, regardless of what contracting procedure is used to award that work. This bill would extend the termination date for these provisions until January 1, 2037. The bill would also prohibit job order contracting by a school district if the district finds, based on criteria and methodology established by the school district, that it will increase the total cost of the project without sufficient documented justification. Existing law requires a school district to prepare an execution plan for all modernization projects that may be eligible for job order contracting. Existing law requires the school district to select from that plan a sufficient number of projects to be initiated as job order contracts during each calendar year and to determine for each selected project that job order contracting will reduce the total cost of that project, as specified. This bill would delete the above provisions. Existing law requires school districts adopting job order contracting to, among other things, prepare an independent estimate for each individual job order developed under a job order contract. The estimate must be prepared prior to the receipt of the contractor's offer to perform work and must be compared to the contractor's proposed price to determine the reasonableness of that price before the issuance of any job order. This bill, instead, would require that the school district's estimate be prepared prior to the receipt of the contractor's proposal. The bill would delete the requirement for the school district to compare its estimate to the contractor's proposed price, as described. Existing law also authorizes job order contracting for community college districts until January 1, 2027. Existing law requires job order contractors to submit a questionnaire to the community college district containing specified information verified under oath, under penalty of perjury. This bill would extend the termination date for these provisions until January 1, 2037. Existing law authorizes a community college district to utilize job order contracting only if the community college district has entered into a project labor agreement or agreements that will apply to all public works awarded through job order contracting and to all other public works of the district that exceed a monetary threshold set by the district until January 1, 2027, regardless of what contracting procedure is used to award that work. This bill would extend the termination date for these provisions until January 1, 2037. By extending the operation of those provisions that expand the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law authorizes continuing contracts for a school district to be made with an accepted vendor for work or services, or for apparatus or equipment, not to exceed 5 years, or for materials or supplies, not to exceed 3 years. This bill would prohibit the duration of any task order procurement contract or job order contract issued pursuant to specified Public Contract Code provisions from exceeding 5 years. The bill would additionally provide that any individual task order or job order issued pursuant to those contracts shall remain valid and enforceable despite the expiration of the term of the task order procurement contract or job order contract pursuant to which the individual task order or job order was validly issued. 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors CA AB 1809?
Fong is the primary sponsor of CA AB 1809.
Description
(1) Existing law, the Local Agency Public Construction Act, authorizes job order contracting, as defined, for school districts until January 1, 2027. Existing law requires job order contractors to submit a questionnaire to the school district containing specified information verified under oath, under penalty of perjury. This bill would extend the termination date for these provisions until January 1, 2037. Existing law authorizes a school district to utilize job order contracting only if the school district has entered into a project labor agreement or agreements that will apply to all public works awarded through job order contracting and to all other public works of the school district that exceed a monetary threshold set by the school district until January 1, 2027, regardless of what contracting procedure is used to award that work. This bill would extend the termination date for these provisions until January 1, 2037. The bill would also prohibit job order contracting by a school district if the district finds, based on criteria and methodology established by the school district, that it will increase the total cost of the project without sufficient documented justification. Existing law requires a school district to prepare an execution plan for all modernization projects that may be eligible for job order contracting. Existing law requires the school district to select from that plan a sufficient number of projects to be initiated as job order contracts during each calendar year and to determine for each selected project that job order contracting will reduce the total cost of that project, as specified. This bill would delete the above provisions. Existing law requires school districts adopting job order contracting to, among other things, prepare an independent estimate for each individual job order developed under a job order contract. The estimate must be prepared prior to the receipt of the contractor's offer to perform work and must be compared to the contractor's proposed price to determine the reasonableness of that price before the issuance of any job order. This bill, instead, would require that the school district's estimate be prepared prior to the receipt of the contractor's proposal. The bill would delete the requirement for the school district to compare its estimate to the contractor's proposed price, as described. Existing law also authorizes job order contracting for community college districts until January 1, 2027. Existing law requires job order contractors to submit a questionnaire to the community college district containing specified information verified under oath, under penalty of perjury. This bill would extend the termination date for these provisions until January 1, 2037. Existing law authorizes a community college district to utilize job order contracting only if the community college district has entered into a project labor agreement or agreements that will apply to all public works awarded through job order contracting and to all other public works of the district that exceed a monetary threshold set by the district until January 1, 2027, regardless of what contracting procedure is used to award that work. This bill would extend the termination date for these provisions until January 1, 2037. By extending the operation of those provisions that expand the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law authorizes continuing contracts for a school district to be made with an accepted vendor for work or services, or for apparatus or equipment, not to exceed 5 years, or for materials or supplies, not to exceed 3 years. This bill would prohibit the duration of any task order procurement contract or job order contract issued pursuant to specified Public Contract Code provisions from exceeding 5 years. The bill would additionally provide that any individual task order or job order issued pursuant to those contracts shall remain valid and enforceable despite the expiration of the term of the task order procurement contract or job order contract pursuant to which the individual task order or job order was validly issued. 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
- Introduced
- 2026-03-19
- Latest action
- 2026-09-27 — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 548, Statutes of 2026.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Fongauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
Newest first
2026-09-27
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 548, Statutes of 2026.
became-law
2026-09-27
Approved by the Governor.
executive-signature
2026-08-27
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.
executive-receipt
2026-08-20
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling.
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-08-20
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 61. Noes 12.).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-08-20
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 61. Noes 12. Page 6319.).
amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-08-19
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
2026-08-19
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 29. Noes 9.).
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-08-19
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 29. Noes 9. Page 5546.).
2026-06-23
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-06-22
From committee: Be ordered to second reading pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2026-06-10
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.) (June 10). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2026-06-01
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on ED.
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2026-05-27
Referred to Com. on ED.
referral-committee
2026-05-18
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
reading-1,referral-committee
2026-05-18
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 57. Noes 11. Page 5142.)
passage,reading-1,reading-3
2026-05-14
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
reading-1,reading-2,reading-3
2026-05-13
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 3.) (May 13).
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable
2026-05-06
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
2026-04-15
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 3.) (April 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2026-03-24
Re-referred to Com. on HIGHER ED.
referral-committee
2026-03-23
Read second time and amended.
amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2
2026-03-19
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on HIGHER ED. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (March 18).
amendment-introduction,amendment-passage,committee-passage,referral-committee
2026-03-02
Referred to Coms. on ED. and HIGHER ED.
referral-committee
2026-02-11
From printer. May be heard in committee March 13.
2026-02-10
Read first time. To print.
reading-1
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
Votes
Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Higher Education]
2026-03-18 · pass · 7-0
Member-level votes (8)
- Alvarez: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Patel: yes
- Castillo: other
Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2026-04-14 · pass · 6-3
Member-level votes (10)
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Fong: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Patel: yes
- Boerner: yes
- DeMaio: no
- Tangipa: no
- Jeff Gonzalez: no
- Celeste Rodriguez: other
Do pass.
2026-05-13 · pass · 12-3
Member-level votes (15)
- Caloza: yes
- Calderon: yes
- Fong: yes
- Solache: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Ellis: no
- Tangipa: no
- Ta: no
- Pacheco: yes
- Krell: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Wicks: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
AB 1809 Fong Assembly Third Reading
2026-05-18 · pass · 57-11
Member-level votes (80)
- Ransom: yes
- Solache: yes
- Ward: yes
- Irwin: yes
- Schiavo: yes
- Soria: yes
- Bonta: yes
- Harabedian: yes
- Ahrens: yes
- Gabriel: yes
- Mark González: yes
- Michelle Rodriguez: yes
- Muratsuchi: yes
- Elhawary: yes
- Berman: yes
- Hoover: yes
- Rogers: yes
- Haney: yes
- Schultz: yes
- Nguyen: yes
- Ortega: yes
- Arambula: yes
- Aguiar-Curry: yes
- McKinnor: yes
- Papan: yes
- Boerner: yes
- Rivas: yes
- Sharp-Collins: yes
- Bains: yes
- Wilson: yes
- Lowenthal: yes
- Addis: yes
- Bennett: yes
- Connolly: yes
- Alvarez: yes
- Alanis: yes
- Hart: yes
- Carrillo: yes
- Gipson: yes
- Garcia: yes
- Bauer-Kahan: yes
- Patel: yes
- Petrie-Norris: yes
- Krell: yes
- Fong: yes
- Ramos: yes
- Ávila Farías: yes
- Kalra: yes
- Pacheco: yes
- Jackson: yes
- Zbur: yes
- Caloza: yes
- Wallis: yes
- Valencia: yes
- Bryan: yes
- Pellerin: yes
- Blanca Rubio: yes
- Macedo: no
- Sanchez: no
- Tangipa: no
- Patterson: no
- Ellis: no
- Hadwick: no
- Johnson: no
- Ta: no
- DeMaio: no
- Davies: no
- Jeff Gonzalez: no
- Dixon: other
- Gallagher: other
- Quirk-Silva: other
- Lackey: other
- Flora: other
- Stefani: other
- Calderon: other
- Celeste Rodriguez: other
- Lee: other
- Wicks: other
- Castillo: other
- Chen: other
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2026-06-10 · pass · 6-1
Member-level votes (7)
- Pérez: yes
- Reyes: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Cortese: yes
- Choi: yes
- Menjivar: yes
- Ochoa Bogh: no
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_api_sync, retrieved 2026-09-29T12:49:49.701567Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=AB 1809. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.