At the July 25, 2007 SAB Meeting the Board approved the use of Construction Management fees when determining the 50% fund release requirement for those projects that were fund released prior to January 1, 2004.  For those applications requesting a fund release after this date only "at risk" Construction Management costs may be included as part of the 50% fund release requirement. Please contact OPSC to determine if your "at risk" Construction Management services can be included for this purpose.

The Attorney General's office has opined that piggy back contracts may not be used to purchase modular components to be placed on a permanent foundation.  The may target is the use of this delivery method to construct entire schools.  However, the Attorney General clearly indicated that portable classrooms, such as the State Relocatable Classrooms, do not fall under this opinion.  At the February 2006 SAB meeting, the OPSC further clarified that if the structure acquired under a piggy back contract met the definition of a portable classroom (Ed Code § 17070.15) then they would be eligible for SFP funding.  In addition, the foundation system did not impact the definition of a portable classroom.  It could be either permanent or temporary.

The State Allocation Board, OPSC and others were named in a law suit filed by the Val Verde Unified School District.  The basic issue of the case is that students of a financial hardship school district do not have equal access to a complete school facility due to the language in the Leroy F Greene School Facilities Act of 1998 and its accompanying regulations.  As there was no formal discussion of the content of the case and the text of the case was not made available, I am unable to provide a better description of the position of the claimants.