California Senate Bill SB247

California 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/6/25
• Introduced: 1/30/25
• Refer: 2/14/25
• Refer: 3/26/25
• Refer: 4/2/25
• Refer: 4/21/25
• Report Pass: 4/22/25
• Refer: 4/22/25
• Report Pass: 1/22/26
• Engrossed: 1/27/26

Caption

An act to add Article 1.7 (commencing with Section 10117) to Chapter 1 of Part 2 of Division 2 of the Public Contract Code, relating to public contracts.

Summary

SB 247, titled the California Good Jobs Act, would add a new article to the Public Contract Code creating an equity-metrics bid preference for certain state contracts. The bill applies to awarding departments, including state agencies and other entities contracting on behalf of the state, and is aimed at contracts tied to large projects funded by federal infrastructure, climate, or semiconductor programs. Under the bill, contractors that commit to specified equity metrics—primarily hiring a required share of workers from distressed areas or disadvantaged communities—could receive a bid preference in state procurement. The preference is structured as a 10% advantage in both lowest-bid and best-value solicitations, with the size of the preference tied to the contractor’s proposed share of contract labor hours performed by eligible persons. The bill also bars the preference from being awarded to noncompliant bidders and says it cannot be used to satisfy any existing minimum participation requirements. The Department of General Services would be required to adopt regulations and enforcement methods, including contractor tracking and reporting, to implement the program.

Impact

SB 247 would create a new procurement preference within state contracting law and add compliance and reporting obligations for contractors seeking the preference. It would affect the Public Contract Code by establishing definitions for awarding departments, contractors, eligible persons, distressed areas, disadvantaged communities, and equity metrics, and by directing the Department of General Services to write implementing regulations. In practice, the bill would influence how state agencies evaluate bids on qualifying contracts, especially large infrastructure-related projects, and could shift contracting incentives toward workforce hiring from lower-income or environmentally burdened communities.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have received generally favorable committee and floor consideration, advancing through committee with majority support and later passing the Senate floor by a substantial margin. The recorded votes show support at multiple stages, including a 30-10 Senate third-reading vote, suggesting broad if not unanimous backing. At the same time, the bill’s movement to and through Appropriations indicates it was treated as having fiscal and implementation implications that warranted additional review.

Contention

The main points of contention likely center on whether a bid preference tied to workforce equity metrics is an appropriate procurement tool and how it would be administered and enforced. Potential critics may question whether the preference could complicate contracting, affect competition, or create compliance burdens for bidders, while supporters likely view it as a way to connect public spending to good jobs and community benefits. The bill’s explicit exclusion of noncompliant bidders and its prohibition on using the preference to meet minimum requirements suggest lawmakers were attentive to concerns about gaming or double-counting the preference.