BILL ANALYSIS Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair 1231 (Corbett) Hearing Date: 5/27/2010 Amended: 5/17/2010 Consultant: Bob Franzoia Policy Vote: G O 7-1 _________________________________________________________________ ____ BILL SUMMARY: SB 1231 would do the following: - Rename the Sweat Free Code of Conduct as the Slave and Sweat Free Code of Conduct. - Require every contract entered into by a state agency for the procurement of equipment, materials, supplies, apparel, garments and accessories and the laundering thereof, excluding public works contracts, to require a contractor to certify that no equipment, materials, supplies, apparel, garments, or accessories provided under the contract are produced by abusive forms of labor performed by all persons. - Extend the period that the contractor is removed from the bidder's list from 360 days to two years, if the contractor knew or should have known the specified products were laundered or produced by the specified prohibited labor. - Require the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) to establish a contractor responsibility program by January 1, 2012 and would require actions by DIR and the Department of General Services (DGS) with regard to the code of conduct. - Require contractors whose manufacturing and assembly locations are outside the United States to comply with international laws or treaties binding on their countries. _________________________________________________________________ ____ Fiscal Impact (in thousands) Major Provisions 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 Fund Contractor responsibility $30 $60 $60 General program (DIR/DGS) (administration/enforcement) - regulations Up to $150 - update contracting terms Up to $150 - revise Web posting processes (Bidsync) $40 - $200 Oversight of contracts Minor to major increase in oversight costs, General/ depending on the state entity; potentially Bond/ significant increase in contract costs if Special* vendors increase prices to cover additional compliance costs * Service Revolving Account _________________________________________________________________ ____ STAFF COMMENTS: SUSPENSE FILE. Until it is fully understood how DIR and DGS may enforce the provisions of this bill, the fiscal impacts remain unclear. For entities subject to the provisions of the bill, but authorized to independently contract, for example, California State University (CSU), Page 2 SB 1231 (Corbett) this bill could result in minor, ongoing costs to have contractors and subcontractors certify they are in compliance with the provisions of the bill. However, if compliance and monitoring is required, costs could increase significantly. If CSU has to document compliance, the process could be costly and uncertain as it can be very difficult to secure evidence of the source of all products. For example, if CSU issues a contract for computer equipment, the contractor or the subcontractor may not know the sources of all the parts in that equipment. It is unlikely CSU has that knowledge and if the contractor or subcontractor, or CSU, has to certify compliance multiple vendors deep into a supply chain, either contract costs will increase or equipment may become unavailable. Additionally, it is unclear what may occur if CSU had to void a contract after being notified by DIR of a compliance problem.