BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 334|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 334
Author: Gomez (D)
Amended: As introduced
Vote: 21
SENATE PUBLIC EMPLOY. & RETIRE. COMMITTEE : 3-2, 06/10/13
AYES: Beall, Block, Yee
NOES: Walters, Gaines
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 4-2, 7/1/13
AYES: De Le�n, Hill, Lara, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Gaines
NO VOTE RECORDED: Padilla
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 53-25, 4/22/13 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : State personnel: employment of outside legal
counsel
SOURCE : California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and
Hearing Officers in State Employment
DIGEST : This bill creates an independent basis for the State
Personnel Board (SPB) to disapprove contracts by state agencies
with private law firms for the provision of legal services if
the state agency fails to provide a copy of the contract to
state Bargaining Unit 2's (BU 2) designated representative as
required by existing law.
ANALYSIS :
CONTINUED
AB 334
Page
2
Existing law:
1. Generally prohibits state agencies from using any legal
counsel other than the Attorney General (AG) in any matter in
which the agency is a party as a result of its official
duties.
2. Obliges all state agencies, except as specified, to obtain
the consent of the AG before employing legal counsel from
outside the civil service and to notify BU 2 within five
business days of the date the agency transmits the request
for consent to the AG.
3. Mandates that the AG provide written notice, as specified,
to BU 2 within 10 days of determining that a state agency
needs to employ outside legal counsel.
4. Requires state agencies to submit copies of proposed
contracts for legal services to BU 2 any time the agency
submits the proposed contracts to the Department of General
Services for approval.
5. Requires, where a state agency is not required to obtain the
AG's consent to contract for outside legal services, the
agency to provide a copy of any proposed contract for outside
legal services to BU 2's designated represented within five
business days prior to executing the contract or, if an
emergency contract as specified has been signed, within five
business days after signing the contract for outside counsel.
6. Establishes standards for the state agencies' use of
personal services contracts, including legal services
contracts, and permits personal services contracts to achieve
cost savings when specified conditions are met, including the
contract does not cause the displacement of civil service
employees.
7. Provides a procedure for state employee representatives to
challenge the use of a personal service contract by a state
agency that outsources civil service functions. Any employee
organization may request, within 10 days of being notified
that a state agency is seeking to use a personal service
contract, that the SPB review the personal services contract
CONTINUED
AB 334
Page
3
for compliance with specified standards.
This bill makes the failure of a state agency to provide a copy
of the contract for legal services to BU 2 to be an independent
basis for the SPB to disapprove the contract.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Unknown costs to SPB (General)
The SPB could incur unknown costs to the extent that BU 2 files
an increased number of challenges with the board if state
agencies do not comply with the notice requirement. However,
since state agencies are already required to provide
notification of outside legal services contracts to BU 2, and
since BU 2 is already authorized to challenge any outside
contract for legal services, it is not anticipated that this
bill will result in an increase in those challenges.
SUPPORT : (Verified 7/2/13)
California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and Hearing
Officers in State Employment
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the bill's sponsor,
California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges and Hearing
Officers in State Employment (CASE), because many state agencies
fail to provide the statutorily required notice, employee
organizations "have no way of learning of the existence of the
outsourcing contract, let alone undertaking efforts to bring it
before SPB for review."
Moreover, CASE notes that SPB has determined that it "is without
authority to disapprove a contract based on the state's
violation of [the notice requirement in] Government Code Section
11045, subdivision (c)."
CASE states that this bill corrects this gap in the law,
incentivizes state agencies to fulfill their statutory notice
obligations, and provides SPB with a remedy in those cases where
state agencies continue to violate the law.
CONTINUED
AB 334
Page
4
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 53-25, 4/22/13
AYES: Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bloom, Blumenfield, Bocanegra,
Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon,
Campos, Chau, Chesbro, Cooley, Daly, Dickinson, Eggman, Fong,
Fox, Frazier, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gray, Hall, Roger
Hern�ndez, Holden, Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Medina, Mitchell,
Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Pan, Perea, V. Manuel P�rez,
Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting,
Torres, Weber, Wieckowski, Williams, Yamada, John A. P�rez
NOES: Achadjian, Allen, Bigelow, Ch�vez, Conway, Dahle,
Donnelly, Beth Gaines, Gorell, Grove, Hagman, Harkey, Jones,
Linder, Logue, Maienschein, Mansoor, Melendez, Morrell,
Nestande, Olsen, Patterson, Wagner, Waldron, Wilk
NO VOTE RECORDED: Lowenthal, Vacancy
JL:k 7/2/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED