BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 583
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 583 (Gomez)
As Introduced February 20, 2013
Majority vote
LOCAL GOVERNMENT 7-1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Achadjian, Levine, Alejo, | | |
| |Bradford, Gordon, Mullin, | | |
| |Rendon | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Melendez | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires a city or library district in which a
withdrawal from the county free library system became effective
on or after January 1, 2012, to comply with specified
requirements before entering into a contract to operate a
library or libraries with a private contractor. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Requires that a legislative body of a city or board of
trustees of a library district in which a withdrawal from the
county free library system becomes effective on or after
January 1, 2012, must comply with the specified statutory
requirements established by AB 438 (Williams), Chapter 611,
Statutes of 2011, before entering into a contract to operate a
library or libraries with a private contractor that will
employ library staff to achieve cost savings.
2)Requires that a legislative body of a city or board of
trustees of a library district in which a withdrawal from the
county free library system in both Los Angeles County or
Riverside County becomes effective on or after January 1,
2012, must comply with specified statutory requirements
established by AB 438 before entering into a contract to
operate a library or libraries with a private contractor that
will employ library staff to achieve cost savings.
3)Exempts a library or libraries from the withdrawal process, if
the library or libraries are funded only by proceeds of a
AB 583
Page 2
special tax imposed by the city or library district, as
specified.
4)Makes technical changes.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Imposes requirements as specified by AB 438 (Williams), until
January 1, 2019, on a city or library district that intends to
withdraw from a county free library system and operate
libraries with a private contractor that will employ library
staff to achieve cost savings, as follows:
a) Establishes public notification requirements for the
legislative body of the city or board of trustees of a
library district prior to the meeting;
b) Specifies that the legislative body of a city or the
board of trustees of a library district must clearly
demonstrate that the contract will result in overall cost
savings as compared to the city's or library district's
actual costs of providing the same services, for the
duration of the entire contract;
c) Prohibits the contract for library services from causing
an existing city or library district employee from
incurring a loss of his or her employment or employment
seniority, a reduction in wages, benefits, or hours, or an
involuntary transfer to a new location requiring a change
in residence;
d) Requires the contract to be awarded through a publicized
competitive bidding process;
e) Requires provisions regarding the qualification of the
staff that will perform the work under the contract, and
assurances that the contractor's hiring practices meet
nondiscrimination standards;
f) Requires the contract to specify that it can be
terminated, if the contractor fails to perform, by the city
or library district without penalty, if there is a material
breach of the contract;
AB 583
Page 3
g) Establishes additional requirements, if the contract for
library services is over $100,000 on the contractor to
disclose specified information, and for audits to measure
performance standards and cost savings;
h) Prohibits the term of the contract from being longer
than five years from the date on which the board of
trustees of a library district, or the legislative body of
a city approves the contract;
i) Specifies these provisions do not preclude a city,
library district, or local government from adopting more
restrictive rules regarding the contracting of library
services; and,
j) Specifies the requirements, as described above, also
apply to the special provisions for a withdrawal of a city
or library district from the county free library system in
Los Angeles County and Riverside County.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : The process contained in the Education Code allowing
the establishment of municipal libraries and the county free
library system dates back to 1911 and was continued in a new
code section in 1977 (AB 3100 (Greene), Chapter 1010, Statutes
of 1976), when there was a major reorganization of the Education
Code.
Prior to January 1, 2012, the statute allowed a board of
trustees, common council, or other legislative body of any city
or the board of trustees of any library district to notify the
county board of supervisors that the city or library district
wanted to withdraw from the county's free library system.
Before any legislative body could take action to withdraw, the
legislative body had to follow specific noticing requirements
contained in the Education Code.
Riverside County, several cities in Ventura County, including
Camarillo and Moorpark, the City of Redding (Shasta County), and
the City of Santa Clarita (Los Angeles County) currently
contract with a private corporation, Library Systems and
Services, Inc. (LSSI), for library services. In these cases the
city continues ownership of the library building and materials,
AB 583
Page 4
while LSSI provides the management of day-to-day operations and
staffing responsibilities. Cities that opt for this model of
providing library services argue that they maintain control over
library operations, planning, financing, and the budget without
having to deal with personnel and staffing responsibilities
which leads to cost savings. Supporters of this bill argue the
contrary and also express concerns that libraries do not remain
public under this new model and that new fees may be charged.
AB 438 (Williams), Chapter 611, Statutes of 2011, establishes
standards for contracting to be met by any local government
wishing to withdraw from the county free library system, in
order to ensure that the private contractor achieves cost
savings over the duration of the contract for the city or
library district, as compared with the city's or library
district's actual costs of providing the same services. AB 438
imposes requirements related to public notice, demonstrated cost
savings, wages and benefits, competitive bidding, staff
qualifications and hiring, eligible contractors, contract
termination, contractor disclosure and performance measurement.
Provisions in AB 438 also require the contract for library
services to be no longer than five years in duration, and to
sunset on January 1, 2019, unless extended by another statute.
AB 438, also sponsored by Service Employees International Union
(SEIU), noted as to the need for the legislation that some
public entities have opted to turn the administration and
operation of their libraries over to private, for-profit
companies, and in certain instances taxpayers have opposed the
idea but did not have adequate ability to have their voices
heard or to have their will as taxpayers impact the decision of
their elected officials. Opposition argued that the bill
unfairly tied the hands of local governments at a time when
cities are expected to provide the same level of services with
less money.
On December 11, 2011, before AB 438 took effect, the Simi Valley
City Council adopted a resolution announcing its withdrawal from
the Ventura County Library System as of December 31, 2011, in
order to establish the Simi Valley Public Library. The City of
Simi Valley issued a request for proposal (RFP) seeking an
operator for the City's library services, and entered into an
agreement with the County of Ventura to operate the library, for
what was anticipated to be a short-term transition to a new
AB 583
Page 5
operator. SEIU filed a lawsuit challenging the City's
withdrawal from the Ventura County Library System that was
eventually dismissed by a County Superior Court Judge. Ventura
County continues to operate the library.
The requirements established by AB 438 do not apply to cities
like Simi Valley that withdrew from a county free library system
to run their own library systems or contract with another public
entity for library services. AB 2592 (Williams) of 2012 was
substantially amended at the end of session to close this
loophole in AB 438. Ultimately, AB 2592 failed to get referred
out of the Senate Rules Committee. This bill is substantially
similar to AB 2592 (Williams).
The loophole that this bill is addressing was known at the time
that AB 438 (Williams) was making its way through the
legislative process; however, the provisions of AB 438 were not
amended to close that loophole. A June 27, 2011, analysis of AB
438 by the Senate Governance and Finance Committee stated the
following:
AB 438 doesn't apply to a city that chooses to withdraw
from a county free library system to run its own library
system or contract with another public entity for library
services. A city could avoid the bill's requirements by
withdrawing from a county system to run its own library
for a short time before contracting with a private firm
for library services.
Under this bill, the requirements in existing law would not
apply to a city or library district that withdrew from a county
free library system prior to January 1, 2012, or between January
1, 2012, and January 1, 2014, if they have already entered into
a private contract. However, under this bill a city or library
district that withdrew from a county system after January 1,
2012, but has not entered into a private contract by January 1,
2014, must comply with the requirements in existing law before
entering into a private contract. Looking forward, this bill
imposes existing requirements on a city or library district
which withdraws from a county free library system before
entering into a contract to operate a library with a private
contractor that will employ library staff to achieve cost
savings.
AB 583
Page 6
The requirements in existing law do not apply to charter cities
or to general law cities that fund their own library systems,
participate in a county library system under a joint powers
agreement, or receive library services through a contract with a
county or public library district. This bill would expand upon
this list by exempting a library or libraries only funded by a
special tax from the contracting requirements in existing law.
This bill is sponsored by the California State Council of the
SEIU.
Support arguments: SEIU argues that this bill simply closes a
loophole and that the provisions of the bill are neither radical
nor a departure from current law governing the state, school
districts and community colleges. Furthermore, this bill will
ensure that tax dollars are accountable and well spent.
Opposition arguments: The League of California Cities, in
opposition, writes this bill further erodes local control by
expanding upon provisions in current law established by AB 438
which ties the hands of local governments and that there is no
evidence to suggest that a single city has attempted to exploit
the alleged 'loophole.'
Analysis Prepared by : Misa Yokoi-Shelton / L. GOV. / (916)
319-3958
FN: 0000494