BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                            Senator Kevin de León, Chair


          AB 1175 (Bocenegra) - Food and Agriculture: Cooperative  
          Agreements: Agricultural Inspector Associates
          
          Amended: March 13, 2014         Policy Vote: Agriculture 4-0
          Urgency: No                     Mandate: No
          Hearing Date: August 4, 2014                            
          Consultant: Robert Ingenito     
          
          This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.


          Bill Summary: AB 1175 would prohibit the California Department  
          of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) from entering into cooperative  
          agreements with Los Angeles County (County) for agricultural  
          inspection services unless a currently unspecified percentage of  
          Agricultural Inspector Associates are granted permanent County  
          civil service status.

          Fiscal Impact: This bill as currently drafted, would not have a  
          direct fiscal impact to CDFA. However, the bill could result in  
          potential cost pressures to the Department in the low hundreds  
          of thousands of dollars annually (See Staff Comments). 
          
          Background: Current law authorizes CDFA to enter into  
          cooperative agreements with counties to carry out and enforce  
          programs that, among other things, combat invasive pests and  
          diseases. CDFA specifically contracts with county agricultural  
          commissioners (CACs) to administer and enforce local programs  
          and inspections.
           
          CDFA's Plant Health and Pest Prevention Services Division is  
          responsible for the prevention and control of plant pests,  
          working cooperatively with CACs to accomplish these goals.   
          Depending on the specific requirements for pest monitoring,  
          trapping, and inspections, work is typically performed by the  
          local county agricultural commissioner's staff which includes  
          aids, associates, and inspectors.

          In 2003-04, legislation was enacted (AB 185 and AB 1896) which  
          prohibited CDFA from entering into cooperative agreements for  
          agricultural inspections with the County unless a minimum of 66  
          percent of all Agricultural Inspector Aids were granted  








          AB 1175 (Bocenegra)
          Page 1


          permanent civil service status as a county employee. Beforehand,  
          these employees were hired on a temporary basis to work on  
          year-long contracts with CDFA. The legislation increased labor  
          costs for the County, and state funds were provided to aid this  
          transition and reduce fiscal impact to the County.

          Proposed Law: This bill would additionally prohibit CDFA from  
          entering into a cooperative agreement with the County unless a  
          portion of Agricultural Inspector Associate positions are also  
          given permanent county civil service status. The required  
          percentage is currently not specified in the bill.

          Related Legislation: AB 1896 (Horton), Chapter 631, Statutes of  
          2004.  Prohibits CDFA from entering into cooperative agreements  
          with specified counties unless at least 66 percent of  
          agricultural inspector aids are afforded protections as  
          permanent employees.

          Staff Comments:  This bill does not directly impact the fiscal  
          operations of CDFA; however, it could result in unknown General  
          Fund cost pressures. Specifically, the conversion of the  
          Agricultural Inspector Associate positions to permanent status  
          could lead to higher labor costs for the County, potentially in  
          the hundreds of thousands of dollars annually (depending on the  
          percentage that is ultimately placed in the bill). Unlike AB  
          1896, this bill does provide funding for the County. Thus, the  
          County's future response could lead it to opt either (1) to seek  
          to recoup those costs when negotiating contracts with CDFA, or  
          (2) not to enter into agreements to perform inspections on  
          behalf of with CDFA. The latter scenario could lead to the  
          department doing some of the inspections itself, which would  
          likely increase costs to CDFA (especially start-up costs)  
          relative to the current arrangement.