BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 232
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 14, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
SB 232 (Monning) - As Introduced: February 11, 2013
Policy Committee: Labor and
Employment Vote: 5-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill extends an existing local government agency 10% bid
preference on public transit projects to all public transit
contracts awarded by the State of California. The current bid
preference is provided to those entities that agree to retain
the employees of the prior contractor or subcontractor.
FISCAL EFFECT
Potential increased special fund costs to the Department of
Parks and Recreation (DPR), of $220,000 annually, or $2.2
million over the duration of a 10-year contract.
Generally, the state does not contract with public transit
contractors. DPR, however, does contract for public transit
services at the Hearst San Simeon State Historical Monument
(Hearst Castle) and has since at least 1983. According to DPR,
the current contract is approximately $22 million over 10 years
(July 31, 2012 to August 31, 2023).
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . Current law [SB 158, Chapter 103, Statues of 2003]
requires an awarding authority for a public transit contract
to give a 10% preference to any bidder who agrees to retain
the employees of prior contractor or subcontractor. Statute
defines awarding authority as any local government agency
(e.g., city, county, special district, etc.).
According to the author, "One of the conditions for Governor
Davis signing SB 158 into law was that the provisions exclude
SB 232
Page 2
the state as one of the government entities defined as
awarding authorities affected by the new law. SB 232 would
eliminate this exception."
According to the California Teamsters Public Affairs Council,
sponsor of this bill, "This bill arose from an incident that
occurred at Hearst Castle when the Department of Parks and
Recreation received bids for transit services and the lowest
bidder steadfastly refused to offer employment to qualified
incumbent drivers. Many of these [drivers] had decades of
service with the prior contractor and become unemployed and
lost their benefits." According to DPR, prior to the new
transit contract in 2012, the prior transit service provider
had held this contract for over 20 years.
2)Existing law , SB 158, Chapter 103, Statues of 2003, requires a
bidder on a public transit contract to declare whether or not
his or she will retain the employees of the prior contractor
or subcontractor for a period of not less than 90 days.
Statute further requires a successor contractor or
subcontractor for public transit services to make a written
offer of employment to each employee to be rehired. That offer
shall state the time within which the employee must accept
that offer, which may not be less than 10 days, and does not
need to be at the same level of wages or benefits as provided
by the previous contractor or subcontractor.
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081