BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2391
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 21, 2004
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC EMPLOYEES, RETIREMENT AND SOCIAL
SECURITY
Gloria Negrete McLeod, Chair
AB 2391 (Koretz) - As Introduced: February 19, 2004
SUBJECT : Public employment: legal services contracts: State
Bargaining Unit 2.
SUMMARY : Prohibits a state agency from contracting for legal
services if the hourly rate of compensation for these services
exceeds by more than 200% the hourly rate billed to state
agencies by State Bargaining Unit 2.
EXISTING LAW Authorizes a state agency to contract for private
legal services if, among other circumstances, the Attorney
General's office has a conflict of interest that prevents the
office from representing the agency.
FISCAL EFFECT : Potential savings if certain state agencies
(e.g. CalPERS) are required to terminate contracts with law
firms that exceed the limitation required by this bill.
COMMENTS :
CalPERS has requested an exemption to this bill so that it may
maintain contracts with law firms that they believe provide
specialized investment services.
Arguments in Support
This bill is sponsored by the California Attorneys,
Administrative Law Judges, Hearing Officers and Deputy Labor
Commissioners in State Employment (CASE). CASE represents
employees represented in State Employee Bargaining Unit 2.
According to CASE, Article VII, Section 1 of the California
Constitution contains the state's civil service provisions.
These provisions have been interpreted by the California Supreme
Court as including an implied mandate limiting the state's
authority to contract with private entities to perform services
the state has historically or customarily performed.
In fact, as recently as 1997, the California Supreme Court
reaffirmed its prior recognition of the "civil service mandate"
AB 2391
Page 2
in Article VII, and the fact that it "forbids private contract
for work that the state itself can perform 'adequately and
competently." Professional Engineers v. Department of
Transportation (1997) 15 Cal. 4th 543, 547.
Despite this, the state has spent large amounts of money
contracting out legal services to private firms. Currently,
many state agencies contract out for legal services while the
state continues to lay off employees because of the fiscal
crisis. With the budget deficit only growing, the state can no
longer afford to contract out for legal services and spend
millions of dollars on work that can be performed by current
state employees.
In recent years, the increased use of outside counsel by state
agencies has become an issue of great concern for CASE and its
members, particularly at a time when the state is proposing
laying off bargaining unit members.
This bill would address the problem by prohibiting a state
agency from contracting out if the hourly rate of compensation
exceeds by more than 200% the hourly rate billed to state
agencies by the State Bargaining Unit 2. In these fiscal times
the state can no longer afford the luxury of spending millions
of dollars for work that can and should be performed by members
of Bargaining Unit 2.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Attorneys, Administrative Law Judges, Hearing
Officers and Deputy Labor Commissioners in State Employment
(Sponsor)
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Clem Meredith / P.E., R. & S.S. / (916)
319-3957