BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  AB 2494
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   May 5, 2010

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Felipe Fuentes, Chair

                 AB 2494 (Blumenfield) - As Amended:  March 18, 2010

          Policy Committee:                             Business and  
          Professions  Vote:                            7-1

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          No     Reimbursable:              

           SUMMARY  

          This bill requires a state agency to immediately discontinue a  
          contract that has been disapproved by the State Personnel Board  
          (SPB). Specifically, this bill:

          1)Requires a state agency to immediately discontinue a contract  
            that SPB or its delegate disapproves, unless otherwise ordered  
            by SPB or its delegate.

          2)Prohibits the state agency from entering into another contract  
            for the same or similar services, or from continuing the  
            services that were the subject of the disapproved contract.

          3)Requires a state agency ordered to discontinue a contract to  
            notify the vendor within 15 days from SPB's final action,  
            unless another time period is specified, and requires the  
            state agency to provide a copy of the notice to SPB and the  
            employee organization that filed the contract challenge. 

          4)Stipulates that failure to provide the required notices per  
            (3) may be grounds for rejection of future contracts for the  
            same or similar services as those discontinued.

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          Other than minor administrative costs, there will be little net  
          fiscal impact, as the bill more explicitly implements the  
          requirements of current law per Government Code Section 19130.    
           The bill provides SPB with flexibility regarding the timing of  
          contract termination, so as not to conflict with the specific  
          terms of a contract.  To the extent implementation of the bill  








                                                                  AB 2494
                                                                  Page  2

          leads to a shift of state services from contracts to civil  
          servants, there could be costs or savings depending on the  
          circumstances.

          For example, in its report on this subject, the State Auditor  
          estimated that the Department of Health Care Services saved more  
          than $1.7 million when it converted information technology (IT)  
          contracts to state IT positions.

           COMMENTS  

           Background and Purpose  .  A September 2009 report by the state  
          auditor on the use of information technology (IT) personal  
          services and consulting contracts at the Department of Health  
          Care Services (DHCS) and the Department of Public Health (DPH)  
          found that, over the preceding five years, SPB had disapproved  
          17 IT contracts because the departments, upon formal challenges  
          from a union, could not adequately justify contracting under  
          Government Code Section 19130-the statute providing conditions  
          allowing for the use of contracting in lieu of civil servants to  
          perform state services.  Although the union prevailed in 17 of  
          its 23 IT contract challenges, many of SPB's decisions were moot  
          because the contracts had already expired before SPB rendered  
          its decisions. 

          According to the auditor, because SPB lacks a mechanism for  
          determining whether state agencies comply with its decisions,  
          the departments experienced no repercussions for failing to  
          terminate these contracts. Although not prohibited by law from  
          doing so, the departments entered into numerous subsequent  
          contracts for the same services as those in the contracts  
          previously disapproved by SPB. 

          The auditor recommended that the Legislature specify that  
          contracts disapproved by SPB be terminated and require state  
          agencies to provide documentation to SPB and the applicable  
          unions to demonstrate to the satisfaction of SPB the termination  
          of these contracts. AB 2492 implements this recommendation.


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081 












                                                                  AB 2494
                                                                  Page  3