BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 149
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 4, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 149 (Lara) - As Amended: March 14, 2011
Policy Committee: PERS Vote:4-1
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes a state department or agency, when the
State Personnel Board (SPB) has either prohibited a contract
from being executed or nullified an executed contract, to create
and fill a civil service position for the equivalent number of
hours for each contractor position requested in the submitted
contract.
FISCAL EFFECT
Increased costs for personnel services, probably several hundred
thousands of dollars, from increased state agency expenditures.
The expenditures would come from two sources:
1)Reduced salary savings of state agencies. In some cases,
state agencies would have to use their unallocated salaries
and wages to pay for these positions that were not budgeted.
This is likely to reduce salary savings that are currently
reverted to the General Fund and other funds.
2)Necessary increase in personnel services to pay the salaries
and wages and benefits for the permanent work force that could
be created by establishing these positions.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose. According to the author, "AB 149 would ensure that
state agencies properly adhere to the requirements of the
State Civil Service Act, by allowing for the creation of civil
service positions if the SPB prohibits or nullifies a personal
services contract." Supporters state that even when a
AB 149
Page 2
contract is found in violation of existing law and
invalidated, the identified work must still be performed and
too often, though, departments do not add the necessary civil
service positions because the statute does not provide them
with that authority.
2)Personal Services Contracts . Government Code Sections
19130-19134 provide criteria outlining when it is permissible
for state agencies to use personal service contracts. SPB
reviews certain contracts to ensure they are consistent with
the Government Code and may disallow contracts if they are not
in compliance with the specified standards.
3)AB 149 would undermine legislative authority. Positions are
generally established by the routine budget process, which
includes extensive executive branch review and approval and
similar scrutiny in the Legislature. For those few positions
that are administratively established the Legislature, in the
budget act, establishes the requirements that the
administration must meet to create the positions. Supporters
are correct that when a contract is denied, state agencies do
not have the authority to add positions to do the work. The
Legislature has enacted those restrictions in order to control
over state spending in general and the size and composition of
the state work force. This bill circumvents the control and
restrictions that the Legislature has enacted into law, in
particular the budget control provisions that govern the
administrative establishment of positions.
4)Funding of positions. No specific mechanism is created to
fund the positions that are administratively established under
the provisions of this bill, so agencies would have to use
their existing allocation of personnel services or reallocate
contract funds. Since the personnel services budgets are
allocated for existing positions, the likely source would be
salary savings, which could reduce administrative savings that
are normally returned to the funding source, including the
General Fund. Contract funds may not be used for personal
services in some situations, which could further reduce salary
savings. In addition, state agencies would likely incur costs
once the contract work is completed and some time would be
required to adjust the size of their work force through
attrition, redirection or layoffs.
AB 149
Page 3
Analysis Prepared by : Roger Dunstan / APPR. / (916) 319-2081