BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  SB 252
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   June 22, 2011

                   ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
                                 Isadore Hall, Chair
                     SB 252 (Vargas) - As Amended:  May 31, 2011

           SENATE VOTE  :   25-15
           
          SUBJECT  :   Public contracts: personal services

           SUMMARY  :   Establishes the Government Oversight and Fiscal 
          Accountability Review Act of 2011 and requires a state agency or 
          department that enters into a privatization contract, as 
          defined, to report to the Department of General Services (DGS) 
          regarding that privatization contract and requires DGS to make 
          that report available for public inspection pursuant to the 
          California Public Records Act (CPRA).  Specifically,  this bill  :  
           

          1)  Defines "agency" as any state agency or department.

          2)  Defines a "privatization contract" to mean an agreement or 
          combination or series of agreements, including, but not limited 
          to, a personal services contract, by which a privatization 
          contractor agrees with an agency to provide services valued at 
          $500,000 or more that are substantially similar to, and in lieu 
          of, services provided, in whole or in part, by civil service 
          employees of the agency. 

          3)  Defines "privatization contract" to mean any contractor, 
          consultant, subcontractor, independent contractor, or private 
          business owner that contracts with an agency to perform services 
          that are substantially similar to, and in lieu of, services 
          provided, in whole or in part, by civil service employees of the 
          agency.

          4)  Requires an agency, as part of the budgetary process, to 
          provide an addendum to its submitted budget request that 
          includes the name of each privatization contractor or 
          subcontractor that has entered into a privatization contract 
          with the agency during that year, the duration of that 
          privatization contract, the services provided, the total cost of 
          each privatization contract for the prior year, the projected 
          number of privatization contracts for the current and upcoming 
          year,  the estimated cost of each contract for the current and 








                                                                  SB 252
                                                                  Page  2

          upcoming year, and for each privatization contract, the number 
          of privatization contractor employees and consultants, reflected 
          as full-time equivalent positions, and their hourly wage rates 
          for the current fiscal year. This measure provides that this 
          addendum shall be a public record. 

          5)  Requires an agency that enters into a privatization contract 
          to prepare and submit an annual report containing a copy of each 
          privatization contract and a budget analysis of that contract, 
          as specified.

          6)  Provides that a subcontract performed under a privatization 
          contract is a public record pursuant to CPRA.

          7)  Requires DGS to compile, publish, and make available for 
          public inspection all contracting reports received pursuant to 
          the provisions of this bill.
           

           EXISTING LAW  : 

          1)  Establishes standards for state agencies for the use of 
          personal services contracts. 

          2)  Requires the contracting agency to clearly demonstrate that 
          the proposed contract will result in actual overall cost savings 
          to the state. 

          3)   Provides that the contract cannot cause the displacement of 
          civil service employees. 

          4)  Requires that personal services contracts entered into by 
          state agencies with private parties in an amount of $5,000 or 
          more, unless exempt, are required to be submitted to the 
          Department of General Services for approval.
           
          4)   CPRA governs the disclosure of governmental records to the 
          public upon request.  Generally, all public records are open to 
          the public upon request unless the record requested is exempt 
          from public disclosure.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   Unknown

           COMMENTS  :   









                                                                  SB 252
                                                                  Page  3

           Background  :  Under current California law, State agencies are 
          allowed to enter into personal services contracts with private 
          entities in order to reduce state costs. Before entering into a 
          private contract the contracting agency needs to demonstrate 
          that the proposed contract will result in overall savings to the 
          state. In addition, the agency must notify the State Personnel 
          Board and receive approval from DGS to enter into that contract. 
          Once the contract has been performed, the state agency must 
          electronically submit certain contract information to the State 
          Contract and Procurement Registration System (SCPRS) maintained 
          by DGS. The SCPRS was established in 2003 by DGS to provide a 
          centralized database of information on state contracts over 
          $5,000. 

          According to DGS, in Fiscal Year 2009-10, California spent $35.4 
          billion in private contracts. A study by the Service Employees 
          International Local 1000 estimated that the state could save 
          roughly $350 million annually by utilizing state workers instead 
          of privatization contracts; $100 million or more annually in IT 
          contracts, $144-$205 million or more annually in medical 
          registry contracts, and $50 million or more annually in 
          architectural and engineering contracts. According to this same 
          study, there are significant shortcomings to the SCPRS which 
          include: incomplete, inconsistent and inaccurate report contract 
          data, unreliable fiscal year costs, and inability for users to 
          search by state agency name and/or contractor.

           Purpose of the bill  :  According to the author, in fiscal year 
          2009-2010, California spent $35.4 billion on private contracts. 
          However, much of this multi-billion expenditure occurred without 
          substantive government oversight; resulting in billions of 
          wasted dollars.  In the Department of Corrections and 
          Rehabilitation alone, there is $1 billion in privatization 
          contracts for services that are identical or substantially 
          similar to services provided by civil service employees.  
          Taxpayers deserve to be given information about what option is 
          the best value. This measure will ensure increased 
          accountability, oversight and public transparency.

           Arguments in support  :  The American Federation of State, County, 
          and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), AFL-CIO, the sponsor of the 
          bill, states that this measure increases legislative oversight 
          and public transparency by requiring state agencies to report 
          the cost and duration of goods and services contracts.  In 
          addition, this measure ensures fiscal accountability by the 








                                                                  SB 252
                                                                  Page  4

          Legislature by including the cost privatization contracts in the 
          same manner as other expenditure data in order to allow a 
          comparison and analysis of privatization costs versus the cost 
          of utilizing civil service employees. 

          Similarly the California Labor Federation and the Association of 
          California State Supervisors declare that "at a time of deep 
          budget cuts to all state agencies, it is particularly important 
          to evaluate the way that state services are contracted out.  
          Contracting out does not only means layoffs of longtime 
          employees, but it also results in reduced oversight and 
          accountability."  In addition, "at a minimum, policy makers need 
          accurate and through information about state contracts to 
          determine whether they are good use of resources.  Currently, 
          there is little data available to make such assessments." 

           In opposition  : The California Chamber of Commerce, among others, 
          writes in opposition to the bill claiming that this measure 
          "creates a very real risk of financial and competitive damage to 
          public and private firms by requiring the disclosure of 
          confidential information. While we are generally supportive of 
          efforts to increase transparency across all sectors of 
          government, we believe SB 252 goes too far by seeking to make 
          details about private subcontracting arrangements and private 
          employee wage information available to the public at large." In 
          addition they claim that, "mandating this information be turned 
          over to state agencies (and in turn the public) would undermine 
          competition among these parties, drive many companies from the 
          market, and ultimately increase the cost of doing business with 
          the state, which would then be passed on to taxpayers."

           Double-referral  : This measure is double-referred to the Assembly 
          Committee on Business, Professions and Consumer Protection.

           Related Legislation  :  

          AB 172 (Eng).  Would establish the Reporting Transparency in 
          Government Internet Web Site to provide audit and summary data 
          regarding contracts valued at $5,000 or more to the public.  
          (Pending in Senate Governmental Organization)

           Prior Legislation  :  

          AB 756 (Eng/Lieu), 2009-2010 Legislative Session.  The bill 
          requires each state agency to provide a link to a centrally 








                                                                  SB 252
                                                                  Page  5

          located and accessible state-run Internet Web site that includes 
          a list of personal and consulting services contracts. (Vetoed by 
          Governor)

          AB 2603 (Eng), 2007-2008 Legislative Session.  The bill requires 
          state agencies to prepare an annual report for the Department of 
          Finance listing personal services and consulting services 
          contracts, entered into by the agency in the previous fiscal 
          year. (Held in Senate Appropriations Committee)

          SB 1331 (Oropeza), 2007-2008 Legislative Session.  The bill 
          would have required the Governor to prepare and submit to the 
          Legislature, along with the Governor's Budget, a report that 
          contains information regarding current and proposed contracts 
          for services in the amount of $5,001.  (Held in Senate Rules 
          Committee)

          SB 1596 (Yee, 2008), 2007-2008 Legislative Session.  The bill 
          would have required the Regents of the University of California 
          to establish a contractor responsibility program and to 
          establish a centralized contract information data warehouse and 
          require contractors to file a questionnaire with the Regents 
          regarding such information with civil penalties for filing 
          incorrect information.  (Held in Senate Appropriations 
          Committee)

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :

           Support 
           
          American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, 
          AFL-CIO (Sponsor)
          Association of California State Supervisors
          California Labor Federation
          California Nurses Association
          California State Employees Association
          Glendale City Employees Association
          Organization of SMUD Employees
          Professional Engineers in California Government
          San Bernardino and Santa Rosa City Employees Association
          San Luis Obispo County Employees Association
           
            Opposition 
           
          American Council of Engineering Companies








                                                                  SB 252
                                                                  Page  6

          California Chamber of Commerce
          TechAmerica
          TechNet


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Felipe Lopez / G. O. / (916) 319-2531