BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1578
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 30, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON ACCOUNTABILITY AND ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
Jim Frazier, Chair
AB 1578 (Pan) - As Amended: April 28, 2014
SUBJECT : Public contracts for services: online database:
expenditures
SUMMARY : Requires the Department of General Services (DGS) to
post specific information about personal services contracts on
its web site. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires DGS to maintain an online database of personal
services contracts that is accessible, searchable, sortable,
and downloadable.
2)Requires the database to include the following information:
a) Description of the contract and services being
purchased;
b) Name of the department, agency, or division contracting
for the service;
c) Name of the contractor and all subcontractors;
d) Effective and expiration dates of the contract;
e) Annual amount paid to the contractor in past fiscal
years and the current fiscal year under the contract, by
funding source;
f) Annual amount proposed to be paid to the contractor in
the fiscal years beyond the approved budget; and,
g) Total projected cost of the contract for all fiscal
years, by funding source.
3)Requires the database information to be compiled in an annual
Service Contractor Expenditure Budget accompanying the
Governor's Budget, detailing total spending on total service
contracts for state government.
EXISTING LAW :
AB 1578
Page 2
1)Specifies the various responsibilities of DGS and other state
agencies in overseeing and implementing state contracting
procedures and policies.
2)Sets public posting requirements, upon the full implementation
of the Financial Information System for California (FISCal)
program, for service contracts in the amount of $5,001 or
more.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : According to the sponsor of this bill, American
Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME),
"taxpayers deserve access to information that would be published
under this bill."
DGS currently provides publicly-assessable information about
state contracts for goods and services through the State
Contract & Procurement Registration System (SCPRS). DGS posts
SCPRS' Excel spreadsheets, which are downloadable, searchable,
and sortable on its website quarterly for contracts in excess of
$5,000. The most recent quarterly file included more than 8,100
contracts.
Data shown in these files covers some of the requirements
specified in this bill, including a description of the contract
and services being purchased, name of the state agency that is
contracting, name of the contractor, and beginning and ending
fiscal years of the contract. This information would meet some
of the requirements listed above. However, the SCPRS file does
not include a list of subcontractors and does not include all
contracts valued under $5,000, which would be required under
this bill.
SB 335 (Yee), Chapter 757, Statutes of 2013, requires the state
to post in a format that allows searching and sorting service
contract information specified in items a through e (except for
the subcontractor components) of this bill upon the full
implementation of FISCal for contracts in excess of $5,000. In
addition to this information, SB 335 also requires posting the
annual amounts paid under the contract in prior fiscal year;
total projected cost of the contract or maximum cost the
contractor is prohibited from exceeding for all fiscal years
during which the contract will be in effect; and the acquisition
AB 1578
Page 3
methods. FISCal is slated to be fully implemented by the end of
2017.
While this information is generally in line with the
requirements of this bill, there are some minor differences.
Specifically, this bill also requires the specification of
funding sources for contracts. According to DGS, meeting the
financial requirements of this bill would entail updating SCPRS,
while FISCal is already being designed to include this reporting
information.
This bill also requires database information to be compiled to
accompany the Governor's Budget. The annual Service Contractor
Expenditure Budget would detail total spending on total personal
service contracts for state government.
Opponents to a prior version state that this bill would violate
employees' privacy and add additional requirements to the
state's "already overly complex" procurement process. A prior
version required the database to include a listing of private
contractor employees and their wages. It is unclear if the
amendments alleviate the concerns of the opposition.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support (prior version)
AFSCME (sponsor)
AFSCME District Council 36
Center on Policy Initiatives
California Labor Federation
Courage Campaign
In The Public Interest
Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy
Working Partnerships, USA
Opposition (prior version)
American Council of Engineering Companies
California Bus Association
California Chamber of Commerce
California Lodging Industry Association
National Federation of Independent Business
Natoma Technologies
Southwest California Legislative Council
AB 1578
Page 4
Analysis Prepared by : Scott Herbstman / A. & A.R. / (916)
319-3600