BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1650
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 4, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 1650 (Jones-Sawyer) - As Amended: April 1, 2014
Policy Committee:
JudiciaryVote:10-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill:
1)Prohibits the state accepting a bid from a bidder that asks an
applicant for onsite construction-related employment to
disclose their conviction history at the time of the initial
employment application.
2)Establishes that (1) does not apply to:
a) A position for which the bidder or the contracting
agency is otherwise required by law conduct a conviction
history background check or for any contract position with
a criminal justice agency.
b) Where the bidder is subject to a collective bargaining
agreement with its employees consistent with (1).
FISCAL EFFECT
1)To the extent the bill's requirement would dissuade
noncompliant contractors from bidding on some state public
works contracts, there would be reduced competition, which
tends to increase contract costs somewhat. Since the bill does
not completely prohibit a contractor from inquiring about an
applicant's conviction history-only from doing so during the
initial application process-it is assumed that most
contractors would adjust their practices accordingly in order
to continue seeking state contracts. Nevertheless, given that
state public works contracts total several billion dollars
annually, the impact describe above could be sufficient to
AB 1650
Page 2
increase contract costs by more than $150,000 annually.
2)The state may incur investigation-related costs to the extent
it is presented with information that a bidder was not in
compliance with the bill's requirements. The number of such
cases is unknown, but the costs could be significant,
involving investigative personnel and legal staff.
3)If a state contractor was subsequently found to have been in
violation of the bill's requirements, there could be
additional costs to void the contract and engage another
contractor.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . According to the author, this bill attempts to
address three issues: (a) discriminatory employment practices
for individuals with prior criminal convictions; (b) high
unemployment rates for individuals with criminal backgrounds;
and (c) high recidivism rates within California.
The author states, "[f]elony convictions are often treated as
an automatic disqualification in employment application
procedures. Without much justification individuals with
criminal records are excluded from being considered for
employment. According to a 2009 Joyce Foundation's report
titled, "Transitional Jobs Reentry Demonstration," employment
rates for former prisoners during the year following release
exceeds 50 percent across the United States. Studies have
implicated that there is a direct co-relation present between
the rates of recidivism and the lack of employment for
individuals with criminal backgrounds."
2)Suggested Amendment . Rather than prohibiting the state from
accepting a bid from a noncompliant bidder, it might be
preferable to require, as a condition for bidding on a state
public works contract, that the bidder certify compliance that
the bidder does not require an applicant to provide conviction
history on the initial application for employment.
3)Prior Legislation . AB 218 (Dickinson)/Statutes of 2013,
prohibits state and local agencies from inquiring about
conviction history in their initial employment applications.
AB 1650
Page 3
AB 218 provides a similar exemption to this requirement
regarding applications for positions required by law to
include a conviction history background check and for
positions in criminal justice agencies.
In 2013, AB 970 (Jones-Sawyer), which applied the same
prohibition as AB 1650, but to all state contracts, was held
on this committee's Suspense File.
In January 2014, AB 1198 (Jones-Sawyer), which was similar to
AB 970, was held in the Assembly Accountability and
Administrative Review Committee.
Analysis Prepared by : Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916) 319-2081