Prop 35 evokes conflict

At issue is the speedy implementation of thousands of public works projects, from highway expansion to public transit improvements to school building construction.

The initiative would do away with state restrictions on contracting with private companies for engineering and architectural work on public works projects. Under current California law, engineering and design work on public works projects must be performed by state civil service employees, except in cases where civil service workers are not qualified for the work. Most of these cases are seismic retrofit projects and statistical evaluations of projects. While use of private services is already common, proposition 35 would further expand the state's options in hiring outside help. And although municipalities currently can and do employ a lot of outside design and architecture work, the proposition would allow these contracts to be authorized by the state.

The city of San Mateo and the San Mateo Unified School District have endorsed Proposition 35. City Manager Arne Croce said during a legislative committee meeting that the initiative would give the city more flexibility in hiring out contractors and would help in Caltrans projects.

Superintendent Tom Mohr said, "The overarching issue is that it's going to cost school districts a great deal of time in back-up work if it all has to be done in-house."

Although a large number of school districts and cities have signed on to the proposition, many have chosen not to support it. The California Federation of Teachers and the California School Employees Association has come out against it, as well as the cities of Berkeley, Fairfax, and Arvin.

"The initiative is bad for our kids and our schools. This ill-conceived measure will mean delays in building new schools, increase school construction costs and endless litigation. We need new classrooms, not more delays and costly lawsuits," said Ron Duva, President of CSEA in his endorsement against Proposition 35.

It's unclear exactly how the initiative would affect school construction and other public projects. If school districts and other public entities have the option of hiring out to private companies, projects could be sped up during times of high growth, when civil service engineers and architects are maxed out, or when the hiring and training of new state employees slows down the construction process.

According to Rebecca Long, senior fiscal and policy analyst for the state, there is a current 10 percent vacancy rate in design and engineering staff at Caltrans at a time when Caltrans has received an additional $7 billion to expand projects.

Long said, "The fact that Caltrans is budgeted at a higher level means that they are going to be short staffed and they are going to have to delay some work." But she also added, "The lack of engineers is not the major bottleneck in delaying projects. There's a lot of issues." These other delays to projects include Caltrans' approach to soliciting community input on projects, which is often at the last minute instead of at the beginning of project planning, and the lack of staff in state and federal agencies to review environmental impact reports.

Opponents of the proposition say that the selection process for private design or engineering companies will be the bottleneck in the process. The main argument of opponents is that the state will lose control and accountability for public projects when it hands them over to private companies. That's because the selection process would not require a system of bidding, like most projects do.

"All this stands to do is benefit large engineering contractors who won't have to show they're cost effective, who won't have to bid for contracts," said Ted Toppin, spokesperson for the No on 35 Campaign. "The initiative eliminates constitutional safeguards and protections."

But proponents say that public entities and private companies would still have to adhere to state conflicts of interest laws, and bidding does not belong in the architectural and engineering phase of projects because design, and not necessarily the lowest cost, should be the priority.

Mike DeLuca, spokesperson for the Taxpayers for Fair Competition, said that there is more accountability when private employees instead of civil service employees are involved. "If Caltrans does a job and does it badly, a local agency has no redress. If Caltrans botches a job, you can't sue them," DeLuca said. "There are actually more taxpayer protections when the contract is with the private sector than Caltrans because if something goes wrong there is legal recourse."

<