Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/7/1999 - STAFF REPORTS (18) DATE: July 7, 1999 TO: City Council FROM: Assistant City Manager - Administration "FAIR COMPETITION AND TAXPAYERS SAVINGS ACT" RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council consider a Resolution supporting the "Fair Competition and Taxpayers Savings Act" in the form of both an Initiative and Legislation. BACKGROUND: Attached is correspondence from the Taxpayers for Fair Competition organization promoting an Initiative and Legislation to allow State and local governments the option of contracting for private engineering and architectural services. A proposed Resolution indicating the City Council's support of this proposed Legislation nd Initiative is attached for Council consideration. Dallas J. Flice Assistant City M r7Administrafion C7 APPROVED y Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Letter and Report 2. Proposed Resolution 1� � 1 Taxpayers i ❑ 111 Anza Boulevard, #406 • Burlingame, CA 94010 • 650-340-0470 • FAX: 650-340-1740 ❑ 11300 W. Olympic Boulevard, #840 • Los Angeles, CA 90064 • 310-996-2600 • FAX: 310-996-2673 ®®.,- May 10, 1999 MAY 19 1999 Mr. William Kleindienst Mayor l 17 City of Palm Springs Box 2743 Palm Springs, Ca. 92263-2743 Dear Mr. Kleindienst: Last spring the Palm Springs City Council voted to oppose Proposition 224, which would have prevented state and local governments from contracting out with qualified private engineers and architects. Fortunately, Prop. 224 was soundly defeated by the voters of California. Unfortunately, the same people who brought us Prop. 224 are at it again. While we were defeating Prop. 224, the same group of Caltrans employees was also pursuing their agenda in the courts. The bad news is they won — the California Supreme Court agreed with their interpretation of the constitution. This means that state government is essentially banned from contracting out for design services. And make no mistake about it -- local governments could be next. In the past, cities, counties and special districts, as well as local and regional agencies, have relied on private design firms to help meet their infrastructure needs. Your ability to contract out for these services has already been impacted by the state ban. It's only a matter of time before additional lawsuits will attempt— and could well succeed — in extending that ban to local governments. In fact, the state employees' lawsuit has already resulted in the City of San Diego and East Bay MUD canceling contracts with local firms. If this ban is allowed to remain in place, it will essentially take control over your local proiects and give it to the state. You lose the ability to decide when, where and how to complete a project. Losing the ability to contract out also means completion of local infrastructure proiects will slow to a crawl. If all design work must be done by the state, a huge bottleneck will develop, stalling local projects for an indefinite amount of time. According to the California Business Roundtable, there will be a $3 billion backlog of transportation projects by the end of 1999 alone. Unfortunately, that's just the beginning. Further, as all design work shifts to the state, California's government will be forced to support a ballooning permanent workforce. As more and more scarce taxpayer funds are siphoned off to this purpose, it will mean either fewer dollars for vital local projects or increased taxpayer costs — iust one more way for Sacramento to take funds away from local government. That is why we are asking for your City Council's support of the Fair Competition and Taxpayer Savings Act. It expressly allows state and local governments to contract out for design services, giving you the flexibility and control necessary to deliver projects on budget and on time. Currently we are gathering signatures to place this initiative on the March 2000 ballot. In the meantime, we are also pursuing a legislative remedy. The legislation (AB 1448 and ACA 16), which has already been introduced, contains the same language as the initiative. We are working to pass the legislation but prepared to go the initiative route if necessary. We would like your City Council to support both the legislation and the initiative. I hope that once you have reviewed the enclosed materials you will agree that our solution allows California and its taxpayers the best opportunity to improve our infrastructure needs. Please sign and return to me the enclosed support form or sample resolution so I can add your city council to our growing coalition. I will be calling to follow-up on this letter. In the meantime, if you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (650) 340-0470. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, ,* Jason Barnett ACT18NNIFBFB To Protect AhiIity Of Local Governments To Contract Out For l \ Architectural&Engineering Services Historically, local government has been free to rely on private design firms as a cost-effective way to speed WHY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS the delivery of transportation,school,water,earthquake &AGENCIES SHOULD retrofitting and other infrastructure projects. SUPPORT THE"FAIR COMPETITION A series of lawsuits brought by state employees (primarily AND TAXPAYER Caltrans engineers) however, has effectively banned Califor- SAVINGS ACT" engineers nia andrnment from architects. This trhasng with al o begun tlod private limit the ability of local government to choose where and when to use private firms, putting many important local projects in jeop- ardy. But that's not all. Without action, the ability of local governments to contract for these services could be com- pletely taken away. The Ban On State Contracting Puts The Existing Ban Gives Sacramento Local Transportation One More Way To Take Funds Away Projects In Jeopardy From local Governments The design work on all Caltrans If this ban on contracting remains projects will now have to be done in place, state government will be by Caltrans employees. Accord- forced to support a ballooning ing to the California Business "Make no mistake about it. The permanent workforce. As more Roundtable, this situation will ability of local government to and more scarce taxpayer funds control local projects is very much create a $3 billion backlog of are siphoned off to support an important highway and bridge at stake if we don't take action. " increased state payroll, it will projects by the end of 1999 Rob Salaber, mean either fewer dollars for vital alone. Former Dixon CityCouncilmember projects at the local level, or Failure to deliver on existing increased taxpayer costs. projects will make it more difficult in the future to find funding for new projects. This Situation IS Only Going To Get Worse For local Governments Private Sector Earthquake Experts Can No longer Be Utilized It's only a matter of time before additional lawsuits will attempt—and could well succeed — in officially Even though critical projects may need specific extending this ban beyond state government to lo- expertise available only in the private sector,these cal and regional governments and agencies as well. lawsuits have precluded their use. More than 20 In fact, the state employees' lawsuit has already contracts forseismic retrofit work have already resulted in the City of San Diego and East Bay MUD been canceled. canceling contracts with private firms. Taxpayers for Fair Competition • 111 Anza Boulevard, Suite 406 • Burlingame, CA 94010 Phone: (650) 340-0470 • Fax: (650) 340-1740 W� . Local Control Will Be Surrendered Join Us In Fighting To Preserve To The State local FlexihilltvAnd Control The ban on state contracting essentially takes The "Fair Competition and Taxpayer Savings Act" control over many local projects and gives it to exists in both legislative and initiative form. It is the state. If local governments are denied the needed to overturn these lawsuits and ensure that ability to contract out at all, you will lose the abil- state, as well as regional and local governments, will ity to decide when, where and have the option of contracting for pri- how to complete a local infra- vate engineering and architectural structure project. "Don't be fooled byfalse projects. charges regarding the -Fair The "Fair Competition and Taxpayer Schedule Control: Does any- Competition and Taxpayer Savings Act" will: one really believe you'll be able Savings Act. " to approach a big, Sacramento This measure does 0 Preserve The Flexibility ureoes no bureaucracy and insist a project Local Governments Need To be done when ou want it? ing to alter the current process � by which contracts are Create The Design Team That Best Hardly. And if completion of a awarded. It simply ensures Meets Its Needs local project depends on state infrastructure, such as an off you have the ability and flexibility to do so. Remember, Passage of the "Fair Competition and ramp, you'll be in the same situ- it's the people misrepresenting Taxpayer Savings Act" expressly a/- ation. this initiative who have ham- lows state and local government the Budget Control: You can ne- pered the state's ability to option of contracting with private engi- gotiate price with a private firm, deliver infrastructure neers and architects. Local govern- but not with a Sacramento bu- projects. " ments should be able to make their own reaucracy. The price will be John decisions about what combination of whatever it says—and you'll pay Director of Publicis Works kss services will work best for them on any the bill. County of Santa Cruz given project. mmmmmmmrl This measure doesn't make local gov- Completion of Even More Local ernment do anythin not already required. Projects Will Slow To A Crawl ■ Affirm Local Choice On STIP Projects Even before the state ban existed, Caltrans gen- This measure would make it absolutely clear that erally completed projects at a slower pace than a regional improvements under the State Transpor- combination of public and private efforts. tation Improvement Plan (STIP) are local choice For example, Caltrans calculated it would take projects, and that the sponsoring local or regional 17 years to complete a highway project in Santa government has the choice and authority to use Clara County. The project was ultimately com- the design services of its choice. pleted by a local public-private partnership 40% ■ Provide Taxpayer Safeguards And faster and hundreds of millions of dollars cheaper Accountability than what Caltrans had originally estimated. If state control of local projects is allowed to ex- Californians must be assured that taxpayer dol- pand beyond state transportation projects, the lars are protected. Therefore, the initiative re- situation will become even worse. The antici- quires contracts be awarded through a competi- pated $3 billion backlog of transportation tive selection process that does not alter cur- projects is just the beginning. rent law governing the selection of private firms. Texpavers for Fair Competition -� %f* RESOLUTION NO. 19606 OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA, SUPPORTING "THE FAIR COMPETITION AND TAXPAYER SAVINGS ACT" IN THE FORM OF BOTH AN INITIATIVE AND LEGISLATION WHEREAS, California's population growth has resulted in the demand for more than$90 billion worth of highway, school, prison, flood control, and other infrastructure improvement projects; and WHEREAS, the need for state and local governments to contract with the private sector for architectural and engineering services has never been greater; and WHEREAS, a series of successful lawsuits by a group of Caltrans employees has resulted in effectively banning the state from contracting with private engineers and architects; and WHEREAS, in order to stop the Caltrans employees' continuing effort to prevent the state and local government from utilizing private engineers and architects, an initiative and legislation (AB1448 and ACA16) known as "The Fair Competition and Taxpayer Savings Act" has been prepared; and WHEREAS, the Fair Competition and Taxpayer Savings Act changes California's laws and allows the state and local governments to contract with private companies for architectural and engineering services; and WHEREAS, the Fair Competition and Taxpayer Savings Act will save California's taxpayers money by encouraging competition between state employees and the private sector; and WHEREAS,the Fair Competition and Taxpayer Savings Act requires architecture and engineering contracts to be subject to standard accounting practices and requires financial and performance audits as necessary to ensure contract services are delivered within the agreed schedule and budget. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, that it SUPPORTS "The Fair Competition and Taxpayer Savings Act" both as an initiative and as legislation, which would clearly allow state and local governments to contract with private companies for architectural and engineering services. ADOPTED this 7th day of July 1999. AYES: Members Barnes, Hodges, 0den, Reller-Spurgin and Mayor Kleindienst NOES: None ABSENT: None ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA By City Clerk City Manager REVIEWED & APPROVED AS TO FORMi'/�