LWVC HOME - VOTING Q&As - STATE PROPS - ABOUT LWV
ON BALLOT MEASURES: ABOUT OUR ANALYSIS - LIST of PROPS - SMART VOTER
-----------

LWV CA Ed Fund LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF CALIFORNIA EDUCATION FUND
Nonpartisan Pros & Cons of

Proposition 224

STATE-FUNDED DESIGN AND
ENGINEERING SERVICES.

----------------------------------------
Initiative Constitutional Amendment

THE QUESTION

Should the state constitution impose restrictions on state-funded design and engineering contracts to require a cost comparison between private contractors and public employees, and to require competitive bidding for construction-related services?

THE SITUATION

The state currently contracts with private firms using a qualifications-based selection process (QBS) to design projects such as roads, hospitals, and schools. This measure would eliminate QBS and award the contract to the bidder with the lowest cost proposal.

The private firm's costs would include overhead, profit, employee benefits, equipment, and rent; the state's costs would be determined by the Controller and would include "additional direct costs to the state," a term that is not defined. There may or may not be equally weighted comparisons.

THE PROPOSAL

Proposition 224 would require:

  • competitive cost-bidding for state-funded engineering or design contracts over $50,000

  • the state to prepare an analysis of the cost of performing the work under contracts using state civil service employees

  • contractors to pay the state's costs in all lawsuits related to the performance of the contracts.

FISCAL EFFECT

According to the Legislative Analyst the fiscal impact of this proposition depends upon which cost factors will be used in comparing the cost of civil service employees with the cost of private design and engineering firms. The Legislative Analyst concludes that a strict interpretation of the term, "additional direct costs," could result in increased costs to state and local governments.

SUPPORTERS SAY

  • Competitive bidding and cost comparisons would ensure fairness, impartiality, and the best deal for the tax dollar.

  • Quality of work would improve because contractors would be fully responsible and liable for their performance.

OPPONENTS SAY

  • Required cost comparisons would be unfair because state civil service costs would omit essential job expenses such as employee compensation, generous benefits, and office expenses.

  • Quality would no longer be the primary factor in design and engineering contracts.
(Analysis prepared by the League of Women Voters of California Education Fund.)

On Propositions: About our Analysis - List of Props - Smart Voter
LWVC Home - Voting Q&As - State Props - About Us

Last updated: April 22, 1998
Send comments and suggestions concerning this page to nvmk16b@prodigy.com
Copyright 1998 League of Women Voters of California Education Fund. All rights reserved.