By Michael Falcone
Daily Bruin Senior Staff
Crowded freeways, decaying schools and buildings overdue for
earthquake retrofits are among the problems supporters of
Proposition 35 say the measure will help alleviate.
But opponents ““ including numerous labor unions and school
districts ““Â foresee construction delays and hidden costs
for the taxpayer.
Through a California constitutional amendment, Proposition 35
would allow the state more flexibility to outsource public works
projects to private companies.
Current law requires that only state civil service employees
perform work for state agencies.
A host of California taxpayer associations, cities, counties and
state and local chamber of commerce branches endorsed the
proposition according to “Yes on 35″ Web site.
Supporters of the proposition say, the measure, if passed, would
significantly speed up the completion of public works projects
around the state such as the building of highways, schools and
prisons.
The official ballot argument in favor of Proposition 35 cites a
“huge backlog” in California Department of
Transportation construction projects evidenced by traffic
congestion on the state’s freeways.
The argument also projects a huge savings for Californians if
the proposition passes.
The California Taxpayers’ Association and other taxpayer
groups say Proposition 35 would save $2.5 billion annually and
create 40,000 jobs over the next 10 years.
But opponents say jobs, money and time will be lost ““ not
saved ““ if the measure is passed Nov. 7.
Bruce Blanning, a spokesman for the “No on 35″
campaign said the estimated $2.5 billion savings is
“nonsense” since the number is based on a study paid
for by backers of the proposition.
Though the proposition counts about 35 school districts among
its supporters, another 20 school districts and the California
Federation of Teachers say the proposition will stall current
school building projects,
“This requires the state to develop new regulations and
impose them on all local agencies ““ that process takes at
least 18 months,” Blanning said. “It would bring
contracting to a crawl, if not a complete halt.”
But proponents say the speed of construction in the state is
already too slow.
Analysis of Proposition 35 provided by the non-partisan state
Legislative Analysts Office says that although costs to the state
may be higher when contracted out, it may still be in the
state’s interest to do so in times of
“peak-workload.”
Now is one of those times, said Scott Macdonald, the spokesman
for the Southern California bureau of “Yes on 35.” He
said the state needs to mobilize public and private engineers to
eliminate what he called infrastructure “gridlock” in
California.
“There is so much work to be done,” Macdonald said.
“It’ll take years to get through the pile.”
Macdonald said California used to do more contracting to private
companies until a number of successful lawsuits brought by Caltrans
workers limited the hiring of private architects and engineers. At
the time, those lawsuits caused the termination of 15 earthquake
retrofit contracts, Macdonald said.
But Blanning said California already uses a combination of civil
service employees and private sector workers, and if the
proposition was to be approved by voters in November it would allow
special interests to soak into the fabric of current constitutional
hiring provisions.
“Anytime you eliminate bidding for a procedure that
selects the most qualified firm, it’s an open door to
corruption,” Blanning said.