Gridlocked California is poised to spend another $6.8 billion to relieve traffic congestion, rebuild aging highways and railroad lines and strengthen bridges against earthquakes. The design and engineering demands for such an ambitious plan far exceed the capacity of government engineers at the state Department of Transportation. Yet the state's ability to hire private engineering firms to fill the gap is severely constrained.

In a series of lawsuits over the last two decades, the powerful public employee union that represents government engineers,Professional Engineers in California Government (PECG), successfully challenged contracting out by the state. To the extent local governments partner with the state for transportation and other building projects, they too are impacted by the PECG lawsuits.

Proposition 35, the proposed constitutional amendment on the November ballot, would once again permit state and local governments "to contract with qualified private entities for architectural and engineering services for all public works of improvement." If California is to meet its critical needs for more roads, schools, sewer systems and water projects, local and state government must have maximum flexibility to use the talent available in the private as well as the public sector. Proposition 35 would provide that needed flexibility.

Opponents argue that the measure would eliminate protections against political influence and corruption in public works contracts. That is nonsense. State and local governments contract out for myriad services now, from highway construction and environmental audits to food preparation and child care. The same rules already in place to protect against cronyism, waste and corruption in the awarding of those contracts would apply to any new contracts allowed under Proposition 35.

Without this measure, Caltrans faces the daunting prospect of hiring and training 1,500 engineers in a tight job market. Inability to fill those positions has already led to long delays in badly needed road projects. Equally troubling, if hundreds of new state engineers are hired, when the projects are completed, the state must then lay them off, a difficult, costly and disruptive prospect. The flexibility permitted by Proposition 35 would allow the state to keep a stable work force of well-trained and experienced engineers without bloating the bureaucracy.

Because it is impossible to know how the state will use its new flexibility, the independent legislative analyst's office says the economic impact of Proposition 35 cannot be precisely quantified. Still, significantly, the analyst's official ballot fiscal analysis also notes that "during times of workload growth (which is the current situation in California) the ability to contract for these services could result in project completion earlier than through the training and hiring of new state workers." In those circumstances, contracting out would save money and speed benefits to the public.

Vote Yes on Proposition 35.



<--- Back to Articles Home Page