Senate Agriculture Committee
No chapters available yet
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
Senate Agriculture Committee California State Senate
Follow its sittingsSpeaker 4
Madam Chair, members of the committee, there are 54 district agricultural associations that hold fairs and expositions that are arguably not subject to the provisions of the California Public Contract Code. I was the attorney for tally amusements in the two lawsuits that are referenced in your committee report. In the first, the trial court held that the public contract code did apply to the twenty second District Agricultural Association, and in the course of that lawsuit, it was revealed the CEO of the fairgrounds, not once, but twice changed the scores to award the contract to the favorite bidder. The way these contracts are rigged is to write them write the RFP so that only one company in the whole United States could meet the minimum experience and qualifications. However, as a result of this alarming testimony and an injunction issued by the trial court, the case was settled, tally was reinstated in the fair, and Ag District paid our client $500,000.
However, what happened to the thirty eight Agricultural District was very different. They wrote the same RFP, again, so only one company, the favorite company, the same one in San Diego, could meet the minimum experience and qualifications. However, this time, the trial court ruled that the Food and Agricultural Code was written in such a way that it did not apply the public contract code, and as a result, the trial court dismissed the lawsuit. That carnival operator has now had for twenty years, an additional ten years, an $80,000,000 contract that has never gone through the competitive bidding process. Now the appellate court, in a published opinion, upheld the trial court's dismissal, but stated in the footnote, and I quote, the the legislature did not intended a different result, quote, we invite them to revisit and clarify the language.
Speaker 3
And that's exactly what this bill does. Parenthetically, we filed a petition with the California Supreme Court, and upon reviewing the petition, while they did not grant review, they did order the published opinion depublished. So I think even the California Supreme Court tacitly agreed that, yes, the Food and Agricultural Code cannot be read so that you can issue RFPs so only one bidder can meet the qualifications. So I thank Senator Patia. People don't realize how lucrative these contracts really are.
Speaker 4
I mean, the one in Orange County for five years is worth $80,000,000. I mean, is a major generating source for revenue for on property owned by the state and absolutely should be subject to the competitive bidding process.
Speaker 1
Thank you very much. Testimony in support. We're gonna do the me too's next. If you would like to support the bill, now is your time to come up to the mic and give your name and your affiliation and that you support the bill, and then we'll take the opposition. Anybody here like to give me too testimony?
Me too testimony. Very good. Is there any witness in opposition that would like to testify? Seeing none, is there any me too opposition that would like to be placed on the record? Seeing none, we'll bring the committee back to the committee for questions, concerns, comments, motions?
Move the bill. You may conclude sir.
Speaker 3
Thank you very much. Madam Chair, I'd like to, thank my expert witness for his tenacity and for flagging this issue for not just me, but for the legislature as a whole. Obviously, we hope this is a productive outcome and respectfully ask for a nigh vote.
Speaker 4
Thank you very much and I also want to, take a minute to thank you very much. It was an excellent explanation for, quite frankly, government run amok, if you will. I think anybody in their right mind would understand that an Agricultural District is part of the state, and that they have to follow state rules and procedure. And if it was in the Ag Code and not explicit, it's an error. And so, I do appreciate you bringing this forward, and you as well, Senator.
Speaker 1
So a motion's been made. Please call the roll. Yes. We did. We did.
And you're noted is here now with your vote. Thank you.
Perfect. So SB twelve twenty three, motion due passed to Appropriations Committee. Senator Caviaro? Aye. Caviaro, aye.
Speaker 2
Alvarado Gill? Aye. Alvarado Gill, aye. Ashby? McNurney?
Aye. McNurney, aye. Padilla? Aye. Padilla, aye.
Speaker 1
That bell has four votes. We're gonna put it on call for the absent member. Thank you very much for being here today. Appreciate your testimony. The committee on agriculture will recess for five minutes.
The senate, committee on agriculture will come to order again. We are we have concluded our agenda, and we are closed. Adjourned. Oh. Oh, that's right.
Well, let's go back on on the record again. Never mind. We'll go back to SB twelve twenty three by Senator Padilla. Please call the absent member.
Speaker 1
That concludes our roll call for today. That bill is out four to one. No, four to zero. And that concludes the business of the committee on agri the senate committee on agriculture. Have a good day everybody.
Ask anything about this video — I analyse its transcript to answer.