Kempton

Professional Engineers in California Government v. Kempton

Good Law
2007 Cal. LEXIS 3580·40 Cal. 4th 1016·56 Cal. Rptr. 3d 814·155 P.3d 226·2007 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3855
Supreme Court of CaliforniaApril 12, 2007No. S139917California16,378 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Moreno, J.

Proposition 35, enacted by the electorate on November 7, 2000, expressly removed a constitutional restriction on the ability of governmental entities to contract with private firms for architectural and engineering services on public works projects. However, the measure was silent as to the status of certain statutory regulations on private contracting that were derived from the constitutional restriction. After the passage of Proposition 35, the state Department of Transportation (Caltrans) took the position that the initiative had impliedly repealed those regulatory statutes and ceased complying with them. However, Caltrans continued to use a pre-Proposition-35 statutory procedure for selecting architectural and engineering contractors. In the writ proceeding below, brought by a state employees’ union and a taxpayer challenging Caltrans’s interpretation of Proposition 35, Caltrans prevailed and the Court of Appeal affirmed judgment in its favor.

*1024 Here we decide two issues: (1) did Proposition 35 implicitly repeal the prior statutes regulating private contracting for architectural and engineering services by government agencies, and (2) did the passage of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.