NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended for use by the standing finance committees of the legislature.  The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used in any other situation.



The LFC is only preparing FIRs on bills referred to the Senate Finance Committee, the Senate Ways and Means Committee, the House Appropriations and Finance Committee and the House Taxation and Revenue Committee. The chief clerks are responsible for preparing and issuing all other bill analyses.



Only the most recent FIR version, excluding attachments, is available on the Intranet. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the LFC office in Room 416 of the State Capitol Building.





F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T





SPONSOR: Varela DATE TYPED: 01/28/99 HB 34
SHORT TITLE: Damage Claims Record Inspections SB
ANALYST: Carrillo


APPROPRIATION



Appropriation Contained
Estimated Additional Impact
Recurring

or Non-Rec

Fund

Affected

FY99 FY2000 FY99 FY2000
$ 0.0 $ 0.0 *

*See Fiscal Implications Section.



(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)



Duplicates/Conflicts with/Companion to/Relates to



SOURCES OF INFORMATION



General Services Department

Administrative Office of the Courts

State Personnel Office

Public School Insurance Authority



SUMMARY



Synopsis of Bill



House Bill 34 is proposing to reduce the time that the Risk Management Division may keep confidential records pertaining to claims for damages from 180 days to 30 days. The records will have to be made available for public inspection after 30 days.



Significant Issues



Two concerns expressed by the General Services Department staff are: the potential to discourage the settlement of lawsuits and increased litigation costs.





FISCAL IMPLICATIONS



As stated above, the potential to increase the cost of litigation to both the State and public employees.



OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES



RMD staff has provided discussion regarding the following:



A major factor that influences parties to compromise their positions is the knowledge that the terms of the settlement agreement will remain confidential, at least for a "cooling-off" period of time. If the present six-month time period is reduced to thirty days, plaintiff and/or defendant parties may resist negotiation which could require that claims be settled and choose to pursue a trial.



The State's litigation costs may increase by providing the plaintiffs' bar (legal counsel) almost immediate access to the amounts which various types of RMD claims are settled. This could be particularly difficult if there are numerous claimants, involving somewhat related issues.



Particular to, but not limited to; employment issues, often other potential claimants wait to see the results of a settlement outcome. Reducing the availability of settlement records for public inspection from six to one month may result in an increase in the number of claims filed.



More often than not, the Risk Management Division receives requests to pay $400.0 to $500.0. The GSD staff believes that the six month waiting period results in less negative publicity against the State resulting in a fewer number of claims filed. Currently, little publicity regarding the claims settled in favor of the State is received. This amount of positive publicity is offset by the current amount of negative publicity received. If the amount of time is reduced from the six to one month period the State may experience an increase in negative publicity.



WJC/gm