SACRAMENTO, CA – A criminal justice reform bill aimed at dismantling one of the most troubling features of California’s indigent defense system has cleared a key hurdle in the Legislature.
AB 690, known as the Fair Representation Act and authored by Assemblymember Nick Schultz, passed out of the Senate Public Safety Committee on June 24 and now heads to the Senate Appropriations Committee.
If enacted, AB 690 would end the use of privatized flat-fee contracts for indigent defense services across California beginning in 2027. These contracts, which pay private attorneys a fixed sum to handle an unlimited number of criminal cases, have been criticized for years by legal scholars, civil rights advocates and public defenders who say the model incentivizes rushed plea deals, excessive caseloads, and ineffective representation.
The bill seeks to address long-standing disparities in California’s criminal legal system, particularly for low-income people charged with crimes.
California is one of only four states that provides no ongoing statewide funding or oversight for trial-level public defense. In the absence of state regulation, many counties have turned to flat-fee contract systems in an effort to manage costs, particularly in areas without full-time public defender offices.
As of early 2025, 24 counties used flat-fee contracts as their primary method of public defense.
Legal experts and researchers say this model not only fails to ensure competent representation, but actively creates financial conflicts of interest for defense attorneys. Under flat-fee contracts, the more hours an attorney spends on a case, the less they earn per hour.
Many contracts do not provide separate funding for investigators, social workers, or expert witnesses, meaning attorneys are expected to fund critical casework from their flat fee. That structure, advocates argue, encourages attorneys to resolve cases quickly rather than thoroughly, undermining their clients’ constitutional rights.
Assemblymember Schultz said the bill is designed to restore fairness and integrity to California’s justice system by eliminating these contracts and setting minimum standards for indigent defense compensation. He said the legislation would ensure that attorneys are paid based on the actual time and work performed, not a flat rate that discourages meaningful representation.
“Every person deserves competent legal representation, regardless of their zip code or how much they earn,” Schultz said in a statement. “This legislation ensures that contracted attorneys have the resources, time, and compensation necessary to provide quality legal services for the most vulnerable in our state.”
The Office of the State Public Defender, which released new standards for contract and panel defense systems earlier this year, has explicitly called for an end to flat-fee contracts. The standards recommend performance-based compensation models, caseload monitoring, and dedicated funding for support services such as investigators and immigration counsel.
AB 690 builds on those standards by requiring counties and courts that contract with private attorneys for indigent defense to provide hourly compensation and to take attorney workload into account when assigning cases. The bill also requires that contracts include a separate budget allocation for case-related services and allow contracted attorneys to seek increased funding if their workload exceeds expectations.
Supporters of the bill include the ACLU of California, the Wren Collective, the California Public Defenders Association, the Vera Institute of Justice, and dozens of criminal justice reform organizations across the state.
In contrast, opposition has come from some county governments and associations, including the California State Association of Counties, the County of Fresno, and the Rural County Representatives of California, which have raised concerns about the financial impact of changing contract systems.
Proponents argue that eliminating flat-fee contracts will not only improve justice outcomes but also save counties money over time. Research indicates that clients represented by flat-fee contract attorneys are more likely to be incarcerated and to receive longer sentences, driving up jail and prison costs.
By contrast, counties with fully funded institutional public defender offices report better case outcomes and lower incarceration rates.
A 2025 report by the Wren Collective and ACLU titled “Contracted to Fail” found that eight of the ten California counties with the highest incarceration rates—including all of the top five—used flat-fee contracts as their sole form of indigent defense.
The same report found that these counties spend 159 percent more on prosecution than public defense, a disparity that far exceeds the already disproportionate statewide average. A separate analysis by the Office of the State Public Defender in its May 2025 “Unequal Scales” report confirmed that counties in California consistently allocate hundreds of millions more in funding to district attorney offices than to indigent defense, despite constitutional requirements that both sides be equally resourced to ensure a fair trial.
Flat-fee contracts, the Wren Collective report concluded, routinely lack basic safeguards such as caseload caps, supervision, and access to investigative resources. In one county, attorneys were found to be handling more than 300 open felony cases at a time, with no limits and no requirement to consult with clients before entering pleas. In another case, a flat-fee attorney admitted in a deposition to pleading 70 percent of his clients guilty at the first court appearance after spending as little as 30 seconds on each case.
AB 690 would prohibit such practices by mandating contractual standards that align with national best practices and workload studies such as the 2023 RAND Corporation Public Defense Workload Study. The legislation would require all new contracts to include quality controls, provide adequate time for attorneys to prepare each case, and ensure funding is available for essential services including expert witnesses, mental health evaluations, and reentry planning.
Assemblymember Schultz noted that while AB 690 does not solve all the challenges facing California’s public defense system, it represents a crucial first step in ending what he called “a two-tier system of justice.”
“This legislation represents a significant step forward in protecting the rights of indigent defendants while also supporting the attorneys who work tirelessly on their behalf,” he said. “By setting fair compensation and resource allocation, we ensure that justice is not compromised by inadequate resources.”
If passed, AB 690 would take effect on January 1, 2027, giving counties ample time to restructure their public defense contracts and bring them into compliance with the new standards. The bill previously passed the Assembly Appropriations Committee by a 12–2 margin and cleared the full Assembly with a bipartisan 64–9 vote.
