By Sophia Selivanoff, Executive Director, Regional Government Services

Local government professionals do not need an introduction to consultants. Most agencies already work with them—sometimes strategically, sometimes out of necessity, and often under tight timelines, fiscal pressure, and public scrutiny. What has changed is the environment in which consulting now occurs.

In California, workforce shortages, rising service expectations, pension and labor considerations, evolving procurement practices, and new legislation such as AB 339 are reshaping how agencies engage external expertise. The result is no longer a simple question of whether consulting is useful, but how it can be used responsibly, compliantly, and effectively in today’s conditions.

This article is written for practitioners who already understand consulting and are navigating a more complex reality. It focuses on what has changed, what AB 339 means in practice, and how agencies can adapt their approach while protecting capacity, compliance, and public trust.

How the Approach to Consulting Has Changed

Not long ago, many consulting engagements followed a familiar pattern: a defined scope, a discrete deliverable, and a relatively linear path from analysis to recommendation. A staffing study, a technology assessment, a compensation review—important work, but often bounded and transactional.

That model is increasingly insufficient. Today’s challenges are interconnected and persistent rather than isolated. Agencies are managing overlapping pressures related to workforce availability, compliance risk, political complexity, public accountability, and long-term sustainability. These conditions require consulting approaches that are more adaptive, integrated, and implementation-oriented.

This shift mirrors broader management trends. Harvard Business Review research has consistently shown that organizations derive the most value from consultants when engagements are collaborative, grounded in operational reality, and focused on improving decision quality rather than delivering generic best practices. Consulting works best when it helps leaders think, test assumptions, and navigate trade-offs—not when it simply produces a report.

For local governments, this evolution has practical implications:

• Greater emphasis on consultants who understand public-sector governance, labor frameworks, and political context
• Stronger alignment between consulting work and strategic, fiscal, and workforce priorities
• Increased focus on implementation feasibility and organizational readiness
• Intentional knowledge transfer so agencies are stronger after the engagement concludes

Consulting today is less about filling a temporary gap and more about managing complexity and risk in an environment where missteps are highly visible and often irreversible.

AB 339 and the New Compliance Reality

Layered onto this broader shift is a regulatory environment that has become more demanding. Assembly Bill 339 (AB 339) is a clear example of how compliance considerations now shape consulting decisions from the outset.

AB 339 expands labor notice and disclosure requirements related to the use of contractors and consultants. While the policy intent is to increase transparency, the operational impact for local agencies is additional planning, documentation, and coordination when engaging with external services.

For agencies already navigating CalPERS requirements, procurement thresholds, and public accountability standards, AB 339 adds another dimension of risk—particularly for short-term, specialized, or advisory engagements. Notice timelines, documentation requirements, and internal review processes can extend procurement schedules and increase staff workload.

As the California Special Districts Association and other professional organizations have noted, agencies must understand and address these requirements before executing contracts. AB 339 effectively raises the stakes for engagement design, requiring closer collaboration among executive leadership, human resources, legal counsel, and procurement staff.

Importantly, AB 339 does not diminish the value of consulting. Instead, it reinforces the need for intentional, well-structured engagements that are clear in scope, compliant by design, and aligned with labor and procurement realities. Agencies that adapt their approach can continue to benefit from external expertise without introducing unnecessary risk.

For a practical overview of what AB 339 requires and how agencies can prepare, RGS has compiled resources here.

Why Consulting Still Matters—Perhaps More Than Ever

Paradoxically, the same conditions that make consulting harder to engage also make it more necessary. Persistent vacancies, retirements, and increased service demands have stretched internal capacity across many jurisdictions. At the same time, agencies are facing infrequent but high-stakes projects, new legislative mandates, and growing expectations for transparency and equity.

When designed thoughtfully, consulting engagements help agencies manage these pressures without overextending staff or compromising core services. Consultants can provide surge capacity, comparative insight from peer jurisdictions, and structured approaches to complex decision-making—particularly when internal teams are balancing day-to-day operations with long-term planning.

Practitioner-focused research and podcasts reinforce this point. Harvard Business Review’s IdeaCast has explored the consulting relationship in episodes such as “When Consultants Are Worth the Money” and “When (and How) to Use Outside Experts,” emphasizing that an external perspective adds the most value when it supports leadership judgment rather than replaces it.
For local governments, this distinction is critical. Effective consultants strengthen decision-making and implementation frameworks, while accountability remains firmly with agency leadership.

What Effective Consulting Looks Like in Today’s Environment

Given today’s operational and compliance landscape, successful consulting engagements tend to share several characteristics.

Clarity of Purpose

Agencies that are explicit about why they are engaging a consultant—whether for compliance support, capacity augmentation, strategic planning, or facilitation—are better positioned to manage scope, expectations, and outcomes.

Integration with Internal Teams

Effective consultants work alongside staff rather than in parallel. Respect for institutional knowledge, public-sector expertise, and internal processes improves both the quality and durability of outcomes.

Practical, Implementable Recommendations

Recommendations must account for labor agreements, budget constraints, governance structures, and political context. Analytical rigor is essential, but feasibility determines value.

Attention to Compliance and Risk

In a post–AB 339 environment, compliance considerations must be embedded from the start. This includes realistic timelines, clear documentation, and alignment with labor, procurement, and pension requirements.

Consulting as a Strategic Tool, Not a Shortcut

Consulting has never been a substitute for leadership, nor a shortcut around difficult decisions. Instead, it is one of several tools local governments can use to navigate complexity responsibly.

As regulatory requirements increase and public expectations continue to rise, the more relevant question is not whether agencies can afford to use consultants, but whether they can afford not to engage external expertise thoughtfully when it is most needed.

Regional Government Services partners with local agencies to design consulting engagements that are collaborative, compliant, and grounded in real-world public-sector experience. In a changing environment, the goal is not simply to adapt, but to do so in ways that strengthen institutions and the communities they serve.

Click to learn more or start a conversation

Frequently Asked Questions

How has AB 339 changed the way agencies should approach consulting?

AB 339 adds labor notice and disclosure requirements that must be addressed early in the procurement and contracting process. Agencies should involve HR, legal, and procurement staff upfront to ensure consulting engagements are compliant by design rather than retrofitted later.

Does AB 339 mean agencies should avoid consultants?

No. AB 339 does not prohibit consulting. It requires more intentional planning. Agencies that clearly define scope, timelines, and compliance responsibilities can continue to benefit from external expertise while managing risk.

What types of consulting engagements are most affected by AB 339?

Short-term, specialized, or advisory engagements may feel the impact most acutely, as notice timelines and documentation requirements can affect speed and flexibility. This makes early planning especially important.

How can agencies balance compliance with operational urgency?

Agencies can balance these demands by standardizing engagement templates, building compliance considerations into procurement timelines, and working with consultants who understand public-sector requirements.

When does it make sense to use internal staff instead of consultants?

Internal staff are best positioned for ongoing operational roles. Consultants are most valuable for time-limited, high-stakes, or specialized work where an external perspective or surge capacity improves outcomes.

How can agencies ensure consulting engagements build long-term capacity?

By prioritizing collaboration, knowledge transfer, and practical implementation, agencies can ensure that consulting work leaves them better equipped to manage future challenges.

About the Author

Sophia Selivanoff is the Executive Director of RGS, where she works with local agencies throughout California to strengthen organizational capacity, navigate complex workforce and compliance challenges, and support effective public-sector leadership. With deep experience in human resources, labor relations, and organizational strategy, Sophia partners closely with elected officials and executive teams to design practical, compliant solutions tailored to the realities of local government. Her work focuses on helping agencies adapt to changing regulatory environments while remaining accountable to the communities they serve.

Learn more about Sophia and her work.