BAKERSFIELD, Calif. (KGET) — The Kern County Board of Supervisors is set to vote Tuesday on extending an existing contract between Bakersfield Recovery Services and the county — but will a conflict of interest create the same problems as it did for the Family Justice Center?

During the regular Board meeting May 12, supervisors Jeff Flores, Chris Parlier and David Couch recused themselves from voting on the proposed agreement between the Kern County District Attorney’s Office and Bakersfield Recovery Services to staff the Family Justice Center. 

All three had received varying amounts in campaign contributions from BRS or its leadership.

Supervisor Leticia Perez was absent from the meeting.

Two names were drawn from a jar to satisfy the quorum and Flores and Parlier were selected. The two voted in support of the agreement while Chair Phillip Peters voted against it, effectively rejecting the DA’s proposal due to not getting the required three out of five votes.

According to the meeting agenda for May 19, Kern Behavioral Health and Recovery Services is seeking an amendment to its agreement with Bakersfield Recovery Services.

The Board approved the original agreement May 13, 2025. District 3 Supervisor Jeff Flores was absent while Parlier, Couch, incumbent Chair Phillip Peters and Perez voted yes.

The agreement was initially for $3,750,000 for BRS to provide outpatient and residential substance use treatment services for adults.

On March 10, the Board approved an amendment to include an additional $995,000 in compensation for services provided during fiscal year 2024-2025 and additional services in the current year.

The proposed second amendment is to extend the term of the agreement through Dec. 31, 2026, and increase compensation to BRS by $2,300,000 — bringing the total amount to $7,045,000, according to the agenda.

So how will the Board vote on this matter if there is a conflict of interest between three of the supervisors and BRS? And how was the initial agreement approved in May 2025 if the same five supervisors sat on the Board at the time?

According to county spokesperson Erin Briscoe, the Levine Act — which requires elected officials who have received over $500 in political contributions from a group to reveal the fact on the record and recuse themselves from the proceeding — does not apply in this case.

This is because the contract between KernBHRS and BRS was competitively bid, according to Briscoe.

On the other hand, the DA’s Office went through an informal bidding process for its proposed agreement with BRS. BRS was the only organization to apply for the position and submit a bid, according to the DA’s Office.

 What’s next for the Family Justice Center after county denies DA motion 

A formal bidding process are typically for projects over $200,000 that go through a Request for Proposal or other similar processes, while an informal bidding process is for projects between $50,000 and $200,000, county officials said.

Bids are still solicited during the informal process, but it isn’t as formal as the RFP process.

The Board is set to vote on this amendment during its 9 a.m. meeting Tuesday at 1115 Truxtun Ave.

Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

 For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to KGET 17 News.