BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1668
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 17, 2007
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JOBS, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND THE ECONOMY
Juan Arambula, Chair
AB 1668 (Leno) - As Amended: April 11, 2007
SUBJECT : Information technology: open-document software.
SUMMARY : Requires that all state agencies create, exchange,
maintain, and preserve electronic documents, only in an open
file format, as approved by the State Chief Information Officer
(CIO), and that all state agencies are able to accept all
electronic documents in an open-file format approved by the CIO.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires all state agencies create, exchange, maintain, and
preserve documents, including text, spreadsheets, and
presentations, only in an open-file format, as specified by
the State CIO.
2)Requires that the State CIO consider a number of factors when
determining the implementation of this standard, including:
a) The interoperability among computer platforms and
applications;
b) The extent to which the file format is fully published
and royalty free;
c) The implementation of the file format by multiple
software providers on multiple platforms without any
intellectual property restrictions for necessary
technology; and
d) The extent to which the file format is developed and
maintained by an open industry organization with an
inclusive process for evolution of the standard.
3)Requires all state agencies be able to accept electronic
documents in an open file format approved by the State CIO.
4)Requires the State CIO, by an unspecified date, to develop
guidelines for state agencies in determining whether
electronic documents existing before January 1, 2008, should
AB 1668
Page 2
be converted to an open-file format. Requires the State CIO
to consider the cost of conversion, potential cost savings of
using approved open-file format applications, the need for
public accessibility of converted documents, and the expected
storage life of those documents.
5)Requires state agencies to begin using open-file format
applications during their regularly scheduled software upgrade
cycle, immediately following notice of the approved open file
format applications by the State CIO.
EXISTING LAW :
1)States legislative intent that state agencies use an
information technology (IT) acquisition method that is
compatible to its short and long-term fiscal needs, and that
they have a choice of suppliers to meet statewide
standardization needs and unique service requirements.
2)Creates the Department of Technology Services (DTS) in the
State and Consumer Services Agency for the purpose of
improving and coordinating the use of technology in state
government, and to coordinate and cooperate with all state
agencies to eliminate technology duplications and create
efficiencies.
3)Creates the Office of the State CIO in the Governor's Office.
Specifies the duties of the State CIO as follows:
a) Advising the Governor on the strategic management and
direction of the state's IT resources, including full
statutory authority over state IT policy (e.g. IT standard
setting), and exercising primary control over IT project
approval and oversight;
b) Recommending procedures in state IT programs for
minimizing overlap, redundancy, and cost in state
operations by promoting the efficient and effective use of
IT;
c) Coordinating the activity of agency information
AB 1668
Page 3
officers, agency chief information officers, and the
Director of DTS, for the purpose of integrating statewide
technology initiatives, ensuring compliance with IT
policies and standards, and promoting alignment of IT
resources and effective management of IT portfolios;
d) Working to improve organizational maturity and capacity
in the effective management of IT; and
e) Establishing performance management and improvement
processes to ensure state technology systems and services
are efficient and effective.
4)Establishes an IT procurement process and procedure for goods
and services, and requires that such acquisitions be done
through competitive means, except in cases of emergency, or
where a sole source purchase is the only way of meeting the
state's needs.
5)Requires DGS to approve IT procurement proposals , prior to
issuing an RFP, by first determining that the procurement is
appropriate, and identifying and documenting the following:
a) The procurement is responsive to a legislative mandate
or state business/operational need;
b) The current processes used to accomplish that
legislative mandate or business/operational need;
c) The priorities the procurement is intended to
accomplish;
d) The current technology the procurement is related to;
e) Whether there are multiple vendors for the technology
being procured; and
f) Whether the procurement leverages existing state
technology investments.
6)Defines IT as all computerized and auxiliary automated
information handling, including systems design and analysis,
conversion of data, computer programming, information storage
and retrieval, voice, video, data communications, requisite
systems controls, and simulation.
AB 1668
Page 4
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose of the bill : According to the author, there are no
appropriate standards in place to preserve access to, nor use
of, electronic text, spreadsheets, and presentations created
by state agencies. Currently, many of these electronic
documents exist in a format that restricts and limits their
use because of their proprietary structure.
AB 1668 would establish a standard in California to improve and
ensure the interoperability of documents between state
agencies and the public by implementing a file format standard
that is fully published, freely distributed, and available to
the users without having to pay a royalty.
2)Open-file formats versus proprietary formats : In the simplest
of terms, when the intellectual property rights of a computer
file format are owned by an entity, and the use of that file
format in a software application requires the payment of a
licensing fee or royalty to the owner of that file format, the
file format is considered proprietary. For example, the most
popular and widely used word-processing program in the world
is Microsoft Corporation's "Word", which creates and preserves
electronic documents in a format commonly called "doc." In
order for any software application to interface, or
interoperate with documents that are created and preserved in
a "doc." file format, the software application must speak or
work in the same file format, which would require the software
developer to pay a royalty to Microsoft for that privilege.
On the other hand, open-file format software applications are
available for implementation and use, free from the payment of
royalties, not licensed, and not subject to other user
restrictions. Open-file formats are developed through a
multi-vendor/multi-stakeholder process conducted by an
international standards organization, which typically consists
of software developers, government organizations, technical
organizations, academicians, and researchers. The file
format is published and available for any software developer
to adopt and utilize in the particular application the
developer is creating. The software application itself is
still a proprietary product, but the format of the computer
AB 1668
Page 5
language that the application uses is not proprietary.
3)Possible advantages and disadvantages of mandating an
open-file format standard for government : One of the
arguments in favor of mandating a state standard for open-file
formats is to ensure that electronic documents generated by
government can be freely accessed and used for many years into
the future. This "archival" argument contends that creating
and preserving information in an open-file format guards
against the risk of being locked-out of that information in
the future, by limitations that exist when using proprietary
formats. Therefore, to ensure that government documents
remain accessible it could be advisable to have an IT standard
that is universally accessible.
Software developers that use proprietary formats, however, argue
that their applications will constantly evolve and respond to
market conditions. They point out that open-file formats are
currently available, and in wide use around the world. To the
extent that technological solutions utilizing this approach
are offered, and grow increasingly popular, software
developers, who use proprietary formats, contend they will
accommodate this circumstance in order to stay competitive.
This may mean, for example, that proprietary software
applications will incorporate features that provide the
interoperability characteristics of open-file formats, if that
is what the market demands. Hence, there may be no need to
limit the technology to a standard open-file format.
Interoperability, or the exchange of information from one
program to the other, may be enhanced by the use of open-file
formats. If an open-file format standard is established, the
interoperability of programs within government, as well as
among governments, may be assured. This may prove crucial in
emergency situations, such as recovering from a disaster.
Notwithstanding the archival and interoperability advantages of
open-file formats, there is still a concern that mandating a
standard, impinges on the need of government to remain
flexible when determining the IT that best meets the business
needs for which a technological solution is being sought.
Statutorily limiting IT procurement to one type of technology,
for example, open-file formats, presupposes that the best IT
solutions for any given problem will only emerge in
applications that use that approach. Experience, however, has
AB 1668
Page 6
shown that innovation spans the gamut of technological
approaches, and government should not necessarily preclude
itself from being able to take advantage of innovations,
whether they are in a proprietary format or not.
It is uncertain whether a mandate would or would not benefit
competition for state IT goods. On the one hand, the royalty
free, and widely published nature of open-file formats might
lead to a wide variety of software applications that use
open-file formats becoming available in the IT marketplace.
The ensuing competition and multiple vendor products could
lower the cost of computer software to both public and private
users. On the other hand, by limiting the software format, the
state could not purchase other products that are already on
the market, and may cost less.
There is also a question of whether the IT hardware currently in
use within state government can accommodate open file format
software. There is a possibility that new, more powerful
hardware, with larger data storage capability, would have to
be procured in order to utilize open-file format programs.
While the state typically goes through IT refresh cycles,
where new equipment is acquired to replace older, worn, and
perhaps outdated components, the question remains whether the
replacement equipment will be more costly in order to handle
open file format applications.
There may also be cost implications for additional training of
state personnel to use open-file format software, and possibly
having to retain separate staff who are capable of operating
the older, legacy systems that are in a proprietary format,
until the legacy systems are completely phased out of state
service.
The issue of workforce training may best be understood in terms
of what the state workforce is currently using, and the level
of instruction that may be needed to move people into new
open-file format applications. The State CIO reports that 90%
to 95% of the state's employees use "Word" to create and
preserve their text documents in a "doc." format. Also,
several major state entities have never migrated to the "doc."
format, because the applications they have been using have
certain features that accommodate their unique workplace
needs. For example, there are still many employees who are
using "Wordstar" or "Mac." Requiring all state employees to
AB 1668
Page 7
transition to new software platforms without regard to
determining the level of training required, and other short
and long-term fiscal needs, could have implications for
employee productivity.
State policy and statute require that state departments and
agencies evaluate all proposed IT procurements, in part, on
the basis of whether they leverage existing state IT
investments. It appears, however, that if a standard is
mandated, existing IT investments that do not comply with that
standard will ultimately be phased out of state service,
regardless of whether that technology has value to the state.
Hence, non-compliant IT investment can no longer be leveraged,
and there may or may not be significant consequences as a
result.
4)State IT procurement and development - prospects and problems :
The acquisition of IT goods and services is perhaps the most
significant component of state procurement activities. In
2005-06, California agencies entered into 9,100 IT contracts
with a value of $1 billion. Ten departments accounted for 74%
of that procurement. According to the CIO, there are 117
active IT projects, with total planned project costs estimated
at just over $5 billion, over the next five years.
IT has long been recognized as a way for the state of California
to deliver services in an efficient and cost-effective manner.
Well-planned IT programs can make government services more
accessible, improve the cost-effective application of the
state's business services and ensure the security of state
information, while simultaneously using that information to
help preserve the peace, health, safety, and prosperity of
state residents and its economic enterprises.
For the last several decades, the challenge to the state of
California has been how to utilize IT most effectively. The
costs and complexities of some very worthwhile IT undertakings
have been as daunting as they are promising.
In his Annual Report on the Executive Branch's Information
Technology Program, 2/28/07, the State CIO reports most IT
projects have proven their worth, but some have been failures,
AB 1668
Page 8
costing the state nearly $500 million dollars in futile
effort. Over the years projects have begun and then been
abandoned, such as the Department of Motor Vehicles' database
upgrade project in 1994, the Department of Social Services'
statewide child support project in 1997, and the Health and
Human Services Data Center project for a Statewide Automated
Welfare System in 1999.
5)Making IT work for state government : The magnitude of IT
procurement in California government, and the high costs of
project failures that have occurred, underscore the need for
coordinated policy, planning, and oversight of IT procurement
and operations. Over the last decade the Legislature and the
Executive Branch have worked to bring some cohesion,
efficiency, fairness, security and competitiveness to the
state's IT procurement policy and processes.
Most recently, the state merged its two major data centers and
its telecommunications network into a single DTS. It also
revamped and expanded the role of the State CIO, and it
implemented the DGS Strategic Sourcing Initiative. The
following is a very brief summary of each of these operations:
a) DTS and its governing Technology Services Board (TSB)
were established in 2005, by consolidating Calnet (the
state's telecommunications network), with the Teale Data
Center, and the Health and Human Services Data Center. The
goal of the realignment and consolidation was to improve
the performance of the Executive Branch in managing the
state's IT infrastructure. Management focus has been
placed on receiving best value acquisition and management
of IT resources, ensuring security, minimizing IT risk, and
ensuring competency among IT personnel throughout state
government.
b) Since 2002, the State CIO has been charged with
providing leadership on IT policy. The State CIO develops
policy recommendations by working with three distinct
governance bodies or councils. The IT Council advises on
overall IT planning and policy. The TSB sets policy on
enterprise services provided by DTS. The Enterprise
Leadership Council (ELC) provides a forum for Executive
Branch agencies to discuss and resolve business issues
related to enterprise-wide IT from a business perspective.
AB 1668
Page 9
c) The Strategic Sourcing Initiative is a process designed
to allow the state to purchase the best products and
services for the best value. Strategic sourcing
streamlines procurement activities by consolidating,
renegotiating and automating contracts to achieve
significant savings.
6)Key policy questions : The following are key policy issues AB
1668 raises:
a) Mandating a standard : According to DTS, there are no
other technology specific standards that are now in state
statute. Whenever a standard, of any sort, is codified it
means that unless a future change in law occurs, the
codified standard is the only approach the state can take
to satisfying a technological business need. If, in this
case, IT evolved in a manner that presented a yet
unanticipated software file format that exceeded the
promises of everything on the market today, the state would
have to make a statutory change to take advantage of the
new technology.
It is unclear whether mandating a technology standard in
statute may or may not be a way to obtain best value
solutions to state business needs, while leveraging the
state's existing IT investment, and minimizing state costs
over the short, medium, and long term.
b) Market forces already in play : There are changes
occurring in the IT marketplace and among organizations
that develop IT standards that may lead the state into
widespread utilization of open-file format software
applications without a statutory mandate.
According to the ODF Alliance, an international organization
of companies that develop and promote the use of open-file
format standards, the use of open-file standards is growing
rapidly around the world. More than 50 national
governments are using open-
file format standards. Furthermore, the alliance states that
businesses are responding to the needs of governments and
their customers, and implementing open-file formats in
AB 1668
Page 10
their products, with a variety of applications already on
the market.
c) Evaluating a proposal for a state IT standard : To date,
the State CIO and DTS have not prepared an analysis on the
potential impact of implementing an open-file format
standard in state government. The State CIO has stated
there is no state preference in project design or in
procurement for open source or proprietary solutions. The
Legislature has stated its intent that IT acquisitions be
compatible to a department or agency's short and long term
fiscal needs. Therefore, the architecture of individual
information technology projects is determined initially by
the project owner, and the analysis supporting those
decisions typically appears in a Feasibility Study Report
(FSR) prepared by the Department of Finance.
It is reasonable to assume that there are cost and
operational implications of imposing one kind of technology
standard upon an organization as large and complex as
California state government. The state of Texas has
considered moving to an open-file format standard, and
found, at a minimum, there are cost and manpower
implications for training IT personnel on using the new
software, converting current files to the new format,
hardware requirements to accommodate greater data storage
needs associated with programs utilizing open-file
software, and reprogramming needs of existing computer
systems.
According to the Director of DTS, which has no position on
the bill, implementation of and open-file format standard
would have to occur over a period of five or more years, at
a minimum, because that would be the earliest a refresh
cycle for IT could be accomplished.
Before mandating a technology standard in statute, the
committee may wish to consider whether an evaluation of the
costs and implications resulting from implementation of an
open-file format standard should be undertaken.
An analysis of mandating an open-file format standard for all
state software applications would need to assess the
opportunities, benefits, costs, and requirements of taking
such action. An evaluation should also investigate the
AB 1668
Page 11
potential impact of what technology the state could not use
as a result of prohibiting the utilization of IT that is
based on a different standard than the one which would be
mandated, and the opportunity costs associated with that
kind of restriction. The analysis might also consider how
a new technology standard would impact the 117 IT projects
currently in some form of development in state government.
If an evaluation of mandating an open-file format standard is
undertaken, it may also need to assess the implications of
not taking such an action at all, and allowing state
government to migrate towards a standard on an evolutionary
basis. With 117 IT projects in the development pipeline,
and probably many more to come, there may be practical and
policy consequences of not moving expeditiously to using
software applications built on open-file formats. For
example, the number of state documents that might
additionally be created, and preserved in proprietary
formats, as a percentage of all government documents
already created in a proprietary format, may or may not be
statistically significant, as it pertains to goals and
policies concerning the accessibility of government
information. Further, if the state were to purposefully
shift to mandating the use of open-file format
applications, the public may or may not be technologically
capable of following suit. The implications of changing
the file format for preserved documents does not
necessarily mean the public will soon have the capability
to reasonably access that information from their existing
computer equipment and software.
d) Americans with Disability Act compliance : Issues have
arisen as to whether current and future open-file format
software may be compliant with the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA). Title II of the ADA prohibits
discrimination against persons with disabilities in state
and local government services, programs and activities.
State and local governments must operate their programs so
that when viewed in their entirety, are readily accessible
and useable by people with disabilities. As disabilities
may affect people in different ways, flexibility in the
provision of programs and services has been a core element
of many ADA compliance programs.
Meeting ADA has been a challenge for some state IT programs.
AB 1668
Page 12
Having one standard for the type of software may limit the
state's ability to provide systems that are fully ADA
compliant. Allowing the state to use multiple formats,
both open-file and proprietary, may give the state more
opportunity to meet its ADA obligations. It is unclear
whether technology standards developed by international
standards organizations would appropriately address a
uniquely American and California civil right.
e) Responding to technological change : How the state
chooses to pursue the implementation of any technology
standard may be influenced by its existing process to
study, and respond to changes in the world of IT, in a time
and manner which keeps California globally competitive, as
well as integrated with IT changes, in and out of
government.
The recent reorganization of entities like DTS and the State
CIO, with their established advisory councils, is intended
to provide the state with strategic directives and ongoing
guidance to effectively utilize IT, to the best of the
state's ability. Both of these organizations have produced
strategic plans that are designed to take the state into
the future with a minimum of problems in using IT.
The California State Information Technology Strategic Plan
was adopted in November, 2004, and is annually updated. It
guides the acquisition, management and use of technology in
the Executive Branch of state government, for a five year
period. The purpose of the plan is to undertake
comprehensive, collaborative planning and sustained,
engaged management and oversight, to reduce risks of IT
failure and increase opportunities for success. The Plan
reflects the State CIO's ongoing evaluation, management,
and oversight efforts of all major IT initiatives in state
government.
7)Options for moving ahead : To the extent that the committee
may wish to move forward with establishing an open-file
format, the following are several options:
a) Status Quo : Proceed with the bill as is, but request
that the State CIO and the Director of DTS provide
testimony, to the best of their ability, on the various
AB 1668
Page 13
implications, advantages, disadvantages, estimated costs
and other relevant information, as the bill moves forward;
b) Two year bill : Make AB 1668 a two year bill, and hold
an informational hearing with appropriate stakeholders, as
well as the State CIO and the Director of DTS providing
relevant testimony;
c) Conduct a study and make recommendations for further
legislative action : Amend the bill to remove the mandate
for a technology standard, and add language that requires
the State CIO, in consultation with DTS, to perform an
evaluation on utilizing an open-file format standard in all
future state software applications, and report back to the
legislature for future action;
d) Conduct a study and authorize the State CIO to issue
guidance to all state agencies : Amend the bill to remove
the mandate for a technology standard, and add language
that authorizes the State CIO, in consultation with DTS, to
perform an evaluation on utilizing an open-file format
standard in all future state software applications, report
back to the legislature, and in the absence of any further
legislative direction, require the State CIO issue a
guidance to all state agencies reflecting his or her
findings, conclusions, and recommendations in regard to the
state migrating to the use of an open-file format standard;
and,
e) Conduct a proof of concept examination : Amend the bill
to require the State CIO, in conjunction with one
department, to conduct a proof of concept examination of
the issues and strategies associated with the state
adopting an open-file format standard, and moving forward
with multiple formats.
8)Technical amendment : The committee staff understands that the
author will offer a technical amendment to clarify that
open-file formats would be included in state standards
established by the State CIO. The standard shall be developed
by an open-file standard setting organization.
9)Related legislation : The following is a list of related bills
introduced this session:
AB 1668
Page 14
a) AB 617 (Torrico) : This bill changes the term of
"progress payments" relating to IT contracts for the
purpose of financing that contractor's cost of delivering a
good or service, prior to actual delivery. Status:
Pending in the Assembly Committee on Business and
Professions.
b) AB 1579 (Lieber) : This bill requires DGS and the State
CIO to consult on appropriate requirements for IT
procurement RFPs. Status: Pending in the Assembly
Committee on Jobs, Economic Development, and the Economy.
Set for hearing on April 17, 2007.
c) SB 617 (Alquist) : This bill establishes a California IT
Procurement Practices Force to review the state's
practices, procedures and policies relating to IT
procurement. Status: Pending in the Senate Committee on
Governmental Organization. Set for hearing on April 24,
2007.
10)Related legislation : The following related bill was enacted
during the 2005-06 session:
a) SB 954 (Figuroa) : This bill required the Department of
General Services to establish policies and guidelines of IT
goods and services on or before January 1, 2007, and to
prepare an IT procurement checklist and establish a
centralized entity responsible for IT procurement methods.
Status: Signed by the Governor - Chapter, 556, statutes of
2005.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Adobe
California Association of Environmental Health Administrators
County Recorders Association of California
Open Document Format Alliance
Redhat
Software & Information Industry Association
Sun microsystems
14 individuals
Opposition
AB 1668
Page 15
Computerland of Silicon Valley
Initiative for Software Choice
InterKnowlegy
Micorsoft
Vertigo Software
Xponentia
Harolds Board Shop
Main Street Computers
1 individual
Analysis Prepared by : Les Spahnn / J., E.D. & E. / (916)
319-2090