BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 169
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 15, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
Brian Maienschein, Chair
AB 169
(Maienschein) - As Amended April 6, 2015
SUBJECT: Local government: public records: Internet.
SUMMARY: Requires local agencies to use specified open data
standards if they choose to post public records online that are
described as "open." Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires a local agency, except a school district, that
voluntarily posts a public record that is described as "open"
on its Internet Web site (website) to post the public record
in an open format that meets all of the following
requirements:
a) Retrievable, downloadable, indexable, and electronically
searchable by commonly used Internet search applications;
b) Platform independent and machine readable;
c) Available to the public free of charge and without any
restriction that would impede the reuse or redistribution
AB 169
Page 2
of the public record; and,
d) Retains the data definitions and structure present when
the data was compiled, if applicable.
2)Finds and declares that Section 1 of the bill furthers, within
the meaning of paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3
of Article I of the California Constitution, the purposes of
that constitutional section as it relates to the right of
public access to the meetings of local public bodies or the
writings of local public officials and local agencies, and
declares, pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of
Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution, that
the Legislature makes the following findings:
Because California's local agencies are increasingly releasing
information in an open format, because open format is not
defined in current law, and because data released by local
agencies in an open format should be as uniform and usable as
possible, requiring local agencies to follow standardized
requirements when they elect to release information in an open
format furthers the purpose of Section 3 of Article I of the
California Constitution.
3)Provides that no reimbursement is required by this bill
because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency
or school district under this act would result from a
legislative mandate that is within the scope of paragraph (7)
of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of Article I of the California
AB 169
Page 3
Constitution.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Requires public agencies, pursuant to the California Public
Records Act (CPRA), to make their records available for public
inspection and, upon request, to provide a copy of a public
record unless the record is exempt from disclosure.
2)Requires a public agency to make non-exempt electronic public
records available in any electronic format in which it holds
the information or, if requested, in an electronic format used
by the agency to create copies for its own or another agency's
use.
3)Authorizes a public agency to charge to the requester the
direct cost of producing the electronic public record.
4)Requires the requester of the electronic record to bear the
cost of producing a copy of the record, including the cost to
construct a record, and the cost of programming and computer
services necessary to produce a copy of the record if the
public agency produces the electronic record only at regularly
scheduled intervals or the request requires data compilation,
extraction, or programming to produce the record.
5)Provides that a public agency is not required to release an
electronic record in the electronic form in which it is held
by the agency, if its release would jeopardize or compromise
the security or integrity of the original record or of any
proprietary software in which it is maintained.
FISCAL EFFECT: This bill is keyed fiscal.
COMMENTS:
AB 169
Page 4
1)Bill Summary. This bill requires local agencies that choose
to post on their websites public records that are described as
"open" to use a format that:
a) Is retrievable, downloadable, indexable, and
electronically searchable by commonly used Internet search
applications;
b) Is platform independent and machine readable;
c) Is available to the public free of charge and without
any restriction that would impede the reuse or
redistribution of the public record; and,
d) Retains the data definitions and structure present when
the data was compiled, if applicable.
This bill is sponsored by the author.
2)Author's Statement. According to the author, "Key information
maintained by local governments, from business licenses to
council agendas and budgets, are frequently kept in file
formats that make them difficult to find or analyze using
contemporary internet tools and other technology. The
AB 169
Page 5
guidelines for posting these documents predate the Xerox
machine.
"Making local government data available online using open
standards will increase transparency and make operations more
effective and accountable to the public. It will streamline
communication between government agencies, both state and
local, and vastly improve accessibility for the public.
Making the information electronically searchable will also
permit the public to assist in identifying efficient solutions
for government, create economic opportunities and promote
innovation and accountability at the local level.
"Critically, this bill does not mandate such action, but
establishes key standards for agencies seeking to modernize
their disclosure practices. This promotes common standards,
based on best practices utilized by governments across the U.S
and throughout the world. Adopting these standards will
ensure that government information is accessible,
interoperable and easily utilized by the public."
3)Background. The Open Data movement is rapidly growing in
popularity and recognition, both nationally and in California.
Computer technology has advanced to provide open format
software, which allows electronic documents created and
maintained by public agencies to be searched, indexed, and
redacted electronically.
In 2009, in order to increase government agency
accountability, promote informed public participation, and
AB 169
Page 6
create economic opportunity through expanding access to
information online in open formats, the United States Director
of the Office of Management and Budget issued an Open
Government Directive to federal government agencies. This
Directive provided guidelines to public agencies responding to
public requests under the Freedom of Information Act and
instructed federal government agencies to "publish information
online in an open format that can be retrieved, downloaded,
indexed, and searched by commonly used web search
applications."
4)California Open Data Portals. The California Health and Human
Services Agency (CHHS) launched an Open Data Portal (portal)
initiative in order to increase public access to one of the
state's most valuable assets - non-confidential health and
human services data. According to the CHHS portal, "Its goals
are to spark innovation, promote research and economic
opportunities, engage public participation in government,
increase transparency, and inform decision-making. 'Open
Data' describes data that are freely available,
machine-readable, and formatted according to national
technical standards to facilitate visibility and reuse of
published data.
"The portal offers access to standardized data that can be
easily retrieved, combined, downloaded, sorted, searched,
analyzed, redistributed and re-used by individuals, business,
researchers, journalists, developers, and government to
process, trend, and innovate. (It) puts tools for
transparency, accountability, and innovation directly into the
hands of Californians and others through a centralized,
user-friendly interface. (The portal) provides users with a
single point of entry to access CHHS departments' publishable
AB 169
Page 7
data. This increased visibility provides derivative value as
the public is able to analyze and utilize publicly available
(publishable) government data to better understand what is
happening in government on all levels - federal, state, and
local."
The CHHS also developed an Open Data Handbook (handbook),
which provides guidelines to identify, review, prioritize and
prepare publishable CHHS data for access by the public via the
CHHS portal. The handbook is intended to serve both as an
internal and external resource to any party that may be
interested in improving the general public's online access to
data, and to provide an understanding of the processes by
which CHHS makes its publishable data tables available. The
handbook "focuses on general guidelines and thoughtful
processes but also provides linked tools/resources that
operationalize those processes."
The State Controller also has an open data website, which
contains financial and statistical information for cities and
counties around the state, allowing visitors to track
spending, revenues, assets, and liabilities. The Controller's
website contains more than 13 million fields of data for
counties and cities over an eleven-year period, from
2002-2013.
5)Open Data and Cities. The National League of Cities in 2014
issued a report entitled, "City Open Data Policies: Learning
by Doing." According to the report, "The White House launched
its Open Government Initiative in 2013, including its Data.gov
AB 169
Page 8
website, thus beginning the process of making government data
more readily available. In the wake of this federal
initiative, in partnership with communities, private
companies, advocates, and the technology sector, cities have
begun to innovatively pursue open data.
"As the primary providers of government services, cities
collect and hold massive amounts
of data about crimes, waste management, transportation,
education, housing, consumption, and more. Until recently,
much of the inherent potential in this data has been untapped.
By making city data freely accessible, governments have not
only improved their transparency, but have begun to use open
data as a means to improve services and gather more
information about communities.
"Open data is still a new concept to governments and practice
models for implementation and design are lacking. The
National League of Cities seeks to assist city leaders in
developing and pursuing open data policies by outlining
implementation processes and pointing to best practices."
Several local jurisdictions in California have launched their
own Open Data websites or portals. For example, the City of
Los Angeles has a searchable website with information on the
economy, public safety, the environment, city services, city
budget, events and culture, parks and libraries, and
transportation. About three months after the launch of Los
Angeles' open data site, the city appointed its first Chief of
AB 169
Page 9
Data officer.
As another example, AmLegal Decoder was deployed in San
Francisco after the Mayor's Office of Civic Innovation, The
OpenGov Foundation and American Legal Publishing Corp. teamed
up to transform and publish the city's laws and legal and
technical codes at SanFranciscoCode.org. AmLegal Decoder is
open-source software that automatically updates
SanFranciscoCode.org and delivers every newly codified city
law accessible online for city employees, everyday citizens
and anyone else who might need them.
In addition, the City of Long Beach has its own open data
site, OpenUpLongBeach.com. Long Beach and Fresno have hosted
open data events as well. The Open Knowledge Foundation also
lists Sacramento, San Jose, Oakland, West Hollywood, Pasadena,
Culver City, Santa Clarita, Bell, Manhattan Beach, San Diego,
Burbank, Compton, and other California cities in its U.S.
Cities Open Data Census.
6)Proposition 42. Proposition 42 was passed by voters on June
3, 2014, and requires all local governments to comply with the
California Public Records Act and the Ralph M. Brown Act and
with any subsequent changes to those Acts. Proposition 42
also eliminated reimbursement to local agencies for costs of
complying with the California Public Records Act and the Ralph
M. Brown Act.
AB 169
Page 10
This bill contains language that says that the Legislature
finds and declares that Section 1 of the bill furthers the
purpose of the California Constitution as it relates to the
right of public access to the meetings of local public bodies
or the writings of local public officials and local agencies.
Pursuant to paragraph (7) of subdivision (b) of Section 3 of
Article I of the Constitution, the bill also includes a
finding that says that "Because California's local agencies
are increasingly releasing information in an open format,
because open format is not defined in current law, and because
data released by local agencies in an open format should be as
uniform and usable as possible, requiring local agencies to
follow standardized requirements when they elect to release
information in an open format furthers the purpose
of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution."
Section 3 of the bill specifies that no reimbursement for
local agencies to implement the bill's provisions is necessary
because "the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency
or school district?would result from a legislative mandate
that is within the scope of paragraph (7) of subdivision (b)
of Section 3 of Article I of the California Constitution."
7)Related Legislation. AB 1215 (Ting) creates the California
Open Data Act and the position of Chief Data Officer, who is
required to establish the California Open Data Standard
(standard), as specified; requires state agencies to make
public data, as defined, available on an Internet Web portal
AB 169
Page 11
pursuant to that standard; and, allows a local government to
adopt that standard. AB 1215 is pending in the Assembly
Accountability and Administrative Review Committee.
SB 272 (Hertzberg) requires local agencies, in implementing
the CPRA, to: create a catalog of enterprise systems, as
defined; make the catalog publicly available upon request in
the office of the clerk of the agency's legislative body; and,
post the catalog on the local agency's Internet Web site. SB
272 is pending in the Senate Governance and Finance Committee.
SB 573 (Pan) requires the Governor to appoint a Chief Data
Officer, who is required to create a statewide open data
portal, as defined, to provide public access to data sets from
agencies within the state. SB 573 is pending in the Senate
Governmental Organization Committee.
8)Previous Legislation. SB 1002 (Yee) of 2012 would have
required the State Chief Information Officer to conduct a
study to determine the feasibility of providing electronic
records in an open format. SB 1002 was vetoed with the
following message:
The role of the State Chief Information Officer is to make
sure that state government uses information technology
efficiently and effectively - including providing public
records electronically when possible. Another legislative
AB 169
Page 12
report on electronic public records isn't necessary.
AB 2799 (Shelley), Chapter 982, Statutes of 2000, required
public agencies, upon request, to disclose electronic records
in an electronic format in which the agency held information
or in a format that had been used by the agency to create
copies for its own use or for other public agencies.
9)Arguments in Support. The Sunlight Foundation, in support,
writes, "Sunlight feels that AB 169 will increase the
accessibility of local open data by providing a useful
definition of what 'open' really means for municipalities that
want to join the open data movement. By offering a clear
definition of open data as 'retrievable, downloadable,
indexable, and electronically searchable by commonly used
Internet search applications;' 'platform independent and
machine readable;' and 'available to the public free of charge
and without any restriction that would impede the reuse or
redistribution of the public record' AB 169 promotes a set of
elements that are broadly recognized to be the core of what it
means to make data open. In addition, by recommending that
information released "retain[s] the data definitions and
structure present when the data was compiled," AB 169 supports
the public provision of good-quality, usable data through
ensuring that whatever contextual information was originally
available with the data remains present in its public-facing
publication.
"Increasing the amount of available, good quality open data is
AB 169
Page 13
an important goal for California to pursue as a state.
California is already rich in local open data expertise that
can help local data's value spread rapidly. The state
features the leadership of municipal open data programs in San
Francisco, Oakland, Los Angeles, Sacramento (and West
Sacramento) and San Diego, and a new county-wide open data
initiative recently came online in Los Angeles County.
Individual state agencies have (also) demonstrated their
strong interest in opening state data?While not a mandate for
activity by local governments, AB 169 would establish a needed
framework for managing information and ensuring those
governments making their data 'open' will do so in a way that
maximizes the utility and interoperability of this
information.
10)Arguments in Opposition. None on file.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
CalTax
Sunlight Foundation
Opposition
AB 169
Page 14
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958