BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                     AB 558


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  May 6, 2015


                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS


                                 Jimmy Gomez, Chair


          AB  
          558 (Low) - As Amended March 26, 2015


           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Policy       |Accountability and             |Vote:|9 - 0        |
          |Committee:   |Administrative Review          |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |Privacy and Consumer           |     |11 - 0       |
          |             |Protection                     |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          Urgency:  No  State Mandated Local Program:  NoReimbursable:  No


          SUMMARY:


          This bill










                                                                     AB 558


                                                                    Page  2





          1)Requires, for information technology (IT) procurements, the  
            use of electronic means, whenever possible, for (a) the  
            transmission of rules and requirements to vendors for a given  
            procurement and (b) the submission of bids and requests for  
            proposals (RFPs) by vendors.


          2)Requires any rules and requirements for an RFP for IT  
            procurements, and changes to such rules, to be posted,  
            whenever possible, on the websites of the Department of  
            General Services (DGS) and the Department of Information  
            Technology (CalTech).


          FISCAL EFFECT:


          Any costs to DGS and CalTech should be minor and absorbable. 


          COMMENTS:


          1)Purpose. According to the author, "The current laws governing  
            IT procurement are outdated, as there are several statutory  
            requirements for the processing of paper documents and the  
            posting of notices in public places.  These burdensome  
            practices require procurement professionals to process and  
            post paper documents outside of any automated systems and  
            require extensive physical storage for all paper documents."



            For the last 15 years, the Legislature changed state laws to  
            permit the electronic submission of documents to state  
            agencies, including business filings, income tax returns,  
            professional license renewals, driver or vehicle license  
            renewals, campaign finance reports, voter registration  
            applications and more. For complex IT projects, however,  








                                                                     AB 558


                                                                    Page  3





            bidders are still required to submit documents on paper to  
            state agencies.

            This bill intends to streamline state IT procurement by  
            allowing state agencies to use electronic means whenever  
            possible for the submission and receipt of bids and cost  
            proposals and requires DGS and CalTech to post certain project  
            documents on the Internet, whenever possible.  AB 558 is  
            sponsored by TechAmerica. 





          2)Comments. The term "whenever possible" does not relate to any  
            standard, such as cost, time, or technological capability. A  
            better term would be "whenever feasible." In addition, it is  
            unclear why changes to the terms of an RFP would need to be  
            posted on the departments' websites, as the state eProcurement  
            system is intend to be the state's official web portal for  
            this information. The departments note that, later this year,  
            the state FI$Cal system will become the state's eProcurement  
            system.
            


            


          Analysis Prepared by:Chuck Nicol / APPR. / (916)  
          319-2081
















                                                                     AB 558


                                                                    Page  4