BILL ANALYSIS AB 2100 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 3, 2000 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY John Dutra, Chair AB 2100 (Dutra & Honda) - As Amended: March 29, 2000 SUBJECT : California Electronic Government and Information Act. SUMMARY : AB 2100 would establish the California Internet Portal Management Authority to administer general policies for the management and maintenance of the State of California domain and enact a strategic plan for the development of an enterprise system environment, as developed by an Electronic Government Task Force and its business advisory council. Specifically, this bill : 1)Enacts the California Electronic Government and Information Act. 2)Finds and declares that the use of internet technology can provide more efficient and effective delivery of services to citizens and that it is the purpose of the chapter to increase the amount of information available to Californians. 3)Declares the intent of the Legislature to encourage uniform standards across departments, maximize cost savings through the use of enterprise systems, improve the provision of services by allowing for on-line payments, applications, and public records posting, encourage improved internal business models, and protect the privacy of Californians through the use of advanced digital signature and encryption technologies. 4)Defines the terms domain, Internet, and state agencies. 5)Provides for full execution of the obligations imposed on agencies under the Public Records Act and Information Practices Act, unless specifically provided otherwise by this Act. 6)Affirmatively declares that there shall only be one domain of the State of California, that the domain includes all branches and agencies of state government, and that the domain shall be administered by the California Internet Portal Management Authority. AB 2100 Page 2 7)Establishes the California Internet Portal Management Authority. 8)Vests the Authority with the responsibilities of administering, managing, maintaining, and establishing policies for the use of the California Internet domain. 9)Requires that a proposal for posting information on the Internet be approved by the Authority, in accordance with the criteria established by this chapter for departments to implement new Internet postings. 10)Requires the Authority to establish technical criteria and guidelines for the approval and denial of proposed Internet postings. 11)Requires the Authority to respond to proposals for posting within 10 days of submission. 12)Denies the Authority the ability to deny a posting request based on the content of the proposal, unless the proposal fails to include the content provisions required by this Act, subsequently, all content proposed by a state agency shall be owned by the state agency. 13)Allows the Authority to post information on the Internet on behalf of any state agency in the implementation of the Electronic Government Task Force's enterprise system recommendations or in response to a direct appropriation in the Budget Act. 14)Directs the Authority to submit quarterly reports to the Joint Legislative Budget Committee with a listing of all proposals submitted, the determination made, the implementation and maintenance costs of the proposal and, additionally, the same listing of all proposals requested by individual legislators and generated in the Budget Act. 15)Requires the Authority to post information submitted to it by the Legislature in accordance with current statutory requirements that the Legislature to provide specific information on the Internet. 16)Directs the Authority to submit quarterly reports to the AB 2100 Page 3 Joint Legislative Budget Committee with a listing of all proposals submitted, the determination made, the implementation and maintenance costs of the proposal and, additionally, the same listing of all proposals requested by individual legislators and generated in the Budget Act. 17)Grants all information posted on the Internet prior to the establishment of the Authority statutory approval until June 30, 2002, except as specified. 18)Requires the Authority to implement the enterprise system policy recommendations of the Electronic Government Task Force by December 31, 2002. 19)Requires the Authority to develop an Internet Security Policy, and issue guidelines for its implementation. The guidelines would be exempt from the Public Records Act. 20)Allows the Authority to develop the necessary rules and regulations for the implementation and administration of the Act. 21)Establishes an Electronic Government Task Force, which is charged with convening a business advisory council twice a year, and requires that the Task Force develop a strategic plan for the development of an enterprise system environment. 22)Disapproves for posting any proposal which does not include direct access to a plain-language privacy policy or any other notice required by the Act. 23)Restates existing law regarding the electronic collection of personal information by any state agency and requires notice to any user of the use or existence of any information gathering method, device or identifier. 24)Reinstates existing law regarding the prohibition of a state agency distributing or selling electronically collected personal information about individuals without prior, written permission and requires its disposal upon request. 25)Restates existing law regarding the privacy of personal information of public officials on the Internet. 26)Restates the Citizen Complaint Act of 1997, which required AB 2100 Page 4 certain complaint and comment forms to be posted on the Internet. 27)Restates the Grant Information Act of 1999, which required specific information regarding grant availability and eligibility to be posted on the Internet. 28)Requires state agencies to submit proposals to the Authority for the posting of information on the Internet pursuant to the requirements of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act. 29)Requires the Office of Administrative Law to submit a proposal for posting of the full text of the California Code of Regulations. 30)Requires by January 1, 2002 that the Authority adopt regulations for the use of digital signatures by state agencies, restating guidelines similar to those in existing law, and grandfathers in the guidelines developed by the Secretary of State under existing law until such time as the regulations proposed by the Authority go into effect. 31)Directs the Authority to adopt rules and regulations for public entities to receive electronic payments for any tax, assessment, rate, fee, charge, rent, interest, penalty or any other account receivable by December 31, 2001. 32)Requires the Controller to provide by November 1, 2001 guidelines for the adoption of rules and regulations for electronic payment functions including, receipting, disbursing, and accounting and requires the Authority to confer with the Controller 60 days prior to amending any electronic payment rules or regulations. 33)States the intent of the Legislature that state agencies absorb any additional fees or chares associated with the use of electronic payments whenever possible. The Authority is required to set up guidelines for the pass through of those charges should they be a necessary association of the use of electronic payment. 34)Updates the Public Records Act exemption rolls to include the guidelines adopted for implementation of the Internet Security Policy. AB 2100 Page 5 35)Repeals Internet posting requirements in current law regarding information on the suspension and revocations of licenses issued by a board, specified information regarding physicians and surgeons, enforcement actions taken by the Department of Real Estate, the posting of the California State Contracts Register, information forwarded to the Cal-EPA from local governments regarding changes in regulated substance regulations, written reports by the Insurance Commissioner, Public Utility Commission meeting notes and agendas, and PUC minority and women business database clearinghouse posting. EXISTING LAW: 1)Establishes the Department of Information Technology (DOIT) and grants the Department general oversight of state information technology programs. 2)Requires the Secretary of State to issue and maintain rules and regulations for the use of digital signatures (Digital Signature Act of 1995) and establishes the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act. 3)Upholds the provisions of the Public Records Act and the Information Practices Act as they apply to statutes requiring or restricting specific Internet-related activities by state agencies. 4)Establishes specific privacy and security guidelines for state agencies to adhere to when involved in Internet-related activities. 5)Establishes the Citizen Complaint Act of 1997 and the Grant Information Act of 1999. 6)Requires that numerous departments and agencies post specific information and content on the Internet. FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown, potentially significant administrative costs to the Department of Information Technology associated with the creation and on-going activities of the California Internet Portal Management Authority and the Electronic Government Task Force. Unknown, potentially significant administrative and programmatic savings to state agencies implementing enterprise system environment, embracing new, more efficient business practices, and using standardized digital AB 2100 Page 6 signature and electronic payment infrastructures. COMMENTS : 1)Need for Bill According to the author's office, "the California Electronic Government and Information Act, provides a framework for the state to begin to reevaluate the way agencies interact with citizens, businesses and each other through the Internet, enabling agencies to truly provide more efficient and effective state services. Internet technology has transformed the private sector because it has forced them to re-engineer their business practices; this measure would direct one Authority to determine how the State could best utilize Internet technology to that end. This new enterprise directly counters the 'stovepipe' approach to technology that we currently employ across departments - where each department is responsible for its own technology and electronic government initiatives." 2)Enterprise Architecture and Single Portal Approaches to Electronic Government Initiatives. Many other states, including Arizona, Massachusetts, Missouri, Utah and Washington have adopted enterprise-wide, strategies for implementation of new "e-government", "digital state"and "one-portal" policies. The basis for the successful implementation of these policies has been approaching the Internet, and its promise of efficiency and ease of use, through a single technological architecture, attached to a specific policy objective of improving citizen access and "customer" service. "No Wrong Door" initiatives are based on a policy that citizens should be able to access information and services they require from any initial contact point with the state. The implementation of a "No Wrong Door" initiative in Arizona, for example, requires that the CIO be aware of, set common architectures, and police the electronic architecture and accompanying infrastructure, including hardware, software, personnel and the legal and financial restrictions, that will enable the state to operate effectively. Utah's "Digital State" initiative, enacted in 1998 (SB 188, Hillyard), directs the state CIO to set specific technology guidelines for state AB 2100 Page 7 agencies, which are required to allow certain services to be transacted on the Internet by July 1, 2002. These enterprise architecture requirements reemphasize the fact that to add value to citizens, and truly make these improvements cost effective and efficient propositions for the state, that "e-government" cannot simply be about web pages and e-mail, remote access to government information, or the ability to pay fees and taxes on-line. "E-government" must represent new and better business processes and interactions with citizens, businesses, and other government agencies, state, local, and federal. The enterprise-system strategy, to be developed by the task force contemplated by this measure, would be implemented by the new Internet Portal Management Authority within the context of the budgetary process in lieu of future statutory posting requirements. This measure would require the submission of quarterly letters to the Joint Legislative Budget by the Authority that detail proposals submitted, the circumstances under which they were approved or denied, the costs associated with the proposal for implementation and long-term maintenance costs, and the enterprise solutions associated with each proposal. The cementing the role of the Legislature through the budgetary process is intended to resolve the "silo", "stovepipe" or "piece meal" problems associated with current law. AB 2100 also intends to resolve "stovepipe" issues as far as implementation of the enterprise plan is concerned by repealing existing stand-alone content specific Internet posting requirements in current statute, except for the posting requirements associated with the Political Reform Act. RELATED LEGISLATION: AB 2163 (Cunneen) - Would make various changes to the Department of Information Technology authorizing statute, including establishing one internet portal. The Department of Motor Vehicles would issues a digital identification certificate. CIO must convene a more business and private sector-oriented advisory council. AB 2934 (Information Technology Committee) - Clean up measure to further define the ability of the Department of Motor Vehicles to proceed with its on-line automobile registration project AB 2100 Page 8 SB 1371 (Sher) - Would expand the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act to include a definition of transferable records, specify who has control of a transferable record, and establish the rights and obligations of a person who has control of a transferable record. SB 1750 (Murray) - Would authorize the Department of Information Technology to provide for the implementation of a single Internet portal by January 1, 2006. Requires the Franchise Tax Board to submit to the Legislature a plan for electronic filing of returns for and electronic payment of every state tax. SUPPORT: None on File. OPPOSITION: None on File Analysis Prepared by : Mike Jacob / INFO. TECH / (916)319-3945