BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1168|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1168
Author: Jones (D), et al
Amended: 8/31/07 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 3-2, 7/10/07
AYES: Corbett, Kuehl, Steinberg
NOES: Harman, Ackerman
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 13-2, 08/30/07
AYES: Torlakson, Cox, Aanestad, Battin, Cedillo, Corbett,
Florez, Kuehl, Oropeza, Ridley-Thomas, Steinberg, Wyland,
Yee
NOES: Ashburn, Runner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Dutton, Simitian
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 75-0, 6/6/07 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Social security numbers
SOURCE : Privacy Rights Clearinghouse
DIGEST : This bill imposes a number of restrictions on
the use of Social Security numbers (SSNs) in public
records, requiring they be redacted or truncated prior to
filing or disclosure to the public by specified dates.
This bill also requires the Office of Privacy Protection to
create a task force to review the use of SSNs by colleges
and universities.
CONTINUED
AB 1168
Page
2
ANALYSIS : Existing law places various restrictions on
the use of Social Security numbers including prohibiting
the public posting or display of an individual's social
security number. These restrictions do not apply to
documents required to be open to the public.
Existing law, the California Public Records Act, provides
that public records of state and local agencies are open to
inspection, unless exempt.
Existing law, the Information Practices Act, imposes
limitations on the collection and disclosure of personal
information, including Social Security numbers, by state
agencies; local agencies are specifically exempted.
Existing law expressly requires the collection of a Social
Security number in certain instances, including in an
abstract of judgment requiring the payment of money, an
abstract of judgment ordering a party to pay spousal or
child support, and a tax lien.
Existing law prohibits employers, beginning January 1,
2008, from using more than the last four digits of an
employee's Social Security number when providing employees
with an itemized statement of earnings.
Existing federal law, the Fair Credit Reporting Act,
requires a credit reporting agency to truncate a consumer's
Social Security number in his or her credit report, upon
the consumer's request.
This bill provides that, unless required to do so by state
or federal law, no person, entity, or government agency may
present for recording or filing with a local agency a
document containing more than the last four digits of a
Social Security number if the document is required by law
to be open to the public.
This bill requires county recorders to establish a Social
Security number truncation program creating a dual records
system made up of: (1) "official records" which contain a
Social Security number but are exempt from the Public
Records Act and so not available to the public (except
pursuant to a subpoena or court order); and (2) "public
AB 1168
Page
3
records" which are an exact copy of the official record,
but the Social Security number is truncated so that only
the last four digits are displayed. This bill provides
that a public record shall have the same legal force and
effect as the official record.
The bill provides that the following terms have the
following meanings:
1."Official filing" means the permanent archival filing of
all instruments, papers, records, and attachments as
accepted for filing by a filing office.
2."Public filing" means a filing that is an exact copy of
an official filing except that any social security number
contained in the copied filing is truncated. The public
filing shall have the same legal force and effect as the
official filing.
3."Truncate" means to redact at least the first five digits
of a social security number.
4."Truncated social security number" means a social
security number that displays no more than the last four
digits of the number.
The bill provides that for every filing containing an
untruncated social security number filed before August 1,
2007, a filing office shall create a public filing.
A filing office shall post a notice on its Web site
informing filers not to include social security numbers in
any portion of their filings. A filing office's online
filing system shall not contain a field requesting a social
security number.
Beginning August 1, 2007, for every filing containing an
untruncated social security number filed by means other
than the filing office's Web site, a filing office shall
create a public filing.
When a public filing version of an official filing exists,
both of the following shall apply:
AB 1168
Page
4
1.Upon a request for inspection, copying, or any other
public disclosure of an official filing that is not
exempt from disclosure, a filing office shall make
available only the public filing version of that filing.
2.A filing office shall publicly disclose an official
filing only in response to a subpoena or order of a court
of competent jurisdiction.
3.The bill provides that nothing in this bill shall be
construed to restrict, delay, or modify access to any
official filing, or modify any existing agreements
regarding access to any official filing, prior to the
creation and availability of a public filing version of
that official filing.
The bill provides that a filing office shall be deemed to
be in compliance with the requirements of this section and
shall not be liable for failure to truncate a social
security number if he or she uses due diligence to locate
social security numbers in official records and truncate
the social security numbers in the public filing version of
those official filings. The use of an automated program
with a high rate of accuracy shall be deemed to be due
diligence.
In the event that a filing office fails to truncate a
social security number contained in a record, any person
may request that the filing office truncate the social
security number contained in that record. Notwithstanding
that a filing office may be deemed to be in compliance with
this section, a filing office that receives a request that
identifies the exact location of an untruncated social
security number that is required to be truncated within a
specifically identified record, shall truncate that number
within 10 business days of receiving the request. The
public filing with the truncated social security number
shall replace the record with the untruncated number.
The above provisions do not apply to a county recorder.
This bill specifies a procedure for county recorders to
follow to implement the Social Security number truncation
program, providing that all official records recorded
AB 1168
Page
5
between January 1, 1980 and December 31, 2008, must be
truncated in descending chronological order with any
records currently existing in electronic format truncated
first. This bill further requires a county recorder to
create an electronic copy of any official record recorded
after January 1, 2009, and truncate any Social Security
number contained in that electronic copy.
This bill would provide that, when a public record version
of an official record exists, a county recorder may only
make available the public record version in response to any
request for inspection, copying, or other disclosure; an
official record may be disclosed only in response to a
subpoena or court order. This bill would exempt an
official record from disclosure under the Public Records
Act if a public record version of that record is available.
The bill provides that nothing in this bill shall be
construed to restrict, delay, or modify access to any
official record, or modify any existing agreements
regarding access to any official record, prior to the
creation and availability of a public record version of
that official record. The bill prohibits a county recorder
from charging any new fee, or increase any existing fee, in
order to fund the social security number truncation
program.
The bill provides that nothing in this bill shall be
construed to require the disclosure by a filing office of
any "official record" if a "public record" version of that
record is available pursuant to Section 9526.5 of the
Commercial Code.
The bill provides that it is the intent of the Legislature
that, in order to protect against the risk of identity
theft, local agencies shall redact social security numbers
from records before disclosing them to the public pursuant
to this chapter.
Nothing in this bill shall be construed to require a local
agency to disclose a social security number.
This section shall not apply to records maintained by a
county recorder.
AB 1168
Page
6
This bill provides that a county recorder shall be deemed
to be in compliance if he or she uses due diligence to
locate and truncate Social Security numbers in official
records while applying industry best practices. This bill
would further specify that a county recorder shall not be
liable for failure to truncate a social security number.
This bill permits a county recorder, if approved by the
county board of supervisors, to charge an additional fee of
up to $1 for recording a document. The funds generated may
only be used for implementation of the Social Security
number truncation program required by the bill.
This bill requires the County Recorders Association of
California to report to the Senate and Assembly Judiciary
Committees and the Office of Privacy Protection by January
1, 2009, and annually thereafter, on implementation of the
bill's requirements concerning Social Security number
truncation. This bill provides that the annual report is
no longer required once the Office of Privacy Protection
determines that all counties have complied with these
requirements.
Existing law establishes a fee for recording documents with
the county recorder at $4 for the first page and $3 for
each additional page and authorizes a county recorder to
assess additional specified fees.
This bill authorizes a county recorder, upon authorization
of the board of supervisors, to charge an additional fee of
$1 for recording the first page of each document, until
December 31, 2017, to be used only by the county recorder
collecting the fee to implement a social security number
truncation program pursuant to these provisions. It
provides that a board shall not authorize this fee unless
the board requires the county auditor to audit the county's
use of funds generated by this fee, as specified, and
authorizes the county recorder to request an extension of
the authorization to charge this fee beyond December 31,
2017. It requires each county recorder, no later than June
1, 2008, to petition the board of supervisors for the
authority to levy the fee.
AB 1168
Page
7
Existing law establishes the Franchise Tax Board to
administer the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation
Tax Law.
This bill requires the Franchise Tax Board, unless
prohibited by federal law, to truncate Social Security
numbers on lien abstracts and other public records before
disclosing these documents to the public.
Existing law requires the University of California, the
California State University system, and the California
community college districts to comply with restrictions
that prohibit the public posting or display of Social
Security numbers. These requirements also prohibit: (1)
printing an individual's Social Security number on a card
that he or she must use to access products or services; (2)
requiring an individual to transmit his or her Social
Security number over the Internet unless the connection is
secure or the Social Security number is encrypted; (3)
requiring an individual to use his or her Social Security
number to access a Web site unless a password is also
required; and (4) printing an individual's Social Security
number on any materials mailed to him or her unless
required by state or federal law.
Existing law permits the use of a Social Security number
for internal verification or administrative purposes.
This bill requires the Office of Privacy Protection to
create a task force to review the use of Social Security
numbers by colleges and universities and report back to the
Legislature by July 1, 2009, on recommendations to minimize
the collection, use, storage, and retention of Social
Security numbers by colleges and universities.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2007-08 2008-09
2009-10 Fund
AB 1168
Page
8
SSN redaction Unknown,
potentially significant; Local
offset by fee authorized in bill
SOS Absorbable costs Special*
Task Force $51 General
* Business Fees Fund
SUPPORT : (Verified 8/31/07)
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse (source)
AARP
American Civil Liberties Union
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees
California Teachers Association
Community College League of California
Consumer Federation of California
Consumers Union
County Recorders Assn of California
Crime Victims United of California
Golden State Manufactured-Home Owners League, Inc.
Gray Panthers
LA District Attorney's office
Rod Pacheco, District Attorney, County of Riverside
Secretary of State Debra Bowen
UC Student Association
OPPOSITION : (Verified 8/31/07)
Butte County Board of Supervisors
Department of Finance
Dept. of Consumer Affairs
Experian
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
San Benito County Board of Supervisors
Stop Hidden Taxes Coalition
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
"California privacy laws require businesses to safeguard
sensitive consumer information that can be used to commit
identity theft, including Social Security numbers. But
government agencies routinely release Social Security
numbers to the general public with virtually no limitation
AB 1168
Page
9
on who can purchase the numbers or how the numbers can be
used. ?Truncated Social Security numbers displaying only
the last four digits cannot be used by fraudsters to open
new credit card accounts, which studies show is the most
common form of identity theft in California.
"How does the release of Social Security numbers in public
records lead to ID theft? A major concern of privacy
advocates is the mass collection and storage of public
records from local government offices by private data base
companies that sell access to the records over the
Internet. These data brokers purchase compact disks full
of public records from county recorders' offices, for
example. ?When a data broker's own security standards are
inadequate (e.g., they fail to adequately screen their
customers to ensure they have legitimate business purposes
for the records), fraudsters and ID thieves gain access to
millions of public records.
"[California] law has shined a light on numerous data
breaches at colleges and universities, including a breach
at UCLA announced December 2006 in which hackers gained
access to the sensitive personal data, including the Social
Security numbers, of 800,000 students, alumni, applicants,
employees, and parents. These breaches at institutions of
higher education raise a fundamental question: for what
purposes do universities collect Social Security numbers,
and why do they store them in Internet-accessible format
for as long as they do?"
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Aghazarian, Anderson, Arambula, Bass, Beall,
Benoit, Berg, Berryhill, Blakeslee, Brownley, Caballero,
Carter, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon,
DeSaulnier, DeVore, Duvall, Dymally, Emmerson, Eng,
Evans, Feuer, Fuentes, Fuller, Galgiani, Garcia, Garrick,
Hancock, Hayashi, Hernandez, Horton, Houston, Huff,
Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Karnette, Keene, Krekorian, La
Malfa, Laird, Leno, Levine, Lieber, Lieu, Ma, Maze,
Mendoza, Mullin, Nava, Niello, Parra, Plescia,
Portantino, Price, Richardson, Sharon Runner, Ruskin,
Salas, Saldana, Silva, Smyth, Solorio, Spitzer,
Strickland, Swanson, Torrico, Tran, Walters, Wolk, Nunez
AB 1168
Page
10
NO VOTE RECORDED: Charles Calderon, Gaines, Nakanishi,
Soto, Villines
RJG:nl 9/1/07 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****