BILL ANALYSIS
Bill No: AB
400
SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
Senator Roderick D. Wright, Chair
2009-2010 Regular Session
Staff Analysis
AB 400 Author: De Leon
As Amended: June 15, 2009
Hearing Date: June 23, 2009
Consultant: Chris Lindstrom
SUBJECT
State agencies: FISCal funds.
DESCRIPTION
AB 400 requires the Financial Information System for
California (FISCal) to list State General Fund (GF) and
federal fund expenditures in the amount of $5,000 or
greater on a public Web site. Specifically, this bill:
1)Defines "General Fund and federal fund expenditures" as
the expenditure or transfer of funds in excess of $5,000
by any state department, including:
a) Grants;
b) Contracts; and,
c) Purchase orders.
2)Excludes GF transfers between state departments or
agencies, or the transfer of state or federal assistance
payments to any individual recipient or beneficiary of
those assistance payments.
3)Requires the following information for each GF and
federal fund expenditure to be listed:
a) The name and principal location of each entity or
other recipient of the funds;
b) The amount of the expenditure;
AB 400 (De Leon) continued
Page 2
c) The type of transaction;
d) The identity of the state department or agency
making the expenditure;
e) The budget program source for the expenditure;
f) A brief description of the purpose for the
expenditure; and,
g) A brief description of any item purchased pursuant
to the expenditure.
4)Makes legislative findings and declarations.
EXISTING LAW
Existing law imposes specified duties on state governmental
agencies and provides for public access to government
records.
Existing law, the California State Constitution, provides
that California's citizens are entitled to a right to
privacy.
BACKGROUND
According to the author's office, "AB 400 seeks to provide
greater transparency in the state budget process, so the
public can easily access and readily review how taxpayer
money is being spent. Support for public programs is
largely predicated on the belief that tax dollars are spent
in a prudent and efficient manner. Transparency in the
expenditure of these tax dollars is critical to returning
public support and confidence in state government."
Background. The State Constitution requires that meetings
of public bodies and writings of public officials and
agencies be open to public scrutiny. The State
Constitution also requires statutes or other types of
governmental decisions to be broadly interpreted to further
the people's right to access government information. The
State Constitution requires governmental actions that limit
the right of access to demonstrate the need for that
restriction. The State Constitution exempts some
information from disclosure, such as law enforcement
records.
AB 400 (De Leon) continued
Page 3
California has a number of state statutes that provide for
the public's access to government information, including
documents and meetings.
1)Access to Government Documents. There are two basic laws
that provide for the public's access to government
documents:
a) The California Public Records Act establishes the
right of every person to inspect and obtain copies of
state and local government documents. The act
requires state and local agencies to establish written
guidelines for public access to documents and to post
these guidelines at their offices.
b) The Legislative Open Records Act provides that the
public may inspect legislative records. The act also
requires legislative committees to maintain documents
related to the history of legislation.
2)Access to Government Meetings. There are two basic laws
that provide for the public's access to state government
meetings:
a) The Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act requires that
meetings of state bodies be conducted openly and that
documents related to a subject of discussion at a
public meeting be made available for inspection.
b) The Grunsky-Burton Open Meeting Act requires that
meetings of the Legislature be open to the public and
that all persons be allowed to attend the meetings.
3)Some Information Exempt From Disclosure. While laws
provide for public access to a significant amount of
information, they also allow some information to be kept
private. Many of the exclusions are provided in the
interest of protecting the privacy of members of the
AB 400 (De Leon) continued
Page 4
public. For instance, medical testing records are exempt
from disclosure. Other exemptions are provided for legal
and confidential matters. For instance, governments are
allowed to hold closed meetings when considering
personnel matters or conferring with legal counsel.
Legislative Trends. In 2006, Congress passed and the
President signed into law the Federal Funding
Accountability and Transparency Act. The law creates a
free, publicly searchable website for all federal contracts
and grants. The law requires access to data on all
payments of more than $25,000, with exceptions for
classified information, federal assistance payments made to
individuals, and an exclusion for federal employees. The
website ( www.USASpending.gov ) became operative on December
13, 2007.
The federal effort inspired elected officials in states
across the country to seek passage of similar legislation
or the execution of executive orders to promote
accountability and transparency in government expenditures.
In 2007, five states (Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, and to a
more limited extent, Minnesota and Hawaii) passed
legislation that mandates the creation of comprehensive
websites for state expenditures. In addition, a number of
states including Texas, Missouri, South Carolina, Alaska
and Louisiana have taken executive action to provide
taxpayers with an opportunity to access state expenditures.
President Obama has called for a searchable Web site to
track federal economic stimulus spending. Governor
Schwarzenegger has launched a Web site to ensure
transparency and accountability of federal economic
stimulus funding as it is received and expended by the
state.
In April 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger also launched a Web
site ( www.reportingtransparency.ca.gov ) which makes
publicly available the Statement of Economic Interests Form
700 and Travel Expense claims for the Governor's Office
Senior Staff and Deputies, Agency Secretaries, Agency
Undersecretaries and Department Directors.
On June 4, 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger executed Executive
AB 400 (De Leon) continued
Page 5
Order S-08-09 and launched a new component to the Reporting
Government Transparency Web site that will require all
state contracts valued at $5,000 or more to be posted
online. The Web site will also list both the internal and
external audits of state departments and agencies,
including information on operations, budget and programs
dating back to January 1, 2008.
Financial Information System for California (FISCal).
FISCal is an integrated information technology project
designed to create and implement a new statewide financial
system which will encompass the areas of budgeting,
accounting, procurement, cash management, financial
management, financial reporting, cost accounting, asset
management, project accounting, and human resources
management. FISCal is designed to replace California's
aging financial management systems; FISCal will be rolled
out in five phases, over a multi-year period, to more than
a hundred departments and agencies.
Development of this system has been done collaboratively
(under FISCal), which includes the Department of Finance
(DOF), the State Treasurer's Office (STO), the State
Controller's Office (SCO), and the Department of General
Services (DGS). The system is required to have an online
searchable database and the capability of operating a
coding structure which indicates the categorization of
expenditures and revenues. The system and the data are
required to be available to both the legislative and
executive branches.
The FISCal project was proposed during the 2007-08 budget
process as an entirely General Fund project. However, due
to a number of factors including General Fund expense, the
Legislature requested more information on alternative
funding scenarios, vendor accountability, and formalization
of control agency roles. It is unclear when FISCal will
move forward and whether the proposed timeline will remain
intact.
PRIOR/RELATED LEGISLATION
SB 719 (Huff), 2009-2010 Legislative Session . Requires
each state department and agency to develop and operate a
searchable Internet Web site accessible by the public that
includes specified information relating to expenditures of
AB 400 (De Leon) continued
Page 6
state funds, defined to include, among other things,
grants, contracts, subcontracts, purchase orders, and tax
refunds, rebates, and credits. (In Senate Appropriations
Committee)
SB 502 (Walters), 2009-2010 Legislative Session . Similar
to SB 719 (Huff) of the 2009-2010 Legislative Session. (In
Senate Governmental Organization Committee)
AB 1194 (Strickland), 2009-2010 Legislative Session .
Similar to SB 719 (Huff) of the 2009-2010 Legislative
Session. (In Assembly Business and Professions Committee)
SB 1494 (McClintock), 2007-2008 Legislative Session .
Similar to SB 719 (Huff) of the 2009-2010 Legislative
Session. (Held in Senate Appropriations Committee)
AB 1843 (Garrick), 2007-2008 Legislative Session . Stated
that it is the intent of the Legislature to require the
Department of Finance to create, operate, and maintain a
searchable database, integrated within a statewide fiscal
information system, which provides the public with
information on how the state spends tax revenues. (Held in
Assembly Appropriations Committee)
AB 1393 (Leno), 2007-2008 Legislative Session . Would have
required by July 1, 2009, any state agency that publishes
an Internet Web site to include on its homepage specified
information that is not exempt from disclosure under the
California Public Records Act about how to contact the
agency, how to request records under the California Public
Records Act, and a form for submitting requests for records
online. This bill also would have required the Department
of Justice to convene an advisory body to consider and make
recommendations for a statutory standard governing the
posting of requests and denials, and public documents not
exempt under the California Public Records Act, on the
Internet Web sites of state agencies, and report its
findings and recommendations to the Governor and
Legislature by January 1, 2009. (Vetoed by the Governor)
AB 2927 (Leno), 2005-2006 Legislative Session . Would have
required any state agency that publishes an Internet
Website to include on the homepage of that site specified
information that is not exempt from disclosure under the
California Public Records Act about how to contact the
AB 400 (De Leon) continued
Page 7
agency, how to request records under the act, and a form
for submitting online requests for records. This bill
would have authorized any person to bring an action to
enforce the duty of a state agency to post this information
and would provide for penalties including monetary awards
to be paid by the agency, with specified provisions to
become operative on January 1, 2008. (Vetoed by the
Governor)
SB 503 (Figueroa), 2005-2006 Legislative Session . Would
have required each state or local body identified in
existing law that maintains an Internet Website, to make
the written guidelines accessible from the homepage of its
Website through a link entitled "Guidelines for How to
Obtain Public Records." (Gutted and Amended in the
Assembly)
SCA 1 (Burton), Resolution Chapter 1, Statutes of 2004 .
Placed Proposition 59 on the statewide ballot, which was
subsequently approved by the voters, to confer to the
people a right of access to information concerning the
conduct of the people's business. Provides that the people
have a right of access to information concerning the
conduct of the people's business, and requires meetings of
public bodies and the writings of public officials and
agencies to be open to public scrutiny. Requires a
statute, court rule or other authority to be broadly
construed if it furthers the right of access, and narrowly
construed if it limits the right of access. Requires a
statute, court rule or other authority adopted after the
effective date of the constitutional amendment that limits
the right of access to include findings demonstrating the
interest protected, and the need for that protection.
Specifies that these provisions do not supersede or modify
the constitutionally guaranteed right to privacy, or affect
the construction of any statute, court rule or other
authority that protects that right to privacy. Specifies
that these provisions do not supersede or modify any other
provision of the state Constitution. Specifies that these
provisions do not affect the scope of permitted discovery
in judicial or administrative proceedings regarding
deliberations of the Legislature, its Members, employees,
committees and caucuses.
SCA 7 (Burton), 2001-2002 Legislative Session . Would have
amended the Declaration of Rights contained in Article 1 of
AB 400 (De Leon) continued
Page 8
the State Constitution to provide that the people of
California have a fundamental right of access to government
information subject to certain narrow exceptions. (Held in
the Assembly)
SUPPORT / OPPOSE : None on file as of June 19, 2009.
FISCAL COMMITTEE : Senate Appropriations Committee
**********