BILL ANALYSIS �
Bill No: AB
172
SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
Senator Roderick D. Wright, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
Bill Analysis
AB 172 Author: Eng
As Amended: May 27, 2011
Hearing Date: June 28, 2011
Consultant: Paul Donahue
SUBJECT : State agencies; Internet website information
SUMMARY : Establishes the Reporting Transparency in
Government Internet Website to provide audit and summary
data regarding contracts valued at $5,000 or more to the
public.
Existing law : The Public Records Act (PRA) requires public
records to be open to public inspection, subject to
specific exemptions.
This bill :
1) Requires the California Technology Agency (CTA), or its
successor, to create and maintain a Transparency website
that includes instructions for the public describing how a
person may obtain more detailed information for a contract.
2) Exempts the State Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General,
Secretary of State, State Treasurer and Controller from
posting the required information on the Transparency
website if the constitutional officer posts the required
information on his or her official Internet website.
3) Requires a constitutional officer, if he or she
determines that information in a contract is exempt from
disclosure pursuant to the PRA, to post the following
information on his or her official Internet website:
a) The contract number;
AB 172 (Eng) continued
Page 2
b) The phrase "PRA exemption claimed;" and,
c) Other identifying information sufficient to
enable a person to submit a request for the
information pursuant to the PRA, for purposes of
testing the exemption claimed for the information.
4) Requires the Secretary of CTA, when a constitutional
officer chooses to post the required information to his or
her official Internet website, to provide a clearly labeled
link to the constitutional officer's Internet website on
the Transparency website.
5) Requires state agencies, by February 15, 2012, to post
to the Transparency website every audit of its operations
finalized from January 1, 2009, to December 31, 2011.
6) Requires state agencies to post to the Transparency
website every audit of its operations completed from
January 1, 2012, and thereafter, within 15 calendar days of
completion.
7) Defines "audit" to mean any review or evaluation
performed by a state agency on itself, or on the state
agency by another entity, including, but not limited to,
the Bureau of State Audits, the Controller, the Department
of Finance, a federal agency with oversight responsibility
of the operations of the state agency, or any
nongovernmental organization that monitors or oversees the
state agency that has received public funds.
8) Requires the Department of General Services (DGS) and
CTA to assist state agencies with the requirements of this
bill.
9) Provides that this bill does not require the posting of
information contained in an audit or contract, including,
but not limited to: the identity of any undisclosed expert
consultant, that is confidential pursuant to a court order,
the attorney-client privilege, or the attorney work product
exception; or, information that, if posted, would
jeopardize peace officer safety, criminal intelligence
information, ongoing investigatory activities, or any
security procedure or any information the disclosure of
which is prohibited by law.
AB 172 (Eng) continued
Page 3
10) Provides that this bill not be construed to limit the
rights of public access to information pursuant to the PRA,
and any information withheld from posting shall be replaced
with the phrase, "PRA exemption claimed."
11) Requires DGS and CTA, by February 15, 2012, to post
summary data regarding any contract awarded by the state on
or after March 31, 2010, valued at $5,000 or more to the
Transparency website, which shall include:
a) The department name;
b) The contract or order number;
c) The total price;
d) The contract start and termination dates;
e) The supplier name;
f) Any special instructions;
g) The supplier classification codes;
h) The acquisition type and method;
i) The item totals, including the quantity,
description and classification codes.
12) Requires state agencies to post to the Transparency
website summary data regarding any contact it awarded from
January 1, 2012, and forward that is valued at $5,000 or
more, within 15 calendar days.
13) Requires the Governor to post every statement of
economic interest and travel and expense report of its
senior staff and deputies, agency secretaries and
undersecretaries, and department directors to the
Transparency website.
14) Makes legislative findings and declarations.
COMMENTS :
1) Purpose of the bill : According to the author's office,
"AB 172 is intended to ensure transparency in state
contracts by requiring that information concerning
AB 172 (Eng) continued
Page 4
contractors who supply consulting or personal services be
available online in an easily searchable data base. This
information would be centrally located with links from the
websites of departments and agencies. Currently
expenditures and staffing levels associated with the use of
civil service workers is routinely reported to the
Legislature and is readily available to the public through
the budget process each year. The same reporting
requirements should apply for personal service and
consulting contracts.
"During these difficult economic and budgetary times
California needs to examine every opportunity to cut costs
without impacting essential public services, make better
use of state workers, reduce government growth, and find
ways to save millions of dollars without raising taxes. AB
172 will help us meet these goals by ensuring that our
state government remains open and transparent."
2) Background : This bill is based upon the Governor's
Executive Order S-20-09 of 2009, which expanded the
Reporting Website to include all program reviews,
monitoring and accountability reports, evaluations,
inspections, assessments and studies of audits conducted by
agencies, departments and outside entities dating back to
January 1, 2008.
3) Support : The sponsor states that, "currently 36 states
allow the public online access to track how state
government spends their taxpayer dollars in order to
promote transparency and cost-savings. California
transparency is inadequate and compares poorly to other
states. The United States Public Interest Research Group
graded California's level of transparency as a "D", with 28
other states scoring higher on their level of transparency.
AB 172 will ensure transparency in state personal services
contracts by requiring departments to report monetary
expenditures and associated staffing levels related to all
personal service contracts. It ensures that future
administrations must provide transparency by placing these
requirements in law."
4) Related legislation :
SB 252 (Vargas, 2011) requires privatization contractors,
as defined, to file with the contracting agency, a copy of
AB 172 (Eng) continued
Page 5
each subcontract or amendment to a subcontract executed
under the privatization contract. Requires the contracting
agency to maintain the subcontract or amendment to the
subcontract as a public record pursuant to the California
Public Records Act. (Pending in Assembly G.O. committee)
AB 1899 (Eng, 2010) would have required state agencies,
DGS, and the office of the State Chief Information Officer
to post specified audits and contracts to the state's
Reporting Transparency in Government Internet Website.
(Vetoed)
AB 756 (Eng, 2009) would have required each state agency to
provide a link to a centrally located and accessible
state-run Internet website that includes a list of personal
and consulting services contracts. (Vetoed)
AB 2603 (Eng, 2008) would have required state agencies to
annually prepare a report listing personal services and
consulting services contracts entered into during the
previous fiscal year. (Held in Senate Appropriations
Committee)
SB 1331 (Oropeza, 2008) would have required the Governor to
prepare and submit to the Legislature, along with the
Governor's Budget, a report that contains information
regarding current and proposed contracts for services in
the amount above $5000. (Held in Senate Rules Committee)
SB 786 (Oropeza, 2007) would have required the Governor to
submit with the Budget Act a report that contains specified
information regarding current and proposed contracts for
services in the amount of $5,001 or more, as specified.
(Held in Senate Appropriations Committee.
SUPPORT:
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO
California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO
Professional Engineers in California Government
Service Employees International Union, Local 1000 (sponsor)
OPPOSE:
None on file
AB 172 (Eng) continued
Page 6
FISCAL COMMITTEE: Senate Appropriations Committee
**********