BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1498|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 1498
Author: Buchanan (D)
Amended: 6/28/12 in Senate
Vote: 21
PRIOR VOTES NOT RELEVANT
SUBJECT : State technology
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill proposes to modify the Governors
Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 2012 (GRP 2) so that the
Director of Technology reports directly to the Governor on
issues relating to information technology. This bill
declares the intent of the Legislature that a plan for
transitioning information technology procurement authority
from the Department of General Services (DGS) to the
Department of Technology (DOT) be developed by the
administration. Specifically, this bill (1) provides that
if GRP 2 becomes effective on July 3, 2012, the Director of
Technology shall report directly to the Governor on issues
relating to information technology when the plan becomes
operative on July 1, 2013; (2) declares legislative intent
that a plan must be developed by the Governor's Office, as
specified, for transitioning information technology
procurement authority from DGS to DOT; (3) declares
legislative intent that any planning process for
transferring the procurement authority to DOT include
consideration of stakeholder input from relevant groups,
CONTINUED
AB 1498
Page
2
including but not limited to, the Milton Marks "Little
Hoover Commission," the Legislature, the Department of
Finance, DGS and DOT, and (4) stipulates that items #2 and
#3 above shall become operative only if GRP 2 becomes
effective.
ANALYSIS : Existing law, GRP 1 (2009), transferred all
the duties, functions, employees, property, and related
funding of the Division of Telecommunications in DGS to the
Office of the State Chief Information Officer (OCIO). The
plan also renamed and transferred the Department of
Technology Services in the State and Consumer Services
Agency (CSA) to the Office of the Department of Technology
Services within the OCIO, renamed the Department of
Technology Services Revolving Fund the Technology Services
Revolving Fund, and made conforming changes. The plan also
abolished the Office of Information Security and Privacy
Protection, and instead created the Office of Information
Security within the OCIO, and the Office of Privacy
Protection within the CSA, with a division of the duties,
personnel, property, and funding of the Office of
Information Security and Privacy Protection between the two
offices. The plan also transferred duties relating to the
state's procurement of information technology from the
Department of Finance, the DGS, and the Department of
Information Technology to the OCIO.
Existing law provides that there is in state government the
California Technology Agency, which duties include
establishing and enforcing state information technology
strategic plans, policies, standards, and enterprise
architecture. The agency is governed by the Secretary of
California Technology.
The California Constitution authorizes the Legislature to
delegate to the Governor the authority to assign and
reorganize functions among executive branch officers,
agencies and their employees. The Governor's authority to
reorganize does not extend to other constitutional offices
(California Constitution, Article V, Section 6). Existing
law specifies the process for reorganization and places
limits on that authority.
Additionally, existing law specifies the purposes of the
CONTINUED
AB 1498
Page
3
Governor's reorganization authority, in the form of a GRP
is to enable the Governor to promote improved strategies
for executing the law; managing state government; reducing
expenditures; increasing efficiency; improving coordination
among agencies and functions; reducing the number of
agencies; and eliminating duplication and overlap among
agencies.
Background
GRP Process . As stipulated in Government Code Section
12080 et seq., the Governor is required to submit any
reorganization plan to the Milton Marks Commission on
California State Government Organization and Economy
(Little Hoover Commission) at least 30 days prior to
submitting the plan to the Legislature. The Little Hoover
Commission's role in the reorganization process is only
advisory - it reviews and submits a report to the Governor
and the Legislature within 30 days of the Plan being
submitted to the Legislature. Existing law also provides
that any GRP becomes law after 60 days unless either House
of the Legislature adopts a resolution rejecting the
proposal.
GRP 2 . GRP 2 (introduced May 3, 2012) would create three
new agencies by relocating departments in three existing
agencies with the goal of grouping like functions more
closely together, reducing the number of agencies from 12
to 10 overall. It also would make a series of other moves
including establishing the Government Operations Agency,
which would house the Office of Administrative Law, the
Public Employees' Retirement System, the State Teachers'
Retirement System, the State Personnel Board, the
California Victim Compensation and Government Claims Board,
the Department of General Services, the Department of Human
Resources, and the Franchise Tax Board.
Additionally, the Government Operations Agency would house
the Department of Technology, which would include the
Office of Information Security and the Office of Technology
Services. The current Secretary of California Technology
would be transitioned into the Director of Technology.
On May 22, 2012, the Little Hoover Commission released its
CONTINUED
AB 1498
Page
4
report of
GRP 2 and recommended that the Plan be allowed to go into
effect. The deadline for a Legislative resolution
affirmatively disapproving GRP 2 is July 2, 2012. If the
Legislature takes no action, GRP 2 becomes effective on
July 3, 2012, and operative on July 1, 2013.
Joint Hearing of GRP 2 . On May 23, 2012, the Senate
Governmental Organization Committee and the Senate
Governance and Finance Committee held a joint informational
hearing to review the plan in its entirety.
With respect to the Governor's proposed placement of the
state's information technology services within the new
Government Operations Agency, the Little Hoover Commission
expressed support and stated "the proposed Government
Operations Agency is a logical place for the state's
information technology services to reside." The Little
Hoover Commission also noted that although the
administration has made it clear that the new director of
the Department of Technology would remain the state Chief
Information Officer (CIO), the Commission was recommending
that the Legislature address this issue by establishing a
direct line of reporting to the Governor on matters related
to the Director's role as CIO.
Purpose of this bill . This bill incorporates the Little
Hoover Commission's recommendation relative to the need for
establishing a direct line of reporting to the Governor by
the Director of the Department of Information Technology
(DOIT).
History . DOIT was created by SB 1 (Alquist, Chapter 508,
Statues of 1995) for the purpose of planning and overseeing
the state's uses of information technology (IT). It was
created as an independent state department that reported
directly to the Governor rather than a cabinet level
agency. DOIT was responsible for ensuring that appropriate
plans, policies, and procedures are in place to assure
successful implementation of IT projects. DOIT struggled
to meet its statutory mandates and the statutory provisions
pertaining to DOIT became inoperative on July 1, 2002, when
the Legislature refused to extend the sunset.
CONTINUED
AB 1498
Page
5
GRP 2 (2005), established the Department of Technology
Services (DTS) within the State and Consumer Services
Agency, as a reorganized entity comprised of the former
Stephen P. Teale Data Center, the California Health and
Human Services Agency Data Center, and the
Telecommunications Division of the DGS. DTS was charged
with responsibility for the planning, acquisition, and
administration of state technology and telecommunications
systems.
In 2006, the Legislature enacted and the Governor signed SB
834 (Figueroa) which established the OCIO. SB 834 made the
State CIO a member of the Governor's cabinet, with the
position appointed by the Governor and subject to Senate
confirmation. SB 834 also codified the responsibilities of
the State CIO, making the State CIO the nominal leader for
the Executive Branch's IT program.
The 2007-08 Budget and related legislation (SB 90, Senate
Budget Committee, Chapter 183, Statutes of 2007)
substantially expanded on
SB 834 and provided an appropriation to establish the OCIO.
In May 2009, GRP 1 was allowed to move forward by the
Legislature, formally creating the OCIO as an Agency to
consolidate statewide information technology functions
under, and to consolidate software contracts, office
automation tools, data centers, servers, and storage. The
OCIO also has authority over IT procurement policy and
enterprise IT management. Since the implementation of GRP
1, the Legislature has continued to expand the role and
responsibilities of the OCIO. In July of 2009, as part of
the special session budget package, the Legislature
required the OCIO to review and make recommendations to the
Joint Legislative Budget Committee regarding large IT
projects (including the California Case Management System)
at the Judicial Council.
AB 2408 (Smyth, Chapter 404, Statutes of 2010) was the
vehicle that codified GRP 1 (2009) which consolidated state
IT functions under the Office of the State Chief
Information Officer and changed the name of the Office to
the California Technology Agency.
CONTINUED
AB 1498
Page
6
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: No
DLW:d1 7/2/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: NONE RECEIVED
**** END ****
CONTINUED