BILL ANALYSIS �
Bill No: SB
938
SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION
Senator Roderick D. Wright, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
Bill Analysis
SB 938 Author: Senate Committee on Governmental
Organization
Amended: April 25, 2011
Hearing Date: April 26, 2011
Consultant: Paul Donahue
SUBJECT : State records management
SUMMARY : Transfers duties of the Department of General
Services related to records management and destruction to
the California Technology Agency.
Existing law : Directs the Director of General Services to
establish and administer a state records management
program.
This bill :
1) Transfers duties of the Department of General Services
related to records management and destruction to the
California Technology Agency.
2) Transfers persons employed by DGS in the California
Records and Information Management Program, and all
equipment and records in the State Records Center in the
Department of General Services, to the California
Technology Agency.
COMMENTS :
1) Background : The state records program within DGS is
comprised of two program elements, the California Records
and Information Management (CalRIM) program, and the State
Records Center (SRC). Among other things, CalRIM
establishes guidelines for state agencies in records
management and retention, including the management of
SB 938 (Committee on Governmental Organization)
PageB
electronic records. CalRIM also provides training and
other technical services to help customer agencies
establish and maintain effective records programs.
CalRIM and the State Archives review and approve records
retention schedules prepared by state agencies. The State
Archives staff determines whether records identified on an
agency retention schedule have archival value and should
therefore be transferred to the Archives at the end of the
record lifecycle.
The SRC stores vital records and semi-active and inactive
records prior to their destruction or archiving. The
Document Destruction Center destroys confidential records,
including plastic items. The SRC also maintains a vault for
storage of vital records on microfilm and other media.
2) Problems with the existing model : With the advent of
electronic records, former rules governing retention,
preservation and access to records are outdated or have
been partially superseded. In addition, state agencies now
routinely store (and delete) files from computer servers,
whereas in previous years printed state documents were
printed by the Office of State Publishing (OSP) and sent
for storage to the State Archives and Library. Digital
publishing of documents bypasses OSP, and often makes
traditional hard copy document storage and retention
practices ineffective in preserving and archiving state
publications. Failure to incorporate computer-generated
documents into the state record retention, destruction and
archiving process makes it challenging for the state to
ensure that digital records created by state agencies will
be available in the long term future to ensure continuity
in the state's business community, assist in disaster
preparedness, and to ensure continued academic and public
access.
The California Technology Agency operates a comprehensive
digital records information system for state agencies, and
grants to the Office of the State Archives access to this
database to assist in fulfilling its mandate to make
available historic records of state government, regardless
of the physical form.
3) New rules regarding records retention : Recent
SB 938 (Committee on Governmental Organization)
PageC
legislation<1> updated the California Civil Discovery Act
in order to take account of the growing volume of
information stored in electronic form. The new law
expressly authorizes the discovery of electronically stored
information and amends procedures in existing law so as to
better address issues unique to the format of such
information. Many of the specific provisions of the state
law were drawn from recently enacted federal rules, which
require retention of documents and changes to document
destruction programs for electronic documents in order to
preserve all electronic evidence, such as emails and voice
mails, throughout all litigation.
Transferring oversight and management of state records to
the California Technology Agency should provide a method by
which paper and electronic records generated by state
agencies can be appropriately preserved in accordance with
federal and state rules governing discovery and evidence.
4) Prior legislation
AB 5 (Evans, 2009) . Establishes procedures in the Civil
Discovery Act for a person to obtain discovery of
electronically stored information, as defined, in addition
to documents, tangible things, and land or other property,
in the possession of any other party to the action. (Stats.
2009, ch. 5)
SB 2067 (Bowen, 1998) . Requires the Secretary of State, in
consultation with DGS, to approve and adopt appropriate
standards established by the American National Standards
Institute or the Association for Information and Image
Management, and would require that reproduction of those
records be done in compliance with the minimum standards or
guidelines, or both, recommended by the American National
Standards Institute or the Association for Information and
Image Management. (Stats. 1998, ch. 569)
Chapter 1786, Statutes of 1963 among other things created
DGS, and transferred the Central Records Depository to DGS,
and enacted the State Records Management Act. The Act
directs DGS to administer a records management program that
will apply efficient and economical management, retention,
preservation and disposal of state records.
-------------------------
<1> AB 5 (Evans, Stats. 2009, ch.7)
SB 938 (Committee on Governmental Organization)
PageD
Chapter 1556, Statutes of 1947 enacted law directing the
Secretary of State to establish a Central Records
Depository for the receipt and custody of all records
required or permitted by law to be filed or deposited in
the office of the Secretary of State. The legislation also
permitted the SOS to determine records retention periods
before records were destroyed, and to determine what
records would be "microphotographed" before being
destroyed.
SUPPORT: None on file
OPPOSE: None on file
FISCAL COMMITTEE: Yes
**********