BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2100
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 3, 2000
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
John Dutra, Chair
AB 2100 (Dutra & Honda) - As Amended: March 29, 2000
SUBJECT : California Electronic Government and Information Act.
SUMMARY : AB 2100 would establish the California Internet Portal
Management Authority to administer general policies for the
management and maintenance of the State of California domain and
enact a strategic plan for the development of an enterprise
system environment, as developed by an Electronic Government
Task Force and its business advisory council. Specifically,
this bill :
1)Enacts the California Electronic Government and Information
Act.
2)Finds and declares that the use of internet technology can
provide more efficient and effective delivery of services to
citizens and that it is the purpose of the chapter to increase
the amount of information available to Californians.
3)Declares the intent of the Legislature to encourage uniform
standards across departments, maximize cost savings through
the use of enterprise systems, improve the provision of
services by allowing for on-line payments, applications, and
public records posting, encourage improved internal business
models, and protect the privacy of Californians through the
use of advanced digital signature and encryption technologies.
4)Defines the terms domain, Internet, and state agencies.
5)Provides for full execution of the obligations imposed on
agencies under the Public Records Act and Information
Practices Act, unless specifically provided otherwise by this
Act.
6)Affirmatively declares that there shall only be one domain of
the State of California, that the domain includes all branches
and agencies of state government, and that the domain shall be
administered by the California Internet Portal Management
Authority.
AB 2100
Page 2
7)Establishes the California Internet Portal Management
Authority.
8)Vests the Authority with the responsibilities of
administering, managing, maintaining, and establishing
policies for the use of the California Internet domain.
9)Requires that a proposal for posting information on the
Internet be approved by the Authority, in accordance with the
criteria established by this chapter for departments to
implement new Internet postings.
10)Requires the Authority to establish technical criteria and
guidelines for the approval and denial of proposed Internet
postings.
11)Requires the Authority to respond to proposals for posting
within 10 days of submission.
12)Denies the Authority the ability to deny a posting request
based on the content of the proposal, unless the proposal
fails to include the content provisions required by this Act,
subsequently, all content proposed by a state agency shall be
owned by the state agency.
13)Allows the Authority to post information on the Internet on
behalf of any state agency in the implementation of the
Electronic Government Task Force's enterprise system
recommendations or in response to a direct appropriation in
the Budget Act.
14)Directs the Authority to submit quarterly reports to the
Joint Legislative Budget Committee with a listing of all
proposals submitted, the determination made, the
implementation and maintenance costs of the proposal and,
additionally, the same listing of all proposals requested by
individual legislators and generated in the Budget Act.
15)Requires the Authority to post information submitted to it by
the Legislature in accordance with current statutory
requirements that the Legislature to provide specific
information on the Internet.
16)Directs the Authority to submit quarterly reports to the
AB 2100
Page 3
Joint Legislative Budget Committee with a listing of all
proposals submitted, the determination made, the
implementation and maintenance costs of the proposal and,
additionally, the same listing of all proposals requested by
individual legislators and generated in the Budget Act.
17)Grants all information posted on the Internet prior to the
establishment of the Authority statutory approval until June
30, 2002, except as specified.
18)Requires the Authority to implement the enterprise system
policy recommendations of the Electronic Government Task Force
by December 31, 2002.
19)Requires the Authority to develop an Internet Security
Policy, and issue guidelines for its implementation. The
guidelines would be exempt from the Public Records Act.
20)Allows the Authority to develop the necessary rules and
regulations for the implementation and administration of the
Act.
21)Establishes an Electronic Government Task Force, which is
charged with convening a business advisory council twice a
year, and requires that the Task Force develop a strategic
plan for the development of an enterprise system environment.
22)Disapproves for posting any proposal which does not include
direct access to a plain-language privacy policy or any other
notice required by the Act.
23)Restates existing law regarding the electronic collection of
personal information by any state agency and requires notice
to any user of the use or existence of any information
gathering method, device or identifier.
24)Reinstates existing law regarding the prohibition of a state
agency distributing or selling electronically collected
personal information about individuals without prior, written
permission and requires its disposal upon request.
25)Restates existing law regarding the privacy of personal
information of public officials on the Internet.
26)Restates the Citizen Complaint Act of 1997, which required
AB 2100
Page 4
certain complaint and comment forms to be posted on the
Internet.
27)Restates the Grant Information Act of 1999, which required
specific information regarding grant availability and
eligibility to be posted on the Internet.
28)Requires state agencies to submit proposals to the Authority
for the posting of information on the Internet pursuant to the
requirements of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.
29)Requires the Office of Administrative Law to submit a
proposal for posting of the full text of the California Code
of Regulations.
30)Requires by January 1, 2002 that the Authority adopt
regulations for the use of digital signatures by state
agencies, restating guidelines similar to those in existing
law, and grandfathers in the guidelines developed by the
Secretary of State under existing law until such time as the
regulations proposed by the Authority go into effect.
31)Directs the Authority to adopt rules and regulations for
public entities to receive electronic payments for any tax,
assessment, rate, fee, charge, rent, interest, penalty or any
other account receivable by December 31, 2001.
32)Requires the Controller to provide by November 1, 2001
guidelines for the adoption of rules and regulations for
electronic payment functions including, receipting,
disbursing, and accounting and requires the Authority to
confer with the Controller 60 days prior to amending any
electronic payment rules or regulations.
33)States the intent of the Legislature that state agencies
absorb any additional fees or chares associated with the use
of electronic payments whenever possible. The Authority is
required to set up guidelines for the pass through of those
charges should they be a necessary association of the use of
electronic payment.
34)Updates the Public Records Act exemption rolls to include the
guidelines adopted for implementation of the Internet Security
Policy.
AB 2100
Page 5
35)Repeals Internet posting requirements in current law
regarding information on the suspension and revocations of
licenses issued by a board, specified information regarding
physicians and surgeons, enforcement actions taken by the
Department of Real Estate, the posting of the California State
Contracts Register, information forwarded to the Cal-EPA from
local governments regarding changes in regulated substance
regulations, written reports by the Insurance Commissioner,
Public Utility Commission meeting notes and agendas, and PUC
minority and women business database clearinghouse posting.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Establishes the Department of Information Technology (DOIT)
and grants the Department general oversight of state
information technology programs.
2)Requires the Secretary of State to issue and maintain rules
and regulations for the use of digital signatures (Digital
Signature Act of 1995) and establishes the Uniform Electronic
Transactions Act.
3)Upholds the provisions of the Public Records Act and the
Information Practices Act as they apply to statutes requiring
or restricting specific Internet-related activities by state
agencies.
4)Establishes specific privacy and security guidelines for state
agencies to adhere to when involved in Internet-related
activities.
5)Establishes the Citizen Complaint Act of 1997 and the Grant
Information Act of 1999.
6)Requires that numerous departments and agencies post specific
information and content on the Internet.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown, potentially significant administrative
costs to the Department of Information Technology associated
with the creation and on-going activities of the California
Internet Portal Management Authority and the Electronic
Government Task Force. Unknown, potentially significant
administrative and programmatic savings to state agencies
implementing enterprise system environment, embracing new, more
efficient business practices, and using standardized digital
AB 2100
Page 6
signature and electronic payment infrastructures.
COMMENTS :
1)Need for Bill
According to the author's office, "the California Electronic
Government and Information Act, provides a framework for the
state to begin to reevaluate the way agencies interact with
citizens, businesses and each other through the Internet,
enabling agencies to truly provide more efficient and
effective state services. Internet technology has transformed
the private sector because it has forced them to re-engineer
their business practices; this measure would direct one
Authority to determine how the State could best utilize
Internet technology to that end. This new enterprise directly
counters the 'stovepipe' approach to technology that we
currently employ across departments - where each department
is responsible for its own technology and electronic
government initiatives."
2)Enterprise Architecture and Single Portal Approaches to
Electronic Government Initiatives.
Many other states, including Arizona, Massachusetts, Missouri,
Utah and Washington have adopted enterprise-wide, strategies
for implementation of new "e-government", "digital state"and
"one-portal" policies. The basis for the successful
implementation of these policies has been approaching the
Internet, and its promise of efficiency and ease of use,
through a single technological architecture, attached to a
specific policy objective of improving citizen access and
"customer" service. "No Wrong Door" initiatives are based on a
policy that citizens should be able to access information and
services they require from any initial contact point with the
state.
The implementation of a "No Wrong Door" initiative in Arizona,
for example, requires that the CIO be aware of, set common
architectures, and police the electronic architecture and
accompanying infrastructure, including hardware, software,
personnel and the legal and financial restrictions, that will
enable the state to operate effectively. Utah's "Digital
State" initiative, enacted in 1998 (SB 188, Hillyard), directs
the state CIO to set specific technology guidelines for state
AB 2100
Page 7
agencies, which are required to allow certain services to be
transacted on the Internet by July 1, 2002.
These enterprise architecture requirements reemphasize the
fact that to add value to citizens, and truly make these
improvements cost effective and efficient propositions for the
state, that "e-government" cannot simply be about web pages
and e-mail, remote access to government information, or the
ability to pay fees and taxes on-line. "E-government" must
represent new and better business processes and interactions
with citizens, businesses, and other government agencies,
state, local, and federal.
The enterprise-system strategy, to be developed by the task
force contemplated by this measure, would be implemented by
the new Internet Portal Management Authority within the
context of the budgetary process in lieu of future statutory
posting requirements. This measure would require the
submission of quarterly letters to the Joint Legislative
Budget by the Authority that detail proposals submitted, the
circumstances under which they were approved or denied, the
costs associated with the proposal for implementation and
long-term maintenance costs, and the enterprise solutions
associated with each proposal. The cementing the role of the
Legislature through the budgetary process is intended to
resolve the "silo", "stovepipe" or "piece meal" problems
associated with current law. AB 2100 also intends to resolve
"stovepipe" issues as far as implementation of the enterprise
plan is concerned by repealing existing stand-alone content
specific Internet posting requirements in current statute,
except for the posting requirements associated with the
Political Reform Act.
RELATED LEGISLATION:
AB 2163 (Cunneen) - Would make various changes to the Department
of Information Technology authorizing statute, including
establishing one internet portal. The Department of Motor
Vehicles would issues a digital identification certificate. CIO
must convene a more business and private sector-oriented
advisory council.
AB 2934 (Information Technology Committee) - Clean up measure to
further define the ability of the Department of Motor Vehicles
to proceed with its on-line automobile registration project
AB 2100
Page 8
SB 1371 (Sher) - Would expand the Uniform Electronic
Transactions Act to include a definition of transferable
records, specify who has control of a transferable record, and
establish the rights and obligations of a person who has control
of a transferable record.
SB 1750 (Murray) - Would authorize the Department of Information
Technology to provide for the implementation of a single
Internet portal by January 1, 2006. Requires the Franchise Tax
Board to submit to the Legislature a plan for electronic filing
of returns for and electronic payment of every state tax.
SUPPORT:
None on File.
OPPOSITION:
None on File
Analysis Prepared by : Mike Jacob / INFO. TECH / (916)319-3945