(1)Existing law establishes the Department of Technology, within the Government Operations Agency, headed by the Director of Technology, who is also known as the State Chief Information Officer. The department is responsible for the approval and oversight of information technology projects by, among other things, consulting with agencies during initial project planning to ensure that project proposals are based on well-defined programmatic needs and consider feasible alternatives to address the identified needs and benefits consistent with statewide strategies, policies, and procedures. By July 1, 2019, and biennially thereafter, existing law requires state agencies, state entities, and specified chief information officers to post on the agency or entity Internet Web site that the site is in compliance with statutory accessibility requirements and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, as provided.

This bill would establish within the Department of Technology the Office of Accessible Technology to monitor and facilitate serve as the central point in state government for providing oversight and guidance to ensure state agency and state entity compliance of state electronic and information technology with the requirements of certain state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology. with specified accessibility and information technology requirements. The bill would require the office to be under the direction of the Director of Technology. The bill would require the office to, among other things, ensure that every state agency and state entity is in compliance with the accessibility requirements of state and federal electronic and information technology policy and statutes and establish a complaint procedure for state employees and members of the public to register complaints about Internet Web site accessibility problems. The bill would require the director to prepare a report that shall be posted on the offices Internet Web site on or before January 1, 2020, and annually thereafter, that includes a summary of all developed statewide policies, standards, and procedures for ensuring compliance with these provisions, and a listing of all state agencies that are and are not in compliance. provisions.

(2)Existing law requires each state agency and each state entity, as those terms are defined, to have a chief information officer with specified duties relating to information technology.

This bill would include ensuring compliance with specified state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology among the duties of those chief information officers.

(1)Existing law establishes the Department of Technology, within the Government Operations Agency, headed by the Director of Technology, who is also known as the State Chief Information Officer. The department is responsible for the approval and oversight of information technology projects by, among other things, consulting with agencies during initial project planning to ensure that project proposals are based on well-defined programmatic needs and consider feasible alternatives to address the identified needs and benefits consistent with statewide strategies, policies, and procedures. By July 1, 2019, and biennially thereafter, existing law requires state agencies, state entities, and specified chief information officers to post on the agency or entity Internet Web site that the site is in compliance with statutory accessibility requirements and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, as provided.

This bill would establish within the Department of Technology the Office of Accessible Technology to monitor and facilitate compliance of state electronic and information technology with the requirements of certain state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology subject to the Legislature making an appropriation to implement these provisions. technology. The bill would require the office to be headed by a Chief of the Office of Accessible Technology, who is required be under the direction of the Director of Technology. The bill would require the office to, among other things, ensure that every state agency and entity is in compliance with the accessibility requirements of state and federal electronic and information technology policy and statutes, contract with the California State Auditor to conduct compliance audits to determine state agency and entity compliance with these provisions and develop corrective action plans, statutes and establish a complaint procedure for state employees and members of the public to register complaints about Internet Web site accessibility problems. The bill would require the chief to establish and co-chair a Disability Accessibility Technology Advisory Panel to advise and consult with the chief on the implementation and operations of this chapter and the policies, standards, and procedures related to accessible technology. The bill would require the chief director to prepare a report that shall be posted on the offices Internet Web site on or before January 1, 2020, and annually thereafter, that includes a summary of all developed statewide policies, standards, and procedures for ensuring compliance with these provisions, and a listing of all state agencies that are and are not in compliance.

(2)Existing law requires each state agency and each state entity, as those terms are defined, to have a chief information officer with specified duties relating to information technology.

This bill would include ensuring compliance with specified state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology among the duties of those chief information officers.

(1)Existing law establishes the Department of Technology, within the Government Operations Agency, headed by the Director of Technology, who is also known as the State Chief Information Officer. The department is responsible for the approval and oversight of information technology projects by, among other things, consulting with agencies during initial project planning to ensure that project proposals are based on well-defined programmatic needs and consider feasible alternatives to address the identified needs and benefits consistent with statewide strategies, policies, and procedures. By July 1, 2019, and biennially thereafter, existing law requires state agencies, state entities, and specified chief information officers to post on the agency or entity Internet Web site that the site is in compliance with statutory accessibility requirements and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, as provided.

This bill would establish within the Department of Technology the Office of Accessible Technology to monitor and facilitate compliance of state electronic and information technology with the requirements of certain state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology subject to the Legislature making an appropriation to implement these provisions. The bill would require the office to be headed by a Chief of the Office of Accessible Technology, who is required to, among other things, ensure that every state agency and entity is in compliance with the accessibility requirements of state and federal electronic and information technology policy and statutes, contract with the California State Auditor to conduct compliance audits to determine state agency and entity compliance with these provisions and develop corrective action plans, and establish a complaint procedure for state employees and members of the public to register complaints about Internet Web site accessibility problems. The bill would require the chief to establish and co-chair a Disability Accessibility Technology Advisory Panel to advise and consult with the chief on the implementation and operations of this chapter and the policies, standards, and procedures related to accessible technology. The bill would require the chief to submit an annual report to the appropriate committees of the Legislature no later than December 31 prepare a report that shall be posted on the offices Internet Web site on or before January 1, 2020, and annually thereafter, that includes a summary of all developed statewide policies, standards, and procedures for ensuring compliance with these provisions, and a listing of all state agencies that are and are not in compliance.

(2)Existing law requires each state agency and each state entity, as those terms are defined, to have a chief information officer with specified duties relating to information technology.

This bill would include ensuring compliance with specified state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology among the duties of those chief information officers.

(1)Existing law establishes the Department of Technology, within the Government Operations Agency, headed by the Director of Technology, who is also known as the State Chief Information Officer. The department is responsible for the approval and oversight of information technology projects by, among other things, consulting with agencies during initial project planning to ensure that project proposals are based on well-defined programmatic needs and consider feasible alternatives to address the identified needs and benefits consistent with statewide strategies, policies, and procedures. By July 1, 2019, and biennially thereafter, existing law requires state agencies, state entities, and specified chief information officers to post on the agency or entity Internet Web site that the site is in compliance with statutory accessibility requirements and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, as provided.

This bill would establish within the Department of Technology the Office of Accessible Technology to monitor and facilitate compliance of state electronic and information technology with the requirements of certain state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology subject to the Legislature making an appropriation to implement these provisions. The bill would require the office to be headed by a Chief of the Office of Accessible Technology, who is required to, among other things, ensure that every state agency and entity is in compliance with the accessibility requirements of state and federal electronic and information technology policy and statutes, contract with the California State Auditor to conduct compliance audits to determine state agency and entity compliance with these provisions and develop corrective action plans, and establish a complaint procedure for state employees and members of the public to register complaints about Internet Web site accessibility problems. The bill would require the chief to establish and co-chair a Disability Accessibility Technology Advisory Panel to advise and consult with the chief on the implementation and operations of this chapter and the policies, standards, and procedures related to accessible technology. The bill would require the chief to submit an annual report to the appropriate committees of the Legislature no later than December 31 that includes a summary of all developed statewide policies, standards, and procedures for ensuring compliance with these provisions, and a listing of all state agencies that are and are not in compliance.

(2)Existing law requires each state agency and each state entity, as those terms are defined, to have a chief information officer with specified duties relating to information technology.

This bill would include ensuring compliance with specified state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology among the duties of those chief information officers.

Date of Hearing: August 8, 2018

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez Fletcher, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 1396

Author:(Galgiani) – As Amended Ver:June 26, 2018

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill creates an Office of Accessible Technology within the California Department of Technology (CDT) to monitor and facilitate compliance of state electronic and information technology with the requirements of certain state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology, as specified. This bill specifies that the office may have no more than two full-time employees.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Costs (various funds through CDT’s cost recovery model) of $250,000 for CDT to hire positions for the new office.
2. Cost pressures (various funds) for CDT to increase staffing beyond the two allowable positions. Specifically, CDT estimates it will require a total of nine positions and $1.3 million to fulfill the responsibilities of the new office. This results in a cost pressure of over $1 million to fund the additional seven positions that will be necessary to staff the office.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. This bill seeks to improve access to state resources online by persons with disabilities by requiring CDT to establish an office that is dedicated to ensuring state agencies and entities comply with various state and federal accessibility statutes. According to the author:

State and federal law is clear that state agencies and entities must ensure their technology is accessible to persons with disabilities. Despite the existing law, compliance is uneven or non-existent. Recently the California State Auditor has released two reports investigating the accessibility of state agency and entity technology accessibility.

1. Staff comments. This bill establishes certain responsibilities and tasks required of the new office in CDT. However, this bill limits the office to two full-time staff positions even though CDT estimates it will need nine positions to staff the office. The author may wish to amend the bill to better align the responsibilities of the office with the specified staffing levels.

Analysis Prepared by: Jessica Peters / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: June 19, 2018

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION

Ed Chau, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 1396

Author:(Galgiani) – As Amended Ver:May 25, 2018

SENATE VOTE: 38-0

SUBJECT: Accessible state technology

SUMMARY: This bill would create an Office of Accessible Technology within the California Department of Technology (CDT) to monitor and facilitate compliance of state electronic and information technology (EIT) with the requirements of certain state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology, as specified. Specifically, this bill would:

1. Establish the Office of Accessible Technology (Office) within CDT, and specify that the purpose of the Office is to be the central point of responsibility for ensuring state agency and entity compliance with state and federal electronic and information accessibility technology policy and statutes, including specified state and federal laws prohibiting discrimination by governmental entities such as the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), as well as the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 at a Level AA success criteria (WGAC 2.0).
2. Require that the Office be responsible for the following:

• Ensuring that every state agency and entity is in compliance with the accessibility requirements of state and federal EIT policy and statutes, as specified, no later than December 31, 2020.
• Developing, updating, and distributing to state agencies and entities statewide policies, standards, and procedures for ensuring compliance with the accessibility requirements specified above.
• Providing training and assistance to chief information officers (CIOs) appointed pursuant to existing law. 
• Establishing a complaint procedure for state employees and members of the public to register complaints about internet website accessibility problems and for resolving complaints with the Office.

1. Specify that the Office shall be under the direction of the director of CDT within the department who shall lead the office in carrying out its mission and that the Office shall have no more than two full time positions, as specified.
2. Require the director of CDT to prepare a report that shall be posted on the internet website of the office on or before January 1, 2020, and annually thereafter, that includes all of the following information:

• A summary of all developed statewide policies, standards, and procedures for ensuring compliance with the above provisions.
• A listing of all state agencies and state entities that are and are not in compliance with the above provisions.
• A summary of the types of complaints received pursuant to this bill, as specified, and the resolution of the complaints, including any accommodations made due to the lack of compliance.

1. Add to the existing roles and responsibilities of each state agency and each state entity’s CIO, the obligation to ensure that all departments, boards, bureaus, and offices within the state agency, and that the state entity itself, are in compliance with or conform to statutes, including, but not limited to specified state and federal laws prohibiting discrimination by governmental entities such as the ADA and the WCAG 2.0.
2. Define various terms for these purposes.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Provides, as a matter of federal law, under the ADA, that no individual shall be discriminated against on the basis of disability in the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of any place of public accommodation by any person who owns, leases, or leases to, or operates a place of public accommodation. (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12182.)
2. Requires, as a matter of federal law, under Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, that federal agencies make their EIT accessible to people with disabilities. The law applies to all federal agencies when they develop, procure, maintain, or use EIT. Under Section 508, agencies must give disabled employees and members of the public access to information that is comparable to the access available to others. (29 U.S.C. Sec. 794d.)
3. Provides that no person in the State of California shall, on the basis of race, national origin, ethnic group identification, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, color, genetic information, or disability, be denied full and equal access to the benefits of, or be unlawfully subjected to discrimination under, any program or activity that is conducted, operated, or administered by the state or by any state agency, is funded directly by the state, or receives any financial assistance from the state. (Gov. Code Sec. 11135(a).)
4. Provides that with respect to discrimination on the basis of disability, programs and activities subject to the provision above shall meet the protections and prohibitions contained in Section 202 of the ADA, and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof, except that if the laws of this state prescribe stronger protections and prohibitions, the programs and activities subject to the provision above shall be subject to the stronger protections and prohibitions. (Gov. Code Sec. 11135(b).)
5. Provides that the Legislature finds and declares that the ability to utilize EIT is often an essential function for successful employment in the current work world. Further provides that in order to improve accessibility of existing technology, and therefore increase the successful employment of individuals with disabilities, particularly blind and visually impaired and deaf and hard-of-hearing persons, state governmental entities, in developing, procuring, maintaining, or using EIT, either indirectly or through the use of state funds by other entities, shall comply with the accessibility requirements of Section 508 of the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and regulations implementing that act, as specified. (Gov. Code Sec. 7405(a).)
6. Establishes CDT within the Government Operations Agency, under the supervision of the Director of Technology (Director), also known as the State Chief Information Officer. (Gov. Code Sec. 11545(a).)
7. Requires the Director to, among other things, advise the Governor on the strategic management and direction of the state’s information technology (IT) resources and provide technology direction to agency and department chief information officers to ensure the integration of statewide technology initiatives. (Gov. Code Sec. 11545(b).)
8. Requires CDT to improve the governance and implementation of IT by standardizing reporting relationships, roles, and responsibilities for setting IT priorities. (Gov. Code Sec. 11546.1.)
9. Requires the heads of state agencies and entities to appoint CIOs, requires state agencies and entities to report certain information to CDT, and further requires state agencies to take all necessary steps to achieve the targets set forth by CDT in its IT performance management framework and report their progress to the CDT on a quarterly basis. (Gov. Code Sec. 11545.)
10. Requires, before July 1, 2019, and before July 1 biennially thereafter, each state agency, state entity, and CIO, as specified, to post on the home page of the state agency’s or state entity’s internet website a signed certification that they have determined that the internet website is in compliance with specified accessibility standards. Further requires that the Director create a standard form that each state agency’s or state entity’s CIO shall use to determine whether the state agency’s or state entity’s website is in compliance with the necessary accessibility standards. (Gov. Code Sec. 11546.7.)
11. Separately requires any system for the electronic filing and service of documents, including any information technology applications, internet websites, and web-based applications, used by an electronic service provider or any other vendor or contractor that provides an electronic filing and service system to a trial court, regardless of the case management system used by the trial court, to satisfy the following requirements:

• The system must be accessible to individuals with disabilities, including parties and attorneys with disabilities, in accordance with Section 508 of the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, and the regulations implementing that act and its appendices, as specified, and the ADA.
• The system shall comply with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 at a Level AA success criteria. (Code Civ. Proc. Sec. 1010.6(g)(2).)

FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:

1. CDT would incur costs in the initial year likely in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for resources necessary to create the OAT, including staff salary, training, and start-up costs. Additionally, ongoing costs would be in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to maintain the office.
2. Ongoing significant costs to CDT to gather data to develop and maintain the annual report. (GF)

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose of this bill: This bill seeks to improve access to state resources online by persons with disabilities by requiring CDT to establish an office that is dedicated to ensuring state agencies and entities comply with various state and federal accessibility statutes and guidelines, and requiring the Director of CDT to publicly report, among other things, a list of all noncompliant state agencies and entities. This bill is sponsored by Disability Rights California (DRC).
2. Author’s statement: According to the author, “State and federal law is clear that state agencies and entities must ensure their technology is accessible to persons with disabilities. Despite the existing law, compliance is uneven or non-existent. Recently the California State Auditor has released two reports investigating the accessibility of state agency and entity technology accessibility.

In her 2015 report, California State Government Websites: Departments Must Improve Website Accessibility So That Persons With Disabilities Have Comparable Access to State Services Online […] the Auditor found many violations of accessibility standards—some more severe than others—making it difficult for users with disabilities to navigate the sites. Some violations made the underlying content inaccessible to persons with disabilities. One of the key recommendations was that the California Department of Technology should be designated as the lead agency responsible for monitoring changes to accessibility standards, providing training to state entities on web accessibility issues, and reporting on state agencies’ web accessibility testing and results.

In her 2017 report, California Community Colleges: The Colleges Reviewed Are Not Adequately Monitoring Services for Technology Accessibility, and Districts and Colleges Should Formalize Procedures for Upgrading Technology, […] the Auditor made several findings about the failure to monitor technology accessibility.”

The author writes that, currently, “[t]here is no central point of responsibility within state government to ensure that state agencies and entities comply with [such] state and federal law.” This bill would provide that central point in the proposed Office of Accessible Technology, moving forward.

1. California law requires that government websites are accessible: Last year, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed AB 434 (Baker, Ch. 780, Stats. 2017) requiring, before July 1, 2019 and before July 1 biennially thereafter, that the director and CIO of each state agency or entity post on the home page of the agency’s or entity’s internet website a signed certification that the agency’s or entity’s website is in compliance with specified accessibility standards. AB 434 further required that the Director of CDT create a standard form that each state agency’s or state entity’s CIO would be required to use to determine whether the state agency’s or state entity’s website is in compliance with the specified accessibility standards.

That bill was enacted following a 2014 Bureau of State Audits (BSA) report on state government website accessibility (2014-131), wherein BSA found that the state websites they reviewed were “not fully accessible.” Forty seven percent of Californians report using the internet to access government services, yet despite the high levels of usage, BSA found violations of applicable accessibility standards on each department’s website.

According to BSA, “[s]ome of the critical accessibility violations […] identified are so severe that, under certain circumstances, they may prevent persons with disabilities from completing the core tasks necessary to access online services. These violations occurred at three departments and would affect users with a variety of disabilities, including motor disabilities and vision loss.”

Furthermore, BSA pointed out that updated standards are available that could help California make its websites more accessible. “In 2008, shortly after California adopted the first version of the WCAG standards, WCAG 1.0, the W3C issued WCAG 2.0. When it did so, the W3C stated that the WCAG 2.0 standards apply more broadly to different types of web technologies and allow for more effective testing of websites’ accessibility. However, California has not adopted these updated standards. In light of these improvements, it is important that the Legislature amend state law to require departments to meet the WCAG 2.0 standards.” Those standards are now reflected in Government Code Section 11546.7, due to AB 434.

Earlier this year, this Committee approved another bill, AB 2749 (Bonta) which sought to carry over those same AB 434 accessibility standards and apply them to mobile applications, recognizing the importance of ensuring that state services available online are mobile-friendly and equally accessible to all Californians. This bill now seeks to create a dedicated office within CDT to ensure compliance and to list noncompliant state agencies and entities.

1. Bill charges CDT with overseeing EIT compliance with accessibility standards by all state agencies and entities: As indicated above, this bill represents a renewed attempt by the Legislature to ensure that state agencies' and state entities in California comply with accessibility requirements of state and federal statutes and standards. In this new iteration, the bill creates a more formalized structure by which a new, centralized Office would be created in CDT to monitor and facilitate the compliance of state agencies’ and state entities’ EIT to certain state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology. This oversight would be facilitated primarily through the CIOs of those agencies and entities who ultimately have to be approved by the Director of CDT under existing law. Those CIOs, under this bill, would be charged with the added responsibility to ensure that all departments, boards, bureaus, and offices within their state agency are in compliance with, or in the case of state entities, ensure that their state entity conform to, the various state and federal statutes containing accessibility requirements for EIT, and the state’s chief CIO—the Director of CDT—would report on any noncompliant agencies or entities.

Notably, under existing law, in this area of the Government Code, unless a specific definition is given otherwise, the default definition for “state agency” is that it includes every state office, officer, department, division, bureau, board, and commission, except the CSUs. (Gov. Code Sec. 11000.) By and large, provisions pertaining to CDT use the term “state agency” without providing a specific definition, and thus the default definition of Section 11000 applies in those situations. In delineating which state agencies and state entities must have CIOs, however, Section 11546.1 defines “state entity” to means an entity within the executive branch that is under the direct authority of the Governor, including, but not limited to, all departments, boards, bureaus, commissions, councils, and offices that are not defined as a “state agency.” (Gov. Code Sec. 11546.1(e)(2).) “State agency,” in that instance, means the Transportation Agency, Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Department of Veterans Affairs, Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency, Natural Resources Agency, California Health and Human Services Agency, California Environmental Protection Agency, Labor and Workforce Development Agency, and Department of Food and Agriculture. (Gov. Code Sec. 11546.1(e)(1).)

As a result, because this bill provides that this new Office must ensure that “every state agency and entity” complies with the accessibility requirements of federal and state EIT policies and statutes, and in turn defines those terms consistent with these narrow definitions above, this new Office within CDTs would have no ability to provide direction to or require compliance with the accessibility requirements of these federal and state laws and standards by constitutional offices. Constitutional offices, to be clear, are neither listed under “state agency” nor fall under the direct authority of the governor under “state entity.”

If the author’s intent was to include constitutional offices within the provisions of this bill, thereby ensuring that the online services of those offices (such as the Secretary of State’s Office, or the California Attorney General, among others) are also accessible to persons with disabilities, the bill should be amended to specifically apply to those constitutional offices, notwithstanding the more limited definitions above.

1. Clarifying the purpose and obligations of this new Office: Under this bill, this new Office within CDT has the stated “purpose to be the central point of responsibility for ensuring state agency and entity compliance with state and federal” EIT policy and statutes. The Office is responsible, among other things, for providing training and assistance to the CIOs of those agencies and entities “pursuant to Section 11546.1.”

Committee staff notes that under existing law CIOs appointed pursuant to Section 11546.1 are mandated to perform functions beyond the scope of this bill, which is focused on ensuring compliance with accessibility laws and standards in the provision of online governmental services. As a result, the Office of Accessible Technology may not be best suited to train CIOs on how to meet all the obligations of a CIO under that section.

Furthermore, as a matter of public policy, there is a question as to whether this Office should be the central point for “responsibility,” which suggests legal duty and liability. If an agency or entity ignores the guidance of the Office, CDT’s new office arguably should not be held legally responsible to the same extent (if not greater extent) as the violating agency/entity, as this language would imply by this designation. Much of what the agencies and entities do fall outside the direct control of CDT, though CDT does have measures by which it can influence their actions.

The author has accepted the following amendments to clarify the purpose and obligations of this new Office and also ensure consistency to the terminology used surrounding EIT accessibility policy and statutes throughout the bill:

Author’s amendments:

On page 5, lines 5-6, strike “to be the central point of responsibility for ensuring” and insert “to serve as the central point in state government for providing oversight and guidance to ensure”

On page 5, line 6 after “compliance with” strike “state and federal electronic and information accessibility technology policy” and insert “accessibility requirements of state and federal electronic and information technology statutes and standards”

On page 5, lines 14-15, after “training and assistance” insert “specific to accessibility statutes and standards”

1. CDT’s Director required to publicly report noncompliant agencies and entities: Under this bill, the Director of CDT has three new responsibilities, separate and apart from the responsibilities of the new Office, in recognition of the Director’s role as the state’s chief CIO. First, the Director must provide a summary of “all developed statewide policies, standards, and procedures for ensuring compliance with the provisions of this chapter.” It is important to note that this is distinct from a requirement that the Director undertake what would be an enormous obligation on CDT’s Director to summarize those policies, standards, and procedures developed by legal departments of other state agencies and departments. This is only those “developed statewide” policies, standards, and procedures. The only entity with authority to develop such policies, standards, and procedures with statewide applicability is presumably CDT.

Second, as indicated in Comment 3 above, the Director is required to create a public list, online, of all state agencies and entities that are not in compliance with this bill. Relatedly, and last, the Director is required to provide a summary of complaints received, the resolution of those complaints, including any accommodations made due to the lack of compliance. All of this information is to be provided on the website of the new Office by January 1, 2020 and annually thereafter. As a matter of public policy, while such reporting provisions seek to provide transparency, they are also potentially problematic in that they put CDT in the precarious position of creating a public list based on varying degrees of violations, with information that will most certainly be used as a basis for lawsuits against agencies and departments that CDT oversees in its function as the state entity with IT expertise, as opposed to general legal expertise which typically resides with the Attorney General’s office.

The author has accepted the following amendments to remove the public reporting requirement of non-compliant offices in favor of a reporting requirement within CDT’s existing annual IT report giving progress updates as to the state’s compliance with accessibility standards:

Author’s amendments:

On page 7, line 12, insert “(a)”

On page 7, strike line 15 and on line 17 strike “(a) A” and insert “a”

On page 7, strike lines 21-29, inclusive and insert “(b) Beginning January 1, 2020, the Director of Technology shall include in the Department of Technology’s annual information technology report required pursuant to Section 11545 an assessment of the state’s compliance, or progress in achieving compliance, with the act adding this chapter.”

1. Other clarifying amendments: The author has accepted the following amendments to correct drafting errors, reinsert a reference to “enterprise architecture” from existing law, ensure that the list of statutes and standards is exhaustive consistently throughout this bill and consistent with similar existing law (see proposed Sections 11549.20(a) and 11549.22(a); and Civ. Code Sec. 1010.6(g)(2)), and make other clarifying changes:

Author’s amendments:

On page 3, line 19 strike “policy, and statutes, including, but not limited to” and insert “policy and the following statutes and standards: (i) Sections 7405 and 11134, Section 508 of the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. Sec. 794d), as amended, the regulations implementing that act set forth in Part 1194 of Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations and Appendices A, C, and D of that part, and the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.); and (ii) the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 at a minimum Level AA success criteria.”

On page 3, strike lines 20-26 inclusive

On page 3, lines 37-38, strike “policy, and statutes, including, but not limited to” and insert “policy and enterprise architecture, and the following statutes and standards: (i) Sections 7405 and 11134, Section 508 of the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. Sec. 794d), as amended, the regulations implementing that act set forth in Part 1194 of Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations and Appendices A, C, and D of that part, and the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12101 et seq.); and (ii) the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 at a minimum Level AA success criteria.”

On page 3, strike lines 38-40, inclusive

On page 4, strike lines 1-4, inclusive

On page 5, line 10 and on page 6, line 5, strike “and” before “the regulations”

On page 5, line 19, strike out “within the department”

On page 5, lines 24-28 strike out “no more than two full-time positions committed to providing staff for the office and they shall be individuals who have existing training in compliance with state and federal electronic and information accessibility technology policy and statues” and insert “no more than two full-time positions assigned to the office, which the Department shall, pursuant to the state civil service statutes, either contract or establish and fill with a person who has relevant knowledge and experience, including training, in compliance with accessibility requirements of state and federal electronic and information technology statutes and standards”

1. Arguments in support: The sponsor of this bill, DRC, argues that “access to governmental services and information has significantly expanded through the availability of technology, including government websites. This technology has the potential to significantly increase the availability of persons with disabilities in accessing information and services. Unfortunately, the growing use of governmental services and information, state and state-entity online websites and technology are still not compliant with long-standing state and federal disability accessibility law. The problem is not with the law, but rather the leadership for ensuring compliance with the law.”

DRC cites two recently released California State Auditor (Auditor) reports, which “concluded that state departments must improve website accessibility so that persons with disabilities have comparable access to state services online. Additionally, the Auditor recommended that CDT be designated as the lead agency responsible for monitoring changes to accessibility standards; provide training to state entities on web accessibility issues; and report on state agencies’ web accessibility testing and results.”

1. Related legislation: AB 2749 (Bonta) See Comment 3.
2. Prior legislation: AB 434 (Baker, Ch. 780, Stats. 2017) See Comment 3.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Disability Rights California (sponsor)

Association of California State Employees with Disabilities

Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organization

Western Center on Law & Poverty

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: Ronak Daylami / P. & C.P. / (916) 319-2200

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 1396

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE GOVERNMENTAL ORG. COMMITTEE: 12-0, 4/24/18

AYES: Dodd, Wilk, Bradford, Cannella, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hill, Hueso, Lara, Portantino, Vidak

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 5/25/18

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Bradford, Hill, Nielsen, Wiener

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Disability Rights California

DIGEST:

This bill establishes the Office of Accessible Technology (OAT), within the Department of Technology (CDT), to be the central point of responsibility for ensuring state and entity compliance with state and federal electronic and information accessibility technology policy and statutes, as specified.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes CDT, within the Government Operations Agency, headed by the Director of Technology (Director).
2. Provides that CDT is responsible for the approval and oversight of information technology (IT) projects by, among other things, consulting with agencies during initial project planning to ensure that project proposals are based on well-defined programmatic needs, and considering feasible alternatives.
3. Defines a “state agency” to mean the Transportation Agency, Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Department of Veteran Affairs, Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency, Natural Resources Agency, California Health and Human Services Agency, California Environmental Protection Agency, Labor and Workforce Development Agency, and Department of Food and Agriculture.
4. Defines a “state entity” to mean an entity within the executive branch that is under the direct authority of the Governor, including, but not limited to, all departments, boards, bureaus, commissions, councils, and offices that are not included in the definition of a state agency.
5. Requires each state agency and each state entity to have a chief information officer with specified duties relating to IT.

This bill:

1. Establishes the OAT, under the direction of the Director within the CDT who shall lead the OAT in carrying out its mission.
2. Specifies that the OAT shall have no more than two full-time positions, and that they be individuals who have existing training in compliance with state and federal electronic and information accessibility technology policy and statutes.
3. Provides that the OAT shall be responsible for all of the following:
   1. Ensuring that every state agency and entity is in compliance with the accessibility requirements of state and federal electronic and IT policy and statutes, as specified, no later than December 31, 2020.
   2. Developing, updating, and distributing to state agencies and entities statewide policies, standards, and procedures for ensuring compliance with the accessibility requirements, as specified.
   3. Providing training and assistance to all appointed chief information officers.
   4. Establishing a complaint procedure for state employees and members of the public to register complaints about Internet Web site accessibility problems, and for resolving those complaints.
4. Requires the Director to prepare a report and post the report on the OAT’s Internet Web site on or before January 1,2020, and annually thereafter.
5. Requires the chief information officer of each state agency and each state entity to ensure that all departments, boards, bureaus, and offices within the state agency are in compliance with state and federal electronic and information accessibility technology policy and statutes, as specified.
6. States that nothing in this bill shall limit the rights of any person to pursue any remedies or causes of action that they may have under any state or federal law to enforce compliance with specified laws or obligations.

Background

Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs conducted by federal agencies, programs receiving federal financial assistance, federal employment, and in the employment practices of federal contractors. In 1998, Section 508 was added to establish requirements for electronic and information technology developed, maintained, procured, or used by the Federal government. Section 508 requires federal electronic and information technology to be accessible to people with disabilities, including employees and members of the public.

American with Disabilities Act of 1990. The ADA was enacted by the United States Congress in 1990. The ADA is a wide ranging civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on disability. It affords similar protections against discrimination to American with disabilities as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which made discrimination based on race, religion, sex, national origin, and other characteristics illegal. In addition, the ADA required employers to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities, and imposes accessibility requirements on public accommodations. The ADA disabilities include both mental and physical medical conditions.

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0: The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is an international community where member organizations, a full-time staff, and the public work together to develop Web standards. In 2008, W3C produced the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 as a revision to the original guidelines produced in 1999. These guidelines cover a wide range of recommendations for making Web content more accessible, primarily for individuals with disabilities. According to W3C, following these guidelines will make content accessible to a wider range of individuals with disabilities, including blindness and low vision, deafness and hearing loss, learning disabilities, cognitive limitations, limited movement, speech disabilities, photosensitivity, and combinations of these.

Comments

Purpose of the bill. According to the author, “access to governmental services and information on vital resources for the constituents of California has significantly expanded through the availability of technology. Despite the growing use of government services and information online there is no central point of responsibility for ensuring that the services and information is delivered through technology and websites that are fully accessible to persons with disabilities. SB 1396 is essential to ensure that persons with disabilities have the same access to information and services as persons without disabilities.”

In addition to establishing the OAT, this bill requires the Director, and the chief information officer of each state agency and state entity, to ensure that all departments, boards, bureaus, and offices within the state agency or entity are in compliance with state IT policy and statutes, including but not limited to; Section 508 of the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 434 (Baker, Chapter 780, Statutes of 2017) required the director and chief information officer of each state agency or state entity to post a signed certification on the front page of the state agency's or entity’s Internet Web site that it is in compliance with specified accessibility standards.

SB 624 (Anderson, 2015) would have established the OAT to monitor and facilitate compliance of state IT with the requirements of certain state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology. (Held in the Senate Appropriations Committee)

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, CDT would incur costs in the initial year likely in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for resources necessary to create the OAT, including staff salary, training, and start-up costs. Additionally, ongoing costs would be in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to maintain the office.

Ongoing significant costs to CDT to gather data to develop and maintain the annual report. (GF)

SUPPORT: (Verified 5/25/18)

Disability Rights California (source)

Association of California State Employees with Disabilities

Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organization

Western Center on Law & Poverty

OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/25/18)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Disability Rights California argues that “access to governmental services and information has significantly expanded through the availability of technology, including government websites. This technology has the potential to significantly increase the availability of persons with disabilities in accessing information and services. Unfortunately, the growing use of governmental services and information, state and state-entity online websites and technology are still not compliant with long-standing state and federal disability accessibility law. The problem is not with the law, but rather the leadership for ensuring compliance with the law.”

Prepared by:

5/29/18 11:40:43

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2017 - 2018 Regular Session

SB 1396 (Galgiani) - Accessible state technology

Bill Summary:

SB 1396 would establish the Office of Accessible Technology (OAT) within the Department of Technology (CDT) to monitor and facilitate compliance of state electronic and information technology (IT) with state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology.

*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM – SUSPENSE FILE ***********

The following information is revised to reflect amendments

adopted by the committee on May 25, 2018

Fiscal Impact:

• CDT would incur costs in the initial year likely in the hundreds of thousands of dollars for resources necessary to create the OAT, including staff salary, training, and start-up costs. Ongoing costs would be in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars per year to maintain the office. (GF)
• Ongoing significant costs to CDT to gather data to develop and maintain the annual report. (GF)

Author Amendments:

Remove the Chief position and make the Director of CDT the lead of the office. Limit the office to two full-time positions. Remove the requirements for each agency or entity to have its own complaint procedure. Remove the advisory panel. Remove the audit requirements.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2017 - 2018 Regular Session

SB 1396 (Galgiani) - Accessible state technology

This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

SB 1396 would establish the Office of Accessible Technology (OAT) within the Department of Technology (CDT) to monitor and facilitate compliance of state electronic and information technology (IT) with state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology.

Fiscal Impact:

• CDT would incur costs in the initial year of approximately $1.3 million for resources necessary to create the OAT, including staff salary, training, and start-up costs. Ongoing costs would be approximately $1.2 million per year to maintain the office. (GF)
• Ongoing significant costs to CDT to gather data to develop and maintain the annual report. (GF)
• Ongoing costs to CDT, likely in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, to contract with the State Auditor to conduct regular compliance audits of state agencies. (GF)
• Potentially significant costs to the Department of Rehabilitation, The Department of General Services, The University of California, The California Community Colleges, the California State University, and any other state entity that is included on the Advisory Panel for workload to prepare for quarterly meetings and to travel to and attend those meetings (GF / Special Fund)

Background:

Under the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 508 (added in 1998), federal government entities are required to ensure that information technology is accessible for persons with disabilities. For example, a web page that uses pictures or graphics should include captions to allow electronic readers to provide information to individuals with vision impairment to access information provided in the picture or graphic.

Current state law requires state entities to comply with the requirements of Section 508 and related federal regulations with respect to information technology systems controlled by, or funded by, state entities.

In 2008, the World Wide Web Consortium produced the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 which covers a number of recommendations for making Web content more accessible, primarily for individuals with disabilities. Current law requires state agencies and entities to post on their website home pages, by January 1, 2019, a certification that the website complies with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0.

Proposed Law:

This bill would:

• Specify at a minimum how all departments boards, bureaus, and offices within the state agency must be in compliance with the state information technology policy and statutes;
• Specify at a minimum what policies and statutes the chief information officer of each state entity must ensure that the entity conforms with;
• Establish the OAT within CDT, and provide that the OAT is to be the central point of responsibility for ensuring state agency and entity compliance with state and federal electronic and information accessibility technology policy and statutes, as specified;
• Specify that the OAT shall be under the direction of the Chief, who shall be appointed by, and serve at the pleasure of, the Governor, subject to Senate confirmation;
• Specify the responsibilities of the Chief, as specified;
• Require the Chief to establish and co-chair a Disability Accessibility Technology Advisory Panel, that meets at least quarterly, that includes the Director of Rehabilitation (co-chair), the Director of General Services, the President of the University of California, the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, the Chancellor of the California State University, disability rights organizations, employee labor organizations, and any other state agencies and state entities the Chief shall determine necessary to advise and consult with the Chief on the implementation and operations of this chapter and the policies, standards, and procedures related to accessible technology;
• Require the Chief to prepare a report, to be posted to the OAT Internet Web site by January 1, 2020, and annually thereafter, as specified;
• Prohibit anything in this bill from limiting the rights of any person to pursue any remedies or causes of action that they may have under any state or federal law to enforce compliance with those laws or the obligations;
• Specify that the provisions of this bill shall become operative only upon an appropriation by the Legislature.

Related Legislation:

AB 103 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 17, Statutes of 2017) among other things, required a system for the electronic filing and service of documents to be accessible to individuals with disabilities.

AB 434 (Baker, Chapter 780, Statutes of 2017) required the director and chief information officer of each state agency or state entity to post a signed certification on the front page of the state agency's or entity’s Internet Web site that it is in compliance with specified accessibility standards.

SB 624 (Anderson, 2015) would have established the OAT to monitor and facilitate compliance of state IT with the requirements of certain state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology. This bill was held in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION

Senator Bill Dodd

Chair

2017 - 2018 Regular

Bill No: SB Hearing Date: 4/24/2018

SUBJECT:

DIGEST: This bill establishes the Office of Accessible Technology (OAT), within the Department of Technology (CDT), to monitor and facilitate compliance of state electronic and information technology (IT) with state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology, subject to an appropriation by the Legislature.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes CDT, within the Government Operations Agency, headed by the Director of CDT, who is also known as the State Chief Information Officer (CIO).
2. Provides that CDT is responsible for the approval and oversight of IT projects by, among other things, consulting with agencies during initial project planning to ensure that project proposals are based on well-defined programmatic needs, and considering feasible alternatives.
3. Requires by January 1, 2019, and biennially thereafter, that state agencies, state entities, and specified chief information officers post on the agency or entity Internet Web site that the site is in compliance with statutory accessibility requirements and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0, as provided.
4. Provides that in order to improve accessibility of existing technology, and therefore increase the successful employment of individuals with disabilities, that state governmental entities, in developing, procuring, maintaining, or using IT, shall comply with specified accessibility requirements.
5. Provides that no person in the State of California shall, on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, ethnic group identification, age, mental disability, physical disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, or sexual orientation, be unlawfully denied full and equal access to the benefits of, or be unlawfully subjected to discrimination under, any program or activity that is conducted, operated, or administered by any state agency.
6. Defines a “state agency” to mean the Transportation Agency, Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Department of Veteran Affairs, Business, Consumer Services, and Housing Agency, Natural Resources Agency, California Health and Human Services Agency, California Environmental Protection Agency, Labor and Workforce Development Agency, and Department of Food and Agriculture.
7. Defines a “state entity” to mean an entity within the executive branch that is under the direct authority of the Governor, including, but not limited to, all departments, boards, bureaus, commissions, councils, and offices that are not included in the definition of a state agency.
8. Requires each state agency and each state entity to have a chief information officer with specified duties relating to IT.
9. Specifies that any report required or requested by law to be submitted to the members of either house, or the Legislature generally, shall be submitted as a printed copy to the Secretary of State, as an electronic copy to the Chief Clerk of the Assembly, and as an electronic or printed copy to the Legislative Counsel.

This bill:

1. Establishes the OAT, within the CDT, and provides that the OAT is the central point of responsibility for ensuring state agency and entity compliance with state and federal electronic and information accessibility technology policy and statutes, as specified.
2. Specifies that the OAT shall be under the direction of a Chief of the Office of Accessible Technology (Chief), who shall be appointed by, and serve at the pleasure of, the Governor, subject to Senate confirmation.
3. Provides that the Chief shall report to the CIO and shall lead the office in carrying out its mission, and provides that the chief shall possess knowledge and expertise in evaluating compliance with the state and federal electronic and information accessible technology policy and statutes, as specified.
4. Provides that the Chief shall be responsible for all of the following:
   1. Ensuring that every state agency and entity is in compliance with the accessibility requirements of state and federal electronic and IT policy and statutes, as specified, no later than December 31, 2020.
   2. Developing, updating, and distributing to state agencies and entities statewide policies, standards, and procedures for ensuring compliance with the accessibility requirements, as specified.
   3. Providing training and assistance to all appointed chief information officers.
   4. Contracting with the California State Auditor to conduct compliance audits to determine state agency and entity compliance, developing corrective action plans for any state agency or entity that is out of compliance, and requires the results of all audits to be posted on OAT’s Internet Web site.
   5. Establishing a complaint procedure for state employees and members of the public to register complaints about Internet Web site accessibility problems and for resolving complaints; and in any case in which a complaint is founded on the failure of a state agency or entity, the agency shall provide, upon request of the complainant, and immediate accommodation to meet the needs of the complainant.
   6. Recommending to the CIO regulations as necessary to implement the provisions of this bill.
5. Requires that the Chief shall establish and co-chair a Disability Accessibility Technology Advisory Panel (Panel) that includes the Director of Rehabilitation, who shall co-chair the Panel, the Director of General Services, the President of the University of California, the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges the Chancellor of the California State University, disability rights organizations, employee labor organizations, any other state agencies and state entities the Chief determines necessary.
6. Specifies that the Panel shall advise and consult with the Chief on the implementation and operations of this bill, and the policies, standards, and procedures related to accessible technology.
7. Specifies that the Panel shall meet as scheduled by the co-chairs, but no less than quarterly.
8. Requires the Chief to submit an annual report to the appropriate committees of the Legislature no later than December 31, that shall include all of the following information:
   1. A summary of all developed statewide policies, standards, and procedures for ensuring compliance with the provisions of this bill.
   2. A listing of all state agencies and state entities that are and are not in compliance with the provisions of this bill.
   3. Any audit findings made as a result of state agency and state entity compliance audits.
   4. A summary of the types of complaints received and the resolution of the complaints, including any accommodations made due to a lack of compliance.
9. Includes ensuring compliance with additional state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology among the duties of each state agency or entity’s chief information officer, as specified.
10. States that nothing in this bill shall limit the rights of any person to pursue any remedies or causes of action that they may have under any state or federal law to enforce compliance with specified laws or obligations.
11. Specifies that this bill shall only become operative upon the Legislature making an appropriation to implement the provisions of the bill, and thereafter shall remain operative.

Background

Purpose of the bill. According to the author, “access to governmental services and information on vital resources for the constituents of California has significantly expanded through the availability of technology. Despite the growing use of government services and information online there is no central point of responsibility for ensuring that the services and information is delivered through technology and websites that are fully accessible to persons with disabilities. SB 1396 is essential to ensure that persons with disabilities have the same access to information and services as persons without disabilities.”

In addition to establishing the OAT, this bill requires the Chief and the chief information officer of each state agency to ensure that all departments, boards, bureaus, and offices within the state agency are in compliance with state IT policy and statutes, including but not limited to, Section 508 of the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the federal Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0.

Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973 prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability in programs conducted by federal agencies, programs receiving federal financial assistance, federal employment, and in the employment practices of federal contractors.

In 1998, Section 508 was added to establish requirements for electronic and information technology developed, maintained, procured, or used by the Federal government. Section 508 requires federal electronic and information technology to be accessible to people with disabilities, including employees and members of the public.

American with Disabilities Act of 1990. The ADA was enacted by the United States Congress in 1990. The ADA is a wide ranging civil rights law that prohibits discrimination based on disability. It affords similar protections against discrimination to American with disabilities as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which made discrimination based on race, religion, sex, national origin, and other characteristics illegal. In addition, the ADA required employers to provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities, and imposes accessibility requirements on public accommodations. The ADA disabilities include both mental and physical medical conditions.

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0: The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) is an international community where member organizations, a full-time staff, and the public work together to develop Web standards. In 2008, W3C produced the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 as a revision to the original guidelines produced in 1999. These guidelines cover a wide range of recommendations for making Web content more accessible, primarily for individuals with disabilities. According to W3C, following these guidelines will make content accessible to a wider range of individuals with disabilities, including blindness and low vision, deafness and hearing loss, learning disabilities, cognitive limitations, limited movement, speech disabilities, photosensitivity, and combinations of these.

The California Department of Technology: CDT is the result of three Governor’s Reorganization Plans (GRPs)—in 2005, 2009, and 2012—and related legislation that ultimately consolidated statewide IT functions into a single entity. The most recent GRP established CDT within the newly created Government Operations Agency with a department-level head, the CIO, who reports directly to the Governor on issues relating to IT. CDT has lead responsibility for approval and oversight of state IT projects, providing data center and telecommunications services, managing IT procurement, and establishing and enforcing IT plans and policies.

Policy considerations. As currently written, this bill requires the Chief to submit an annual report to the appropriate committees of the Legislature on a variety of issues including but not limited to, a summary of compliance with this bill, a listing of state agencies not in compliance with this bill, any audit findings, and a summary of the types of complaints received and any resolution of the complaints. In the interest of transparency and the public dissemination of information, the author may wish to amend this bill to require that the findings be posted on OAT’s Internet Web site no later than January 1, following the year that this bill becomes operative, and annually thereafter, rather than submitted as a report to the Legislature.

Prior/Related Legislation

AB 103 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 17, Statutes of 2017) among other things, required a system for the electronic filing and service of documents to be accessible to individuals with disabilities.

AB 434 (Baker, Chapter 780, Statutes of 2017) required the director and chief information officer of each state agency or state entity to post a signed certification on the front page of the state agency's or entity’s Internet Web site that it is in compliance with specified accessibility standards.

SB 624 (Anderson, 2015) would have established the OAT to monitor and facilitate compliance of state IT with the requirements of certain state and federal laws relating to the accessibility of technology. (Held in the Senate Appropriations Committee)

AB 2711 (Portantino, 2008) would have required the Secretary of the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency to develop a comprehensive state technology and innovation strategy to guide future state expenditures and activities. (Held in the Assembly Appropriations Committee)

SB 105 (Burton, Chapter 1102, Statutes of 2002) established within the State Department of Rehabilitation, a Division of Services for the Blind and Visually Impaired and the Deaf and hard of Hearing with the purpose of enlarging economic opportunities and enhancing the self-sufficiency of persons who are blind, visually impaired, deaf, and hard of hearing, and assisting them to gain competitive employment.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

SUPPORT:

Disability Rights California (Source)

Association of California State Employees with Disabilities

Coalition of California Welfare Rights Organization

Western Center on Law & Poverty

OPPOSITION:

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: Disability Rights California (DRC) argues that “access to governmental services and information has significantly expanded through the availability of technology, including government websites. This technology has the potential to significantly increase the availability of persons with disabilities in accessing information and services. Unfortunately, the growing use of governmental services and information, state and state-entity online websites and technology are still not compliant with long-standing state and federal disability accessibility law. The problem is not with the law, but rather the leadership for ensuring compliance with the law.”

Further, DRC cites two recently released California State Auditor (Auditor) reports, which “concluded that state departments must improve website accessibility so that persons with disabilities have comparable access to state services online. Additionally, the Auditor recommended that CDT be designated as the lead agency responsible for monitoring changes to accessibility standards; provide training to state entities on web accessibility issues; and report on state agencies’ web accessibility testing and results.”