Information technology security.
Do you support it?
Want to know if it passes?
We'll email you when AB 670 moves — a committee vote, a floor vote, or a signature. Nothing else.
Free forever · unsubscribe in one click.
Your answer was recorded either way.
Which district are you in?
Your ZIP is all we need to match you to your own representatives — so we can tell you how they voted on AB 670.
You're tracking AB 670
We'll email you the moment it moves.
AB 670 — Information technology security.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 518, Statutes of 2015.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 25, 2015. Enacted.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
1 sponsor
1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Single-party support
Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 8 recorded votes so far.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Summary
(1) Existing law establishes, within the Government Operations Agency, the Department of Technology under the supervision of the Director of Technology, who is also known as the State Chief Information Officer. The department is generally responsible for the approval and oversight of information technology projects by, among other things, consulting with state agencies during initial project planning to ensure that project proposals are based on well-defined programmatic needs. Existing law establishes, within the department, the Office of Information Security under the supervision of the Chief of the Office of Information Security. Existing law sets forth the authority of the office, including, but not limited to, the authority to conduct, or require to be conducted, an independent security assessment of any state agency, department, or office, the cost of which is to be funded by the state agency, department, or office being assessed. This bill would additionally require the office, in consultation with the Office of Emergency Services, to require no fewer than 35 independent security assessments of state entities each year and determine basic standards of services to be performed as part of an independent security assessment. The bill would require the state agency, department, or office being assessed to fund the costs of its independent security assessment. The bill would require the office and the Office of Emergency Services to receive the complete results of an independent security assessment. The bill would prohibit, during the process of conducting an independent security assessment, the disclosure of information and records concerning the independent security assessment, except that the information and records would be authorized to be transmitted to state employees and state contractors with specific duties relating to the independent security assessment. The bill would require the disclosure of the results of a completed independent security assessment under state law. This bill would require the office, in consultation with the Office of Emergency Services, to rank state entities on an information security risk index, as specified. The bill would require the office to report to the Department of Technology and the Office of Emergency Services any state entity found noncompliant with information security requirements. The bill would further require the office to notify the Office of Emergency Services, Department of the California Highway Patrol, and the Department of Justice of any criminal or alleged criminal cyber activity affecting any state entity or critical infrastructure of state government. The bill would authorize the office to conduct or require to be conducted an audit of information security to ensure program compliance, the cost of which to be funded by the state agency, department, or office being audited. This bill would authorize the Military Department to perform an independent security assessment as described above. This bill would require state entities, as defined, rather than certain information security officers, to comply with policies and procedures issued by the office. The bill would also make technical, nonsubstantive changes. (2) Existing law requires that a statute that limits the public's right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings to demonstrate the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would limit access to information and records of an ongoing independent security assessment and would make findings to demonstrate the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 10/06/15 - Chaptered Current pdf October 06, 2015
- Enrolled 09/14/15 - Enrolled pdf September 14, 2015
- Amended 09/03/15 - Amended Senate pdf September 03, 2015
- Amended 06/23/15 - Amended Senate pdf June 23, 2015
- Amended 06/15/15 - Amended Senate pdf June 15, 2015
- Amended 04/06/15 - Amended Assembly pdf April 06, 2015
- Introduced 02/25/15 - Introduced pdf February 25, 2015
- AB670 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 518, Statutes of 2015.
-
Approved by the Governor.
-
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.
-
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 3000.).
-
Assembly Rule 77 suspended. (Page 2990.)
-
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after September 10 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 2594.).
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (August 27).
-
In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.
-
In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
-
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Withdrawn from committee.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (June 29). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on G.O.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on G.O.
-
Referred to Coms. on G.O. and JUD.
-
In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
-
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 1771.)
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 28).
-
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (April 7). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Re-referred to Com. on P. & C.P.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on P. & C.P. Read second time and amended.
-
Referred to Com. on P. & C.P.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee March 28.
-
Read first time. To print.
Sponsors
- Jacqui Irwin · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Irwin, Jacqui Democratic
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 70 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 79 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 99% | 0% | 0% | 1% |
How each member voted (80)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Achadjian | — | Yea |
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Brough | — | Yea |
| Brown | — | Yea |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Mathis | — | Yea |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Olsen | — | Yea |
| Ridley-Thomas | — | Not Voting |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Dababneh | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Frazier | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Harper | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Chu | — | Yea |
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Linder | — | Yea |
| Low | — | Yea |
| Mayes | — | Yea |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| O'Donnell | — | Yea |
| Obernolte | — | Yea |
| Perea | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Rodriguez | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Burke | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Kim | — | Yea |
| Lopez | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Yea |
| Chiu | — | Yea |
| Chávez | — | Yea |
| Baker | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Santiago | — | Yea |
| Steinorth | — | Yea |
| Thurmond | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Hadley | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Jim Patterson | — | Yea |
| Lorena Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| Travis Allen | — | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Irwin, Jacqui | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 36 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 39 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 98% | 0% | 0% | 3% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Anderson | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Yea |
| Morrell | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Not Voting |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Vidak | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Nguyen, Stephanie | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 86% | 0% | 0% | 14% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Not Voting |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 11 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 12 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 92% | 0% | 0% | 8% |
How each member voted (13)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Block | — | Yea |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Vidak | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Not Voting |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 69 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 79 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 99% | 0% | 0% | 1% |
How each member voted (80)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Achadjian | — | Yea |
| Baker | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Brough | — | Yea |
| Brown | — | Yea |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Mathis | — | Yea |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Obernolte | — | Yea |
| Rodriguez | — | Yea |
| Ridley-Thomas | — | Yea |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Frazier | — | Yea |
| Harper | — | Yea |
| Linder | — | Yea |
| Low | — | Yea |
| Mayes | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Olsen | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Chu | — | Yea |
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Burke | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Kim | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Lopez | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Chiu | — | Yea |
| Chávez | — | Not Voting |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Dababneh | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| O'Donnell | — | Yea |
| Perea | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Santiago | — | Yea |
| Steinorth | — | Yea |
| Thurmond | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Hadley | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| Travis Allen | — | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Irwin, Jacqui | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Yea |
| Patterson, Joe | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (17)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (11)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Low | — | Yea |
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Baker | — | Yea |
| Dababneh | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 670 do?
- (1) Existing law establishes, within the Government Operations Agency, the Department of Technology under the supervision of the Director of Technology, who is also known as the State Chief Information Officer. The department is generally responsible for the approval and oversight of information technology projects by, among other things, consulting with state agencies during initial project planning to ensure that project proposals are based on well-defined programmatic needs. Existing law establishes, within the department, the Office of Information Security under the supervision of the Chief of the Office of Information Security. Existing law sets forth the authority of the office, including, but not limited to, the authority to conduct, or require to be conducted, an independent security assessment of any state agency, department, or office, the cost of which is to be funded by the state agency, department, or office being assessed. This bill would additionally require the office, in consultation with the Office of Emergency Services, to require no fewer than 35 independent security assessments of state entities each year and determine basic standards of services to be performed as part of an independent security assessment. The bill would require the state agency, department, or office being assessed to fund the costs of its independent security assessment. The bill would require the office and the Office of Emergency Services to receive the complete results of an independent security assessment. The bill would prohibit, during the process of conducting an independent security assessment, the disclosure of information and records concerning the independent security assessment, except that the information and records would be authorized to be transmitted to state employees and state contractors with specific duties relating to the independent security assessment. The bill would require the disclosure of the results of a completed independent security assessment under state law. This bill would require the office, in consultation with the Office of Emergency Services, to rank state entities on an information security risk index, as specified. The bill would require the office to report to the Department of Technology and the Office of Emergency Services any state entity found noncompliant with information security requirements. The bill would further require the office to notify the Office of Emergency Services, Department of the California Highway Patrol, and the Department of Justice of any criminal or alleged criminal cyber activity affecting any state entity or critical infrastructure of state government. The bill would authorize the office to conduct or require to be conducted an audit of information security to ensure program compliance, the cost of which to be funded by the state agency, department, or office being audited. This bill would authorize the Military Department to perform an independent security assessment as described above. This bill would require state entities, as defined, rather than certain information security officers, to comply with policies and procedures issued by the office. The bill would also make technical, nonsubstantive changes. (2) Existing law requires that a statute that limits the public's right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings to demonstrate the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would limit access to information and records of an ongoing independent security assessment and would make findings to demonstrate the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest.
- Who sponsors AB 670?
- AB 670 is sponsored by Irwin, Jacqui (Democratic).
- What is the current status of AB 670?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 25, 2015. Enacted.
- Where can I track AB 670?
- Track AB 670 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 670
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of AB 670
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →