Identity theft: local agencies.
Summary
Existing law requires any state office, officer, or executive agency that owns or licenses computerized data that includes personal information to disclose any breach of the security of the system following discovery or notification of the breach in the security of the data to any resident of California whose unencrypted personal information was, or is reasonably believed to have been, acquired by an unauthorized person. This bill would expand this disclosure requirement to apply to a breach of computerized data that is owned or licensed by a local agency. The bill would create a state-mandated local program by imposing new duties on local agencies. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 1798.29 of the Civil Code proposed by SB 46 that would become operative if this bill and SB 46 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2013
Committee Review
Sep 2013
Assembly Passage
May 2013
Senate Passage
Sep 2013
Signed into Law
Sep 2013
Introduced Feb 22, 2013
Signed Sep 27, 2013
Floor votes · Senate Sep 9, 2013 · Assembly May 29, 2013
How they voted
35–0
Passed
Total votes 35
Sep 9, 2013
D
Democratic25
100% Yea
R
Republican10
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
29
Key actions
12
Committee
12
Amendments
1
Sep 27, 2013
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Sep 10, 2013
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 3118.).
lower
Sep 9, 2013
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (35-0)
senate
Sep 9, 2013
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after September 11 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Aug 30, 2013
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 30).
upper
Aug 13, 2013
Upper · Passed
In committee: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
upper
Jun 25, 2013
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (June 25). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jun 13, 2013
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
May 29, 2013
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (63-0-1)
assembly
May 24, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 24).
lower
May 15, 2013
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Apr 30, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: to consent calendar. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (April 30). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 18, 2013
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (April 17). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Apr 3, 2013
Lower · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
lower
Mar 7, 2013
Committee
Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and JUD.
lower
Feb 24, 2013
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 26.
lower
Feb 22, 2013
Introduced
Introduced. To print.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Nora Campos
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1149
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1149. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline