Public contracts: information technology: contractor performance assessment report.
Summary
Existing law establishes in state government the Department of Technology within the Government Operations Agency. Existing law provides that the Department of Technology is responsible for the approval and oversight of specified information technology projects. Existing law requires specified contracts for the acquisition of information technology projects to be made by or under the supervision of the Department of Technology. Existing law sets forth requirements for the acquisition of goods and services by state agencies and sets forth the various responsibilities of the Department of General Services and other state agencies in overseeing and implementing state contracting procedures and policies. Existing law requires, unless otherwise expressly provided, that all contracts for the acquisition of information technology goods or services be made by or under the supervision of the Department of General Services. This bill would require the Director of Technology, by January 1, 2017, to develop a standardized contractor performance assessment report system to evaluate the performance of a contractor on any information technology contract or project reportable to the Department of Technology, as provided. The bill would require the Director of Technology to implement that evaluation system for all reportable information technology contracts and projects, as specified, and would require that system to be used in addition to any other procurement procedures when evaluating or awarding those contracts or projects.
Bill status
vetoed
4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2015
Committee Review
Sep 2015
Assembly Passage
Jun 2015
Senate Passage
Sep 2015
Vetoed
Oct 2015
Introduced Feb 23, 2015
Vetoed Oct 7, 2015
Floor votes · Senate Sep 10, 2015 · Assembly Jun 2, 2015
How they voted
24–7
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 33
Sep 10, 2015
D
Democratic23
100% Yea
R
Republican10
70% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
25
Key actions
6
Committee
8
Amendments
5
Jan 15, 2016
Vetoed
Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
lower
Oct 7, 2015
Vetoed
Vetoed by Governor.
lower
Sep 10, 2015
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (24-7-2)
senate
Sep 10, 2015
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 80. Noes 0. Page 3058.).
lower
Sep 9, 2015
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
lower
Aug 31, 2015
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
upper
Aug 27, 2015
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 27).
upper
Aug 17, 2015
Committee
In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.
upper
Jul 14, 2015
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 1.) (July 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jun 11, 2015
Committee
Referred to Com. on G.O.
upper
Jun 2, 2015
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (70-0-2)
assembly
May 28, 2015
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
lower
May 28, 2015
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 28).
lower
Apr 29, 2015
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Apr 15, 2015
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (April 15). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Mar 5, 2015
Committee
Referred to Com. on A. & A.R.
lower
Feb 24, 2015
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 26.
lower
1 primary · 1 co-sponsor
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 522
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 522. 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