California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB434

Introduced
2/13/17  
Introduced
2/13/17  
Refer
3/20/17  
Refer
3/20/17  
Report Pass
3/21/17  
Report Pass
3/21/17  
Refer
3/22/17  
Refer
3/22/17  
Report Pass
4/19/17  
Refer
4/19/17  
Report Pass
4/26/17  
Report Pass
4/26/17  
Refer
4/26/17  
Refer
4/26/17  
Refer
5/10/17  
Refer
5/10/17  
Report Pass
5/26/17  
Report Pass
5/26/17  
Engrossed
5/30/17  
Engrossed
5/30/17  
Refer
5/30/17  
Refer
5/30/17  
Refer
6/8/17  
Report Pass
7/3/17  
Report Pass
7/3/17  
Refer
7/3/17  
Report Pass
7/11/17  
Report Pass
7/11/17  
Refer
7/11/17  
Refer
7/11/17  
Report Pass
8/21/17  
Report Pass
8/21/17  
Refer
8/21/17  
Refer
8/21/17  
Enrolled
9/13/17  
Enrolled
9/13/17  
Chaptered
10/14/17  
Chaptered
10/14/17  
Passed
10/14/17  

Caption

State Web accessibility: standard and reports.

Impact

This legislation impacts state laws by formally establishing web accessibility requirements that agencies must adhere to. The need for biannual certifications means that state agencies are required to maintain compliance with accessibility standards continually. This act emphasizes the state's commitment to making public services accessible to everyone and places the onus on state officials to ensure that their digital platforms meet these standards.

Summary

Assembly Bill 434, introduced by Baker, focuses on enhancing web accessibility standards for state agencies in California. It mandates that each state agency or entity's director and chief information officer certify on their website that it complies with specific accessibility standards as set out in the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. This measure is aimed at ensuring that all individuals, regardless of disability, can effectively access information and services provided by state entities.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 434 is generally positive, as it aligns with broader efforts to promote inclusivity for individuals with disabilities. Supporters argue that this bill represents a critical step towards transparency and accountability in government service delivery. However, it also raises concerns among some state officials regarding the feasibility and resource implications of meeting these new requirements.

Contention

Key points of contention include the potential administrative burden on state agencies to consistently meet the outlined standards and effectively report their compliance. Critics argue that the bill, while well-intentioned, could strain resources, particularly for smaller agencies or those already facing budget constraints. Concerns also exist about the lack of guidelines on how these standards are to be enforced and monitored, which could lead to inconsistencies in implementation.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB2749

State agencies: state entities: Internet Web site accessibility: standards: mobile-friendly: requirements.

CA SB937

State agencies: web accessibility.

CA SB1396

Accessible state technology.

CA AB915

Small and disadvantaged business enterprises.

CA AB793

Recycling: plastic beverage containers: minimum recycled content.

CA SB66

California Council on the Future of Transportation: advisory committee: autonomous vehicle technology.

CA AB2019

Small business enterprises.

CA AB1483

Housing data: collection and reporting.