AB 2063 directs the Legislative Counsel, working with the Assembly and Senate Rules committees, to make a prescribed set of legislative materials available to the public in electronic form. The list includes bill texts and histories, committee analyses, vote records, veto messages, the California Codes and Constitution, and — notably — letters submitted through the Legislature’s internet portal starting with bills introduced in the 2027–28 Regular Session.
The bill also sets access rules and technical expectations: publication must occur via the state’s largest nonproprietary, nonprofit cooperative public computer network in multiple formats; audiovisual recordings must remain downloadable for at least 20 years before secure archival; personal information can be retained only to provide service; and the Legislative Counsel cannot charge for access. The combination expands public access while leaving several privacy and operational questions for implementation.
At a Glance
What It Does
Requires the Legislative Counsel to publish a defined catalog of legislative materials online and to add constituent letters submitted via the Legislature’s internet portal for bills introduced in 2027–28 and after. It mandates multi-format publication through the largest nonproprietary, nonprofit cooperative public computer network and requires documentation of electronic formats.
Who It Affects
Directly affects the Legislative Counsel and its IT operations, the Assembly and Senate Rules committees (advisory role), the operators of the specified public computer network, advocacy organizations and members of the public who submit letters, journalists, researchers, and state archival programs.
Why It Matters
The bill centralizes and standardizes public access to legislative records and creates a new, routinized public record of citizen input submitted online. That expands transparency but also imposes new technical, archival, and privacy responsibilities on the Legislature and any partner network operator.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 2063 amends the statute governing California’s legislative information system to require the Legislative Counsel, with advice from both houses’ Rules committees, to post a wide array of legislative materials online. The statutory list is detailed: calendars, committee schedules and membership, full text of bills in all versions, bill histories and statuses, committee analyses, vote records, veto messages, the California Codes and Constitution, statutes since 1993, and a link to a list of required state and local reports.
The bill inserts a new item: letters submitted through the Legislature’s internet portal in connection with bills, effective for bills introduced during the 2027–28 Regular Session onward. The Legislature also expresses an intent that those letters not disclose confidential information or otherwise infringe on individual privacy.
On technical access, the statute requires use of the largest nonproprietary, nonprofit cooperative public computer network as the access point, and it directs publication in one or more formats and by one or more means to maximize feasible public access. Documentation describing the digital formats must be available through the same network.
The bill distinguishes material already maintained in the Legislative Counsel’s legislative information system from other materials: items in that system must be posted in the shortest feasible time after they are available in the system; other items must be posted in the shortest feasible time after they are available to the Legislative Counsel.The bill imposes three operational guardrails. First, personal information about someone who accesses the published information may be retained only for the purpose of providing service to that person.
Second, the Legislative Counsel may not charge a fee for access to materials posted via the designated network. Third, audiovisual recordings of legislative proceedings that the Legislature causes to be made must remain accessible and downloadable via the internet for a minimum of 20 years after creation, and after that period they must be archived in a secure format.
The statute clarifies these electronic access obligations are in addition to any other electronic or print distribution and do not change the State’s copyright or proprietary interests in the materials.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Commencement: the requirement to publish letters applies to bills introduced during the 2027–28 Regular Session and thereafter.
Network requirement: the bill specifies publication via the “largest nonproprietary, nonprofit cooperative public computer network,” rather than a proprietary state portal.
Audio retention: audiovisual recordings must be downloadable and publicly accessible for at least 20 years, after which they must be archived in a secure format.
No-access fee: the Legislative Counsel is prohibited from imposing any fee or charge as a condition of accessing the materials on the specified network.
Format transparency: documentation that describes the electronic digital formats used for published materials must itself be publicly accessible on the same network.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Baseline catalogue of legislative materials to publish
This portion lists the core items the Legislative Counsel must make publicly available in electronic form: calendars, committee schedules and membership, bill texts in all stages, bill histories and statuses, committee analyses, vote information, veto messages, the California Codes and Constitution, statutes enacted since 1993, and a link to required reports. Practically, it centralizes material that has previously been scattered across committee sites, the Legislature’s portal, and third‑party repositories, creating a single statutory mandate for comprehensive online publication.
New requirement to publish letters submitted via the internet portal
This new subparagraph requires that letters submitted through the Legislature’s internet portal in connection with each bill be made publicly available, beginning with bills introduced in the 2027–28 Regular Session. The statute also includes a legislative intent statement directing that letters made public not disclose confidential information or infringe on privacy. The text, however, stops short of spelling out an operational process for redaction, notice, or exemptions for sensitive content.
Audiovisual recording access and retention
The bill requires that audiovisual recordings of legislative proceedings remain accessible and downloadable via the internet for a minimum of 20 years following the recording date, after which they must be archived in a secure format. That creates a defined retention and access lifecycle for audiovisual material and pushes a long-term storage and migration obligation onto the Legislature or its designated hosting entity.
Publishing channel, timing, and format documentation
Publication must occur by means of access via the largest nonproprietary, nonprofit cooperative public computer network, and materials should be offered in one or more formats and by one or more means to provide the greatest feasible access. The bill requires that documentation describing the electronic digital formats be publicly available on that network. It also sets a timing standard: materials already in the Legislative Counsel’s information system must be published in the shortest feasible time after appearing there; other materials must be published in the shortest feasible time after reaching the Legislative Counsel.
Privacy, fees, and complementary distribution
Personal information about users who access published materials may be retained only to provide service to that person, and the Legislative Counsel may not charge a fee for access to the materials on the specified network. The statute emphasizes that this electronic access is additional to any other electronic or print distribution the Legislature may provide, preserving multiple distribution channels while forbidding paywalls for the designated network access.
State copyright and proprietary interests preserved
The bill explicitly states that publishing material under this section does not alter or relinquish any copyright or other proprietary interest of the State in the materials. That preserves the State’s control over reuse terms even while making materials publicly accessible.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Journalists and researchers — they get centralized, machine‑accessible access to bill texts, committee analyses, vote records, and constituent letters, which reduces time spent aggregating records from disparate sources.
- Civic tech and open‑data communities — publicly documented data formats and a single large access point make it easier to build tools, archives, and data services that surface legislative activity and public input.
- Members of the public and advocacy groups — constituent letters submitted through the portal will become visible in the public record, increasing the visibility of public input and allowing groups to track how frequently they or others engage on specific bills.
- State archivists and historians — the 20‑year downloadable window for audiovisual records creates a predictable preservation horizon and ensures long-term access to legislative proceedings.
Who Bears the Cost
- Legislative Counsel and state IT teams — they must implement expanded publishing, format documentation, timeline guarantees, and long‑term archival procedures, all of which require staff, procurement, and ongoing hosting budgets.
- Operator of the chosen public computer network — hosting a comprehensive, downloadable legislative record at scale will impose storage, bandwidth, security, and accessibility obligations on the network operator.
- Submitters of letters (private individuals and organizations) — the change increases the risk that personal or sensitive content they include in portal submissions becomes public with limited clarity on redaction options or notice.
- Advocacy organizations and campaign shops — their coordinated letter campaigns may be publicly visible and more easily monitored or litigated, potentially exposing strategy or donor information depending on submission practices.
- State budget — increased data hosting and archival needs, plus potential legal and compliance work to manage privacy concerns, will likely require additional appropriations or reallocation of existing resources.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is transparency versus privacy and practicability: the bill furthers public access by making more legislative material — including citizen letters — routine public records, but it provides only general privacy intent language and leaves significant implementation choices (redaction, hosting, timing, and funding) to administrators, forcing trade-offs between rapid, comprehensive disclosure and careful protection of individuals’ confidential information.
The bill expands public access but leaves key implementation mechanics undefined. It instructs the Legislative Counsel to publish letters submitted through the Legislature’s portal, yet it provides only an aspirational privacy statement rather than a concrete redaction standard, exemption list, or notice procedure for individuals whose correspondence might contain sensitive data.
That gap forces implementers to choose between broadly publishing submissions (with attendant privacy and legal risk) or instituting internal review and redaction workflows that slow publication and increase costs.
The statutory command to use the “largest nonproprietary, nonprofit cooperative public computer network” raises procurement and interoperability questions: the phrase is not self‑defining and may implicate third‑party network operators, memoranda of understanding, or new contracts. Likewise, the timing standard—posting in the “shortest feasible time”—is operationally vague and could produce inconsistent implementation or litigation over what is feasible.
The 20‑year downloadable window for audiovisual material sets a useful minimum but creates long‑term storage, format‑migration, and security obligations without funding or technical standards in the text. Finally, the bill preserves state copyright, which means access does not equal unfettered reuse; users and developers will need to confirm licensing terms separately.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.