Joint Technology Committee approves introduction of IT procurement transparency bill after debate on RFIs and market research

The Joint Technology Committee voted to introduce draft legislation titled Purchasing Transparency for Information Technology Procurement, moving the bill forward after questions about request-for-information (RFI) language and market-research requirements.

The bill would require the Joint Technology Committee (JTC) to conduct an annual review of IT project rates and billing practices; require that a budget request to JTC include responses to a request for information and formal market research for major projects; remove a continuous appropriation for the IT revolving fund; and repeal the office's authority to approve procurement contracts related to IT projects while permitting the office to be a party to procurement processes. The draft also requires certain governmental bodies to issue RFIs and allows JTC to review RFI responses and market research in executive session when necessary.

Senator Rodriguez moved to introduce the draft legislation. Members discussed whether the bill's language should specify an RFI or use broader terms such as a scope-of-work document or other pre-procurement instruments. Senator Marchman suggested broadening the language beyond an RFI to encompass other procurement processes; Nicole Myers of Legislative Legal Services and a staff member identified in the transcript as Ms. Martin explained the drafter's intent and how statute currently treats RFIs and formal market research.

Nicole Myers said the drafter "has a request for information for a major information technology project and then, market research for, IT procurement that is not a major information technology project." Ms. Martin explained that an RFI is typically a pre-procurement step and that the bill distinguishes RFIs for major projects from market research for smaller ones. Ms. Martin also said the bill provides JTC the option to use executive session "in case that there is sensitive pricing information because typically for RFIs ... we want the JTC to be able to look at the responses to the RFIs before the award is given."

Representative Pascal and other members pressed for clearer definitions of terms such as "market research" and for more detail about where in the procurement timeline the required information would be produced. Rep. Haskell said committee goals and the committee's process remain somewhat unclear to newer members, while a committee staffer (Falco) and staff analyst described how the bill would standardize information provided to committee staff and members so projects arrive with baseline procurement details.

During roll call, members recorded votes as follows: Bazely — Aye; Pasco — No; Rodriguez — Aye; Weinberg — Yes; Marchman — Aye; the chair recorded a Yes. The chair announced the motion passed and the draft will be introduced. The transcript records that senators Bazely, Rodriguez, Weinberg, Marchman and the chair voted in favor and that Pasco voted no; no second was recorded in the transcript.

Committee members indicated the draft can be amended before formal introduction and that staff will continue work with Legislative Legal Services and involved agencies to refine terms such as RFI and market research. The transcript does not record a final bill number or effective dates; those details were described in the meeting as "not specified."