BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 1624 |
By: Simmons |
Transportation |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties have expressed concern over new technology soon to be used by a joint airport board that will enable customers to secure advanced airport parking over the Internet. Specifically, these parties contend that the collection of sensitive customer data such as name, address, and credit card information increases the risk of identity theft, invasion of privacy, and unsolicited marketing should someone obtain the information through a public open records request. C.S.H.B. 1624 seeks to address this issue by making certain personal identifying information collected by certain joint airport boards confidential and exempt from disclosure under state public information law.
|
||||||
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
|
||||||
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
|
||||||
ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 1624 amends the Transportation Code to make personal identifying information collected by a joint airport board operating a county or municipal airport for which the constituent agencies are populous home-rule municipalities confidential and exempt from disclosure under state public information law if the information collected is in relation to a commercial online payment system and includes a person's name, address, email address, and phone number; account number, password, payment transaction activity, toll or charge record, or credit, debit, or other payment card number; and other personal financial information.
|
||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2017.
|
||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 1624 may differ from the original in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and formatted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||
|