SB 368 California Senate · 2011-2012 Regular Session

Developmental services: decisionmaking.

Summary
Existing law authorizes a peace officer, without a warrant, to take into temporary custody a minor when the officer has reasonable cause for believing that the minor is in danger, as specified. Existing law provides for a hearing process to deem the child a dependent child of the court. Under existing law, during the hearing process the court is authorized to temporarily limit the right of a parent or guardian to make educational decisions for the child and to temporarily appoint, or make itself, these decisions, as specified. Under existing law, once the minor is adjudged a dependent child of the court, the court may limit the ability of a parent or guardian to make educational decisions for the minor. This bill would authorize the court to limit the right of a parent or guardian to make decisions about developmental services and to appoint a responsible adult, or to make itself, those decisions, as specified. Under existing law, a minor may be adjudged a ward of the court for specified reasons. The court may limit the control to be exercised over the ward by a parent or guardian, including educational decisionmaking, and appoint a responsible adult, as specified, to make those decisions. This bill would extend those provisions to decisions relating to developmental services. Existing law authorizes, during the pendency of any juvenile proceeding, the minor's counsel or the court to express a doubt as to the minor's competency. Existing law requires proceedings to be suspended if the court finds substantial evidence raises a doubt as to the minor's competency. Existing law requires the court to appoint an expert, as specified, to evaluate whether the minor suffers from a mental disorder or developmental immaturity, or other condition and, if so, whether the condition impairs the minor's competency. This bill would require that the court appoint an expert, as specified, to evaluate whether the minor suffers from a developmental disability. This bill would also require the court to appoint the director of a regional center for developmentally disabled individuals, or his or her designee, to evaluate the minor if the expert believes the minor is developmentally disabled, as prescribed, and would make related changes. Under existing law, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, the State Department of Developmental Services is authorized to contract with regional centers to provide support and services to individuals with developmental disabilities. The services and supports to be provided to a regional center consumer are contained in an individual program plan (IPP) , developed in accordance with prescribed requirements through an individual program planning process. Existing law defines "authorized representative" for purposes of the act to include a person having legal custody of a minor claimant or a person with written authority to act as representative of the claimant. This bill would add to the definition of "authorized representative" a responsible adult appointed through a court order made pursuant to the limitation of developmental services decisionmaking authority, as set forth above, and who does not have a conflict of interest, as defined. The bill would give a court-appointed developmental services decisionmaker the right to access the minor's information, to participate in the IPP process, and to participate in the fair hearing process. This bill would incorporate additional changes in Sections 4514 and 5328 of the Welfare and Institutions Code, proposed by SB 146, to be operative only if SB 146 and this bill are both chaptered and become effective on or before January 1, 2012, and this bill is chaptered last.
Bill status signed all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2011
Committee Review
Sep 2011
Senate Passage
Aug 2011
Assembly Passage
Sep 2011
Signed into Law
Oct 2011
Introduced Feb 15, 2011 Signed Oct 4, 2011
Floor votes · Senate Jun 2, 2011 · Assembly Sep 8, 2011

How they voted

39–0
Passed
Total votes 39
Jun 2, 2011
D Democratic24
24 Yea
100% Yea
R Republican15
15 Yea
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea All Nay Mixed No data
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
37
Key actions
9
Committee
6
Amendments
4
Oct 4, 2011
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Sep 8, 2011
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (75-0-4)
assembly
Sep 8, 2011
Upper · Passed
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 2411.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
upper
Sep 7, 2011
Introduced
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
upper
Aug 31, 2011
Upper · Passed
Action rescinded whereby the bill was read a third time, passed, and ordered to Senate.
upper
Aug 25, 2011
Introduced
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
upper
Aug 18, 2011
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. Ordered to consent calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (August 17).
lower
Jun 29, 2011
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (June 28).
lower
Jun 9, 2011
Committee
Referred to Com. on HUM. S.
lower
Jun 2, 2011
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (39-0)
senate
May 27, 2011
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 8. Noes 0. Page 1116.) (May 26).
upper
Apr 27, 2011
Upper · Passed
Hearing postponed by committee.
upper
Apr 12, 2011
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 641.) (April 12). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Feb 24, 2011
Committee
Referred to Com. on HUMAN S.
upper
Feb 15, 2011
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors

Sponsors

Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
CL
Carol Liu
DDemocratic
CA
25