AB 193 California Assembly · 2015-2016 Regular Session

Mental health: conservatorship hearings.

Summary
Existing law provides a procedure for the appointment of a conservator for a person who is determined to be gravely disabled as a result of a mental disorder or an impairment by chronic alcoholism, and requires an officer, including a county public guardian or a county mental health program, to conduct a conservatorship investigation and render a written report to the court of his or her investigation. Under existing law, a professional person in charge of an agency providing comprehensive evaluation or a facility providing intensive treatment for a gravely disabled person may recommend a conservatorship for that person, and the agency is required to disclose any records or information that may facilitate an investigation. Existing law requires the officer providing conservatorship investigation, when he or she concurs with the recommendation of the professional person or facility, to petition the superior court in the patient's county of residence for a conservatorship. Existing law also provides for the establishment of a conservatorship for a person who is unable to properly provide for his or her personal needs or is substantially unable to manage his or her finances. This bill would authorize the court, if a conservatorship has already been established under the Probate Code, and after a hearing attended by the conservatee, unless he or she waives presence, and the conservatee's counsel, to order an investigation from the officer providing conservatorship investigation if the court, in consultation with a licensed physician or psychologist, as specified, providing comprehensive evaluation or intensive treatment, determines, in a specified proceeding, that the conservatee may be gravely disabled as a result of a mental disorder or impairment by chronic alcoholism and is unwilling to accept, or is incapable of accepting, treatment voluntarily. The bill would also require the court to appoint counsel to a conservatee if he or she cannot afford counsel. The bill would require the officer providing conservatorship investigation to petition the superior court in the patient's county of residence to establish conservatorship if he or she concurs with the conservatorship investigation order of the court, and to file a copy of his or her report with the court. The bill would require a conservator to disclose any records or information that may facilitate the investigation. The bill would also make conforming changes. By expanding the duties of the county officer providing conservatorship investigation, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Bill status vetoed 4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2015
Committee Review
Sep 2015
Assembly Passage
Jun 2015
Senate Passage
Sep 2015
Vetoed
Oct 2015
Introduced Jan 28, 2015 Vetoed Oct 11, 2015
Floor votes · Senate Sep 8, 2015 · Assembly Jun 2, 2015

How they voted

330
Passed
Total votes 33
Sep 8, 2015
D Democratic23
23 Yea
100% Yea
R Republican10
10 Yea
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea All Nay Mixed No data
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
31
Key actions
7
Committee
11
Amendments
6
Jan 15, 2016
Vetoed
Consideration of Governor's veto stricken from file.
lower
Oct 11, 2015
Vetoed
Vetoed by Governor.
lower
Sep 9, 2015
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 2996.).
lower
Sep 8, 2015
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (33-0)
senate
Sep 8, 2015
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after September 10 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
lower
Aug 27, 2015
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 27).
upper
Aug 17, 2015
Committee
In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.
upper
Jul 6, 2015
Committee
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jul 2, 2015
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (June 30).
upper
Jun 22, 2015
Committee
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Jun 11, 2015
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
upper
Jun 2, 2015
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (70-0-2)
assembly
May 28, 2015
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
lower
May 28, 2015
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 28).
lower
May 6, 2015
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Apr 21, 2015
Committee
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (April 21). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 15, 2015
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Apr 14, 2015
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended.
lower
Apr 13, 2015
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 16. Noes 0.) (April 7).
lower
Feb 9, 2015
Committee
Referred to Coms. on HEALTH and JUD.
lower
Jan 29, 2015
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee February 28.
lower
1 primary · 3 co-sponsors

Sponsors