Protective proceedings.
Summary
Existing law, the Guardianship-Conservatorship Law, generally establishes the standards and procedures for the appointment of, and termination of an appointment for, a guardian or conservator of a person, an estate, or both. Under existing law, a court may appoint the Director of Developmental Services as guardian or conservator of the person and estate, or person or estate, of a developmentally disabled person, in which case a specified order of preferences for deciding between equally qualified prospective conservators does not apply. Existing law authorizes the director to have these conservatorship duties performed through a regional center, or an agency or individual designated by the regional center, as specified. This bill would revise various procedures in the conservatorship process. Among other provisions, the bill would provide that, when equally qualified as other potential conservators, the conservatee's preference and the prior conservator's preference, to a prescribed extent, should prevail. For petitions filed after January 1, 2023, the bill would prohibit a regional center from acting as a conservator but would authorize the regional center to act as a designee of the director, as specified. The bill would require the Director of Developmental Services to develop guidelines to mitigate conflicts that may arise when a regional center is acting as designee while at the same time providing service coordination activities to the same person. The bill would also require the petition for conservatorship to include alternatives to conservatorship considered by the petitioner or proposed conservator and reasons why those alternatives are not suitable, alternatives tried by the petitioner or proposed conservators, if any, and the reasons why those alternatives do not meet the conservatee's needs. This bill would require the court to provide conservators with written information concerning the conservator's obligations to support the conservatee. The bill would require the court, within 30 days of the establishment of a conservatorship and annually thereafter, to provide conservatees under the court's jurisdiction with written information regarding their rights, including a personalized list of the rights the conservatee retains. The bill would expand the annual duties and reporting requirements of court investigators conducting required visits to assess the progress of the conservatorship. The bill would revise the procedures for termination of a limited conservatorship by requiring the court to terminate an uncontested petition for termination under specified circumstances, and without a hearing. The bill, upon appropriation, would require the Judicial Council to establish a conservatorship alternatives program within each self-help center in each superior court. Among other goals, the conservatorship alternatives program would provide information relating to less restrictive alternatives to conservatorship. The bill would designate the duties of court staff reviewing petitions under the conservatorship alternatives program. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to adopt a rule of court that specifies educational requirements for staff attorneys, examiners, investigators, and attorneys appointed as legal counsel in guardianship and conservatorship cases, as well as judges who are regularly assigned to hear probate matters. This bill would require the Judicial Council to include the less restrictive alternatives to conservatorship in the required subject matter to meet those educational requirements. The bill would establish a supported decisionmaking process and a process for entering into a supported decisionmaking agreement for adults with disabilities, as defined. The bill would define "supported decisionmaking" as an individualized process of supporting and accommodating an adult with a disability to enable them to make life decisions without impeding the self-determination of the adult. The bill would authorize an adult with a disability to request and have present one or more adults, including supporters, in any meeting or communication. The bill would set forth the duties of supporters and would specify the elements of a written supported decisionmaking agreement, if one is used.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2022
Committee Review
Aug 2022
Assembly Passage
May 2022
Senate Passage
Aug 2022
Signed into Law
Sep 2022
Introduced Jan 19, 2022
Signed Sep 30, 2022
Floor votes · Senate Aug 29, 2022 · Assembly May 25, 2022
How they voted
35–0
Passed · 5 other
Total votes 40
Aug 29, 2022
D
Democratic31
93% Yea
R
Republican9
66% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
30
Key actions
11
Committee
8
Amendments
12
Sep 30, 2022
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 30, 2022
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 79. Noes 0.).
lower
Aug 29, 2022
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
lower
Aug 29, 2022
Upper · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 35. Noes 0. Page 5187.).
upper
Aug 22, 2022
Upper · Passed
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
upper
Aug 11, 2022
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
upper
Aug 11, 2022
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 11).
upper
Aug 2, 2022
Committee
In committee: Referred to suspense file.
upper
Jun 28, 2022
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 27). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Jun 23, 2022
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HUMAN S.
upper
Jun 22, 2022
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on HUMAN S. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (June 21).
upper
Jun 1, 2022
Committee
Referred to Coms. on JUD. and HUMAN S.
upper
May 25, 2022
Lower · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 75. Noes 0. Page 4949.)
lower
May 19, 2022
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
lower
May 19, 2022
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (May 19).
lower
Apr 6, 2022
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to suspense file.
lower
Mar 17, 2022
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Mar 16, 2022
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 15, 2022
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (March 15).
lower
Mar 8, 2022
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Mar 7, 2022
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on JUD. Read second time and amended.
lower
Jan 27, 2022
Committee
Referred to Com. on JUD.
lower
Jan 20, 2022
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee February 19.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
BM
Brian Maienschein
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1663
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1663. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline