California 2021-2022 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly 1 D cosponsors

AB 99 — School safety: crisis intervention and targeted violence prevention program.

Last action — Ordered to inactive file at the request of Senator Stern.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2021-2022 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

Existing law requires school districts and county offices of education to be responsible for the overall development of a comprehensive school safety plan for each of their schools operating a kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive. Existing law requires a comprehensive school safety plan to include, among other things, procedures for conducting tactical responses to criminal incidents, including procedures related to individuals with guns on school campuses and at school-related functions. Existing law requires, commencing January 1, 2023, a school official whose duties involve regular contact with pupils in any of grades 6 to 12, inclusive, as part of a middle school or high school, and who is alerted to or observes any threat or perceived threat, as defined, to immediately report the threat or perceived threat to law enforcement, as provided. Existing law requires, commencing January 1, 2023, with the support of the local educational agency, the local law enforcement agency or schoolsite police, as applicable, to immediately conduct an investigation and threat assessment, as specified. Existing law requires the investigation and threat assessment to include a review of the firearm registry of the Department of Justice and, if justified by a reasonable suspicion that it would produce evidence related to the threat or perceived threat, a schoolsite search. This bill would require the governing board of a school district to adopt policies within the comprehensive school safety plan, on or before August 1, 2023, for the establishment of a crisis intervention and targeted violence prevention program that assists in the identification and assessment of pupils whose behavior may indicate a threat that is not imminent to the health and safety of pupils, school staff, or other community members and that provides referrals to appropriate services. The bill would require those policies to include, among other things, provisions requiring each school district to establish at least one multidisciplinary threat assessment and resource team and provisions identifying how this team will identify threats and distinguish the types of threatening behavior that may represent a physical threat to the school community, as provided. If, after an investigation and assessment in response to a report of a threat or perceived threat described above, the law enforcement agency determines the threat or perceived threat is not imminent, the bill would authorize the law enforcement agency to refer the identified pupil to the local educational agency's multidisciplinary threat assessment and resources team. Under the bill, a school district and any of its employees acting within the scope of their employment would be immune from civil liability for any damages allegedly caused by, arising out of, or relating to compliance with these requirements, except as provided. By imposing new duties on school districts, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the State Department of Education to make materials pertaining to multidisciplinary threat assessment and resource teams available on its internet website and to update those materials as necessary. 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 the statutory provisions noted above.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Ordered to inactive file at the request of Senator Stern.

  2. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  3. Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.

  4. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 11).

  5. In committee: Referred to suspense file.

  6. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  7. Withdrawn from committee.

  8. Re-referred to Com. on G.O.

  9. Withdrawn from committee.

  10. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  11. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (June 30).

  12. In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  13. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on ED.

  14. Referred to Coms. on ED. and G.O.

  15. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  16. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 1594.)

  17. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  18. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 16. Noes 0.) (May 20).

  19. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  20. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  21. Read second time and amended.

  22. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 0.) (April 22).

  23. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on HIGHER ED. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (April 7). Re-referred to Com. on HIGHER ED.

  24. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  25. Re-referred to Com. on ED.

  26. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on ED. Read second time and amended.

  27. Referred to Coms. on ED. and HIGHER ED.

  28. Read first time.

  29. From printer. May be heard in committee January 9.

  30. Introduced. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (1)

  • Portantino

Not signed on (120)

120 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 120 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Do pass as amended

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 2000
Unaffiliated 4000
Republican 1000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Portantino — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Bates — Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 5000
Democratic 1000
Republican 1000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Yea
Kamlager — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

AB 99 Irwin Assembly Third Reading

Passed 78 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 27000
Unaffiliated 41000
Republican 10000
Total 78000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (78)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Holden — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Wood — Yea
Smith — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Ting — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Medina — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Villapudua — Yea
Salas — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Low — Yea
Levine — Yea
Daly — Yea
Gray — Yea
Burke — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Chau — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Luz Rivas — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Bennett, Steve Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Lee, Alex Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Ward, Christopher M. Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Davies, Laurie Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Yea
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 16 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 8000
Democratic 6000
Republican 2000
Total 16000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (16)
Member Party Vote
Levine — Yea
Holden — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Chau — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Luz Rivas — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Davies, Laurie Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 12 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 4000
Republican 2000
Unaffiliated 6000
Total 12000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (12)
Member Party Vote
Low — Yea
Medina — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Levine — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety education
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 99 do?
Existing law requires school districts and county offices of education to be responsible for the overall development of a comprehensive school safety plan for each of their schools operating a kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive. Existing law requires a comprehensive school safety plan to include, among other things, procedures for conducting tactical responses to criminal incidents, including procedures related to individuals with guns on school campuses and at school-related functions. Existing law requires, commencing January 1, 2023, a school official whose duties involve regular contact with pupils in any of grades 6 to 12, inclusive, as part of a middle school or high school, and who is alerted to or observes any threat or perceived threat, as defined, to immediately report the threat or perceived threat to law enforcement, as provided. Existing law requires, commencing January 1, 2023, with the support of the local educational agency, the local law enforcement agency or schoolsite police, as applicable, to immediately conduct an investigation and threat assessment, as specified. Existing law requires the investigation and threat assessment to include a review of the firearm registry of the Department of Justice and, if justified by a reasonable suspicion that it would produce evidence related to the threat or perceived threat, a schoolsite search. This bill would require the governing board of a school district to adopt policies within the comprehensive school safety plan, on or before August 1, 2023, for the establishment of a crisis intervention and targeted violence prevention program that assists in the identification and assessment of pupils whose behavior may indicate a threat that is not imminent to the health and safety of pupils, school staff, or other community members and that provides referrals to appropriate services. The bill would require those policies to include, among other things, provisions requiring each school district to establish at least one multidisciplinary threat assessment and resource team and provisions identifying how this team will identify threats and distinguish the types of threatening behavior that may represent a physical threat to the school community, as provided. If, after an investigation and assessment in response to a report of a threat or perceived threat described above, the law enforcement agency determines the threat or perceived threat is not imminent, the bill would authorize the law enforcement agency to refer the identified pupil to the local educational agency's multidisciplinary threat assessment and resources team. Under the bill, a school district and any of its employees acting within the scope of their employment would be immune from civil liability for any damages allegedly caused by, arising out of, or relating to compliance with these requirements, except as provided. By imposing new duties on school districts, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would require the State Department of Education to make materials pertaining to multidisciplinary threat assessment and resource teams available on its internet website and to update those materials as necessary. 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 the statutory provisions noted above.
Who sponsors AB 99?
AB 99 is sponsored by Irwin, Jacqui (Democratic) and Portantino.
What is the current status of AB 99?
This bill died with 2021-2022 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track AB 99?
Track AB 99 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 99

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 99

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →