California 2023-2024 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly 1 D cosponsors

AB 369 — Foster care: independent living.

Last action — In committee: Held under submission.

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 2023-2024 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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 establishes the Independent Living Program (ILP) , which has among its purposes providing training in daily living skills, budgeting, locating and maintaining housing, and career planning for foster youth up to 21 years of age. Existing federal law authorizes a state, under certain circumstances, to expand eligibility for the ILP to former foster youth who have not attained 23 years of age. Existing law requires the State Department of Social Services, with the approval of the federal government, to amend the foster care state plan to permit all eligible children to be served by the ILP up to 21 years of age. This bill would require, by June 30, 2025, the department to develop a plan, in consultation with, among others, county ILP administrators, to, among other things, update and upgrade curriculum to facilitate successful transitions to adulthood. This bill would expand the age for all eligible children to be served by the ILP up to 23 years of age, in those counties that opt to provide those extended services. Existing law authorizes a child who is declared a ward or dependent child of the court who is 16 years of age or older, or a nonminor dependent, as defined, who is participating in a transitional independent living case plan to retain resources with a combined value of $10,000, consistent with federal law, and still remain eligible to receive public social services. Existing law requires the written approval of a child's probation officer or social worker for withdrawal of the child's savings, as specified. Existing law establishes the Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) program, under which counties provide payments to foster care providers on behalf of qualified children in foster care. This bill would remove that monetary value limit and instead allow those nonminor dependents to retain resources consistent with federal law. The bill would prohibit those resources from being evaluated after the initial determination for the same foster care episode to determine continued eligibility for a foster care maintenance payment. The bill would also authorize a nonminor dependent who reenters foster care, as specified, and is ineligible for federal financial participation due to cash savings in an amount that is greater than allowed, to receive aid in the form of state AFDC-FC if certain requirements are met. Because counties would administer these extended benefits, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. In committee: Held under submission.

  2. In committee: Referred to APPR suspense file.

  3. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 19). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  4. Referred to Com. on HUMAN S.

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

  6. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 76. Noes 0. Page 1792.)

  7. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

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

  9. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (May 18).

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

  11. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (March 28). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  12. Referred to Com. on HUM. S.

  13. From printer. May be heard in committee March 4.

  14. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"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

AB 369 Zbur Assembly Third Reading

Passed 76 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 44003
Republican 13000
Unaffiliated 19001
Total 76004
% of votes cast 95%0%0%5%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Holden — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Villapudua — Yea
Ting — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Low — Yea
Wood — Yea
Essayli — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Mathis — Not Voting
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Luz Rivas — Yea
Vince Fong — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Addis, Dawn Democratic Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Not Voting
Alvarez, David Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bains, Jasmeet Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Bennett, Steve Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Lee, Alex Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
McKinnor, Tina Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Ortega, Liz Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Not Voting
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Not Voting
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Schiavo, Pilar Democratic Yea
Soria, Esmeralda Democratic Yea
Valencia, Avelino Democratic Yea
Ward, Christopher M. Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Wilson, Lori D. Democratic Yea
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Davies, Laurie Republican Yea
Dixon, Diane Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Hoover, Josh Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea
Sanchez, Kate Republican Yea
Ta, Tri Republican Yea
Wallis, Greg Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 11 Yea · 0 Nay · 5 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 9001
Unaffiliated 2001
Republican 0003
Total 11005
% of votes cast 69%0%0%31%
How each member voted (16)
Member Party Vote
Holden — Yea
Mathis — Not Voting
Wendy Carrillo — Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
Ortega, Liz Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Not Voting
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Not Voting
Dixon, Diane Republican Not Voting
Sanchez, Kate Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

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

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 5000
Unaffiliated 1000
Republican 1001
Total 7001
% of votes cast 88%0%0%13%
How each member voted (8)
Member Party Vote
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Not Voting
Sanchez, Kate Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety housing labor
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 369 do?
Existing law establishes the Independent Living Program (ILP) , which has among its purposes providing training in daily living skills, budgeting, locating and maintaining housing, and career planning for foster youth up to 21 years of age. Existing federal law authorizes a state, under certain circumstances, to expand eligibility for the ILP to former foster youth who have not attained 23 years of age. Existing law requires the State Department of Social Services, with the approval of the federal government, to amend the foster care state plan to permit all eligible children to be served by the ILP up to 21 years of age. This bill would require, by June 30, 2025, the department to develop a plan, in consultation with, among others, county ILP administrators, to, among other things, update and upgrade curriculum to facilitate successful transitions to adulthood. This bill would expand the age for all eligible children to be served by the ILP up to 23 years of age, in those counties that opt to provide those extended services. Existing law authorizes a child who is declared a ward or dependent child of the court who is 16 years of age or older, or a nonminor dependent, as defined, who is participating in a transitional independent living case plan to retain resources with a combined value of $10,000, consistent with federal law, and still remain eligible to receive public social services. Existing law requires the written approval of a child's probation officer or social worker for withdrawal of the child's savings, as specified. Existing law establishes the Aid to Families with Dependent Children-Foster Care (AFDC-FC) program, under which counties provide payments to foster care providers on behalf of qualified children in foster care. This bill would remove that monetary value limit and instead allow those nonminor dependents to retain resources consistent with federal law. The bill would prohibit those resources from being evaluated after the initial determination for the same foster care episode to determine continued eligibility for a foster care maintenance payment. The bill would also authorize a nonminor dependent who reenters foster care, as specified, and is ineligible for federal financial participation due to cash savings in an amount that is greater than allowed, to receive aid in the form of state AFDC-FC if certain requirements are met. Because counties would administer these extended benefits, 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 no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors AB 369?
AB 369 is sponsored by Zbur, Rick Chavez (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 369?
This bill died with 2023-2024 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 369?
Track AB 369 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 369

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 369

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →