California 2023-2024 Regular Session Status: In Committee 1 R cosponsors

AB 697 — Drug Court Success Incentives Pilot Program.

Last action — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 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 “In Committee” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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 consolidates within the State Department of Health Care Services all substance use disorder functions and programs from the former State Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs. Under existing law, the State Department of Health Care Services is responsible for administering prevention, treatment, and recovery services for alcohol and drug abuse. Existing law authorizes each county to establish a drug court program. If a county elects to provide that program, existing law requires the county to develop a plan for the operation of a drug court program that, among other things, provides a local action plan for implementing cost-effective drug court systems. This bill would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, authorize the superior courts in the Counties of Sacramento, San Diego, and Solano to conduct a pilot program to provide specific supportive services to adult defendants who participate in the county's drug court, as specified. The bill would require the Judicial Council to administer the program and would authorize the council to establish guidelines and reporting requirements for the participating drug courts. This bill would require a participating drug court to enroll eligible defendants in specific supportive services unless a defendant refuses or is already enrolled in those services. The bill would require a county probation department, or another county department designated by the court, to administer the supportive services payments and reimbursements. By increasing the duties of county agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require participating drug courts to collect and submit specific data to the Judicial Council. The bill would also require the Judicial Council to prepare and submit a report to the Legislature and the Governor on or before January 1, 2028, that compares the data gathered by the participating drug courts to other similar, nonparticipating drug courts, as specified. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2029. 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. From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  2. Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.

  3. In committee: Held under submission.

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

  5. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

  6. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (March 21). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  7. Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

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

  9. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  10. From printer. May be heard in committee March 16.

  11. 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

Subjects

public-safety healthcare 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 697 do?
Existing law consolidates within the State Department of Health Care Services all substance use disorder functions and programs from the former State Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs. Under existing law, the State Department of Health Care Services is responsible for administering prevention, treatment, and recovery services for alcohol and drug abuse. Existing law authorizes each county to establish a drug court program. If a county elects to provide that program, existing law requires the county to develop a plan for the operation of a drug court program that, among other things, provides a local action plan for implementing cost-effective drug court systems. This bill would, upon appropriation by the Legislature, authorize the superior courts in the Counties of Sacramento, San Diego, and Solano to conduct a pilot program to provide specific supportive services to adult defendants who participate in the county's drug court, as specified. The bill would require the Judicial Council to administer the program and would authorize the council to establish guidelines and reporting requirements for the participating drug courts. This bill would require a participating drug court to enroll eligible defendants in specific supportive services unless a defendant refuses or is already enrolled in those services. The bill would require a county probation department, or another county department designated by the court, to administer the supportive services payments and reimbursements. By increasing the duties of county agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would require participating drug courts to collect and submit specific data to the Judicial Council. The bill would also require the Judicial Council to prepare and submit a report to the Legislature and the Governor on or before January 1, 2028, that compares the data gathered by the participating drug courts to other similar, nonparticipating drug courts, as specified. The bill would repeal these provisions on January 1, 2029. 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 697?
AB 697 is sponsored by Davies, Laurie (Republican).
What is the current status of AB 697?
This bill died with 2023-2024 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” 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 697?
Track AB 697 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 697

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 697

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →