California 20252026 Regular Session Status: Introduced 1 D cosponsors

SB 1157 — Juveniles: secure youth treatment facilities: less restrictive programs.

Last action — August 13 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

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

This bill has been introduced in the Senate. Introduced February 18, 2026. It must pass committee before a floor vote.

Next likely step: a committee referral and hearing.

Odds of enactment

Low chance

Based on the sponsor, cosponsors, and committee posture, this bill has a low chance of becoming law.

Upgrade to see the exact probability and what's driving it.

A statistical estimate from our own model of past outcomes — an insight, not a guarantee. Policymaking is volatile.

Prognosis

Stalled 28% · moderate confidence

  • Introduced

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 5 recorded votes so far.

Based on stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes, and cross-state momentum — a description of the observable signals, not a prediction.

In plain language

This bill requires courts to consider specific information when placing juveniles in less restrictive programs.

The bill mandates that courts must consider certain criteria and provide reasons for placing juveniles in less restrictive programs. It also imposes additional duties on probation departments to gather necessary information for the courts.

What this means for you
  • Families: Families of juveniles may see changes in the treatment options available for their children.

Summary

Existing law authorizes a court to order a ward who is 14 years of age or older, and who meets certain criteria, to be committed to a secure youth treatment facility, operated by the county of commitment, for a period of confinement. Existing law authorizes the court, upon a motion from the probation department or the ward, to order that the ward be transferred from a secure youth treatment facility to a less restrictive program, such as a halfway house, a camp or ranch, or a community residential or nonresidential service program if the court determines that the ward has made substantial progress toward the goals of the individual rehabilitation plan. Existing law requires the court to consider the recommendations of the probation department on the proposed change in the placement. This bill would generally require the court, when determining whether to place a ward in a particular less restrictive program that includes congregate residential care, to consider certain information, including, among other things, whether the program has specified insurance policies, and to state on the record the reason for placing a ward in a particular less restrictive program that includes congregate residential care. The bill would require program providers to provide that information to the probation department for the purpose of providing it to the court. By imposing additional duties on probation departments, 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 the statutory provisions noted above.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. August 13 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  2. August 5 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.

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

  4. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (June 30).

  5. June 23 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.

  6. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  7. Referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  8. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  9. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 37. Noes 1. Page 4499.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  10. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  11. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 4267.) (May 14).

  12. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  13. Set for hearing May 14.

  14. May 4 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  15. Set for hearing May 4.

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

  17. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 3872.) (April 14).

  18. Set for hearing April 14.

  19. Re-referred to Coms. on PUB. S. and APPR.

  20. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

  21. Referred to Com. on RLS.

  22. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 21.

  23. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No

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

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

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 5002
Republican 2000
Total 7002
% of votes cast 78%0%0%22%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
González, Mark Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Not Voting
Harabedian, John Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Schultz, Nick Democratic Yea
Sharp-Collins, LaShae Democratic Not Voting
Alanis, Juan Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 37 Yea · 1 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 28101
Republican 9001
Total 37102
% of votes cast 93%3%0%5%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Arreguín, Jesse Democratic Yea
Ashby, Angelique V. Democratic Yea
Becker, Josh Democratic Yea
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Cabaldon, Christopher Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
McNerney, Jerry Democratic Yea
Menjivar, Caroline Democratic Nay
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Pérez, Sasha Renée Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Richardson, Laura Democratic Yea
Rubio, Susan Democratic Yea
Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola Democratic Not Voting
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Alvarado-Gil, Marie Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Not Voting
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Yea
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Yea
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety civil-rights labor health-insurance
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 SB 1157 do?
Existing law authorizes a court to order a ward who is 14 years of age or older, and who meets certain criteria, to be committed to a secure youth treatment facility, operated by the county of commitment, for a period of confinement. Existing law authorizes the court, upon a motion from the probation department or the ward, to order that the ward be transferred from a secure youth treatment facility to a less restrictive program, such as a halfway house, a camp or ranch, or a community residential or nonresidential service program if the court determines that the ward has made substantial progress toward the goals of the individual rehabilitation plan. Existing law requires the court to consider the recommendations of the probation department on the proposed change in the placement. This bill would generally require the court, when determining whether to place a ward in a particular less restrictive program that includes congregate residential care, to consider certain information, including, among other things, whether the program has specified insurance policies, and to state on the record the reason for placing a ward in a particular less restrictive program that includes congregate residential care. The bill would require program providers to provide that information to the probation department for the purpose of providing it to the court. By imposing additional duties on probation departments, 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 the statutory provisions noted above.
Who sponsors SB 1157?
SB 1157 is sponsored by Archuleta, Bob (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 1157?
This bill has been introduced in the Senate. Introduced February 18, 2026. It must pass committee before a floor vote.
Where can I track SB 1157?
Track SB 1157 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 1157

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 SB 1157

Last checked for changes about 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →