California 2009-2010 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 892 — Care facilities.

Last action — From Assembly without further action.

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

This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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, the California Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Act, provides for the licensure of residential care facilities by the department. Existing law requires a criminal record check of applicants for a license, special permit, or certificate of approval to operate a residential care facility for the elderly, or for other persons, including nonclients who reside in those facilities and staff and employees. Existing law requires that an application be denied if it is found that the applicant or any of the other designated persons has been convicted of a crime, other than a minor traffic violation. Existing law authorizes the Director of Social Services to grant an exemption from disqualification under these provisions, but prohibits the director from granting an exemption in the case of certain crimes. This bill would add additional specified crimes with respect to which the director is prohibited from granting an exemption. This bill would also add specified crimes with respect to which the director is prohibited from granting an exemption within 10 years of either the date the person was convicted of the offense or the date the person was released from incarceration for the offense, whichever is later.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From Assembly without further action.

  2. From committee without further action.

  3. Set, second hearing. Held in committee and under submission.

  4. Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  5. (Heard in committee on June 29.)

  6. From committee: Do pass, but first be re-referred to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  7. (Heard in committee on June 15.)

  8. From committee: Do pass, but first be re-referred to Com. on PUB. S. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  9. To Coms. on HUM. S. and PUB. S.

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

  11. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 33. Noes 0. Page 3548.) To Assembly.

  12. To Special Consent Calendar.

  13. Read second time. To third reading.

  14. From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.

  15. Set for hearing May 10.

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

  17. From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0. Page 3308.)

  18. Set for hearing April 20.

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

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

  21. To Com. on RLS.

  22. From print. May be acted upon on or after February 25.

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

Sponsors

  • Alquist · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

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

Sponsors (1)

  • Alquist

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

Special Consent #24 SB892 Alquist

Passed 34 Yea · 0 Nay · 5 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 31005
Democratic 2000
Republican 1000
Total 34005
% of votes cast 87%0%0%13%
How each member voted (39)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Cogdill — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Ducheny — Yea
Dutton — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Hollingsworth — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Leno — Yea
McLeod — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Negrete — Yea
Runner — Yea
Ashburn — Not Voting
Oropeza — Not Voting
Price — Not Voting
Romero — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Wright — Not Voting
Aanestad — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Harman — Yea
Huff — Yea
Liu — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Wiggins — Not Voting
Cedillo — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Correa — Yea
Cox — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Yea
Florez — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety civil-rights healthcare
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 892 do?
Existing law, the California Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Act, provides for the licensure of residential care facilities by the department. Existing law requires a criminal record check of applicants for a license, special permit, or certificate of approval to operate a residential care facility for the elderly, or for other persons, including nonclients who reside in those facilities and staff and employees. Existing law requires that an application be denied if it is found that the applicant or any of the other designated persons has been convicted of a crime, other than a minor traffic violation. Existing law authorizes the Director of Social Services to grant an exemption from disqualification under these provisions, but prohibits the director from granting an exemption in the case of certain crimes. This bill would add additional specified crimes with respect to which the director is prohibited from granting an exemption. This bill would also add specified crimes with respect to which the director is prohibited from granting an exemption within 10 years of either the date the person was convicted of the offense or the date the person was released from incarceration for the offense, whichever is later.
Who sponsors SB 892?
SB 892 is sponsored by Alquist.
What is the current status of SB 892?
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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 SB 892?
Track SB 892 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 892

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 892

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →