California 2011-2012 Regular Session Status: Enacted

AB 2066 — Residential care facilities for the elderly: revocation of licenses.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 643, Statutes of 2012.

Track this bill free

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

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

This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 23, 2012. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 70% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Enacted

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 7 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

Summary

Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of residential care facilities for the elderly. These provisions are administered by the State Department of Social Services. Violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. Existing law requires a licensee of a licensed residential care facility for the elderly to take all reasonable steps to transfer affected residents safely as a result of the forfeiture of a license, the change of use of the facility pursuant to the department's regulations, or the revocation of a license. This requirement includes providing each resident or the resident's responsible person with a written notice no later than 60 days before the intended eviction and, if 7 or more residents will be transferred as a result of the forfeiture of a license, revocation of a license, or change in the use of the facility, submitting a proposed closure plan to the department for approval. This bill would eliminate the requirement that a licensee comply with these provisions on the basis of the revocation of a license. Existing law requires, if the Director of Social Services determines that it is necessary to temporarily suspend a license of a residential care facility for the elderly in order to protect the residents or clients of the facility from physical or mental abuse, abandonment, or any other substantial threat to health or safety, the department to make every effort to minimize trauma for the residents. Existing law authorizes and requires the department, in the event of a temporary license suspension, to comply with specified procedures relating to the transfer of residents. This bill would make these provisions applicable in the event that the director determines that it is necessary to revoke the license of a residential care facility for the elderly. The bill also would require that, upon an order to revoke a license, except as specified, the licensee provide a 60-day written notice of license revocation that may lead to closure to the resident and the resident's responsible person within 24 hours of receipt of the department's order of revocation. The bill would authorize the department to allow the licensee to secure the services of a person who is not an immediate family member of the licensee or an entity that is not owned by the licensee to manage the day-to-day operations of the facility for at least 60 days, provided that the person or entity is licensed and in substantial compliance to operate a residential care facility for the elderly that is of comparable or greater size and comparable programming to the facility, and that the person or entity meets other specified requirements. The bill would require that a resident who transfers from the facility receive a refund of paid preadmission fees in accordance with specified provisions. The bill would require the licensee, within 10 days of all residents having left the facility, to submit a final list of names and new locations of all residents to the department and the local ombudsman program. By expanding the definition of a crime, 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. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 643, Statutes of 2012.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 5 p.m.

  4. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 79. Noes 0. Page 5891.).

  5. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after August 11 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.

  6. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 4445.).

  7. Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

  8. From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and ordered to consent calendar.

  9. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: to consent calendar. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (June 26). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

  11. Referred to Com. on HUMAN S.

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

  13. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 70. Noes 0. Page 4985.)

  14. Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

  15. From committee: Do pass. To consent calendar. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 16).

  16. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (April 24). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  17. Re-referred to Com. on AGING & L.T.C.

  18. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on AGING & L.T.C. Read second time and amended.

  19. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on AGING & L.T.C. with recommendation: to consent calendar. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (April 10). Re-referred to Com. on AGING & L.T.C.

  20. Re-referred to Com. on HUM. S.

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

  22. Referred to Coms. on HUM. S. and AGING & L.T.C.

  23. From printer. May be heard in committee March 25.

  24. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Monning · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

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

Sponsors (1)

  • Monning

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 2066 MONNING Concurrence in Senate Amendments

Passed 79 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 76001
Democratic 1000
Republican 2000
Total 79001
% of votes cast 99%0%0%1%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Carter — Yea
Huber — Yea
Butler — Yea
Hagman — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Knight — Yea
Logue — Yea
Chesbro — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Cook — Yea
Miller — Yea
Dickinson — Yea
Donnelly — Yea
Perea — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Campos — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Conway — Yea
Allen — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Davis — Yea
Halderman — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Hall — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Norby — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Torres — Yea
Fong — Yea
Fletcher — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Gorell — Yea
Monning — Yea
Valadao — Not Voting
Achadjian — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Beall — Yea
Block — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
Hill — Yea
Jeffries — Yea
Lara — Yea
Ma — Yea
Mansoor — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Pan — Yea
Silva — Yea
Smyth — Yea
Swanson — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Williams — Yea
Eng — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Furutani — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Bonnie Lowenthal — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Consent Calendar 2nd

Passed 36 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 34003
Republican 1000
Democratic 1001
Total 36004
% of votes cast 90%0%0%10%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Hancock — Not Voting
Huff — Yea
Runner — Yea
Liu — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Yee — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
De León — Yea
Negrete McLeod — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Evans — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Harman — Not Voting
Hernandez — Not Voting
Anderson — Yea
Dutton — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Leno — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Price — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Vargas — Yea
Wright — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Blakeslee — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Emmerson — Yea
Correa — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
La Malfa — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

AB 2066 MONNING Consent Calendar Second Day

Passed 70 Yea · 0 Nay · 10 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 68009
Republican 1001
Democratic 1000
Total 700010
% of votes cast 88%0%0%13%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Gorell — Yea
Halderman — Yea
Butler — Yea
Carter — Yea
Hill — Yea
Fong — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Allen — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Cook — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Fuentes — Not Voting
Furutani — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Campos — Yea
Portantino — Yea
John A. Pérez — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Hagman — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Hall — Not Voting
Harkey — Yea
Fletcher — Not Voting
Atkins — Not Voting
Chesbro — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Huffman — Yea
Knight — Not Voting
Ammiano — Yea
Block — Yea
Conway — Yea
Davis — Yea
Dickinson — Yea
Donnelly — Yea
Lara — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Miller — Yea
Monning — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Norby — Yea
Pan — Yea
Perea — Not Voting
Skinner — Yea
Smyth — Yea
Swanson — Yea
Torres — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Achadjian — Yea
Beall — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Brownley — Yea
Buchanan — Yea
Hayashi — Yea
Huber — Yea
Jeffries — Yea
Logue — Yea
Ma — Not Voting
Mansoor — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Silva — Not Voting
Solorio — Yea
Valadao — Yea
Williams — Yea
Eng — Yea
Feuer — Yea
Yamada — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Not Voting
Bonnie Lowenthal — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
V. Manuel Pérez — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Not Voting
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass, to Consent Calendar.

Passed 17 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 16000
Democratic 1000
Total 17000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Campos — Yea
Hall — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
Donnelly — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Norby — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Davis — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety housing 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 AB 2066 do?
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of residential care facilities for the elderly. These provisions are administered by the State Department of Social Services. Violation of these provisions is a misdemeanor. Existing law requires a licensee of a licensed residential care facility for the elderly to take all reasonable steps to transfer affected residents safely as a result of the forfeiture of a license, the change of use of the facility pursuant to the department's regulations, or the revocation of a license. This requirement includes providing each resident or the resident's responsible person with a written notice no later than 60 days before the intended eviction and, if 7 or more residents will be transferred as a result of the forfeiture of a license, revocation of a license, or change in the use of the facility, submitting a proposed closure plan to the department for approval. This bill would eliminate the requirement that a licensee comply with these provisions on the basis of the revocation of a license. Existing law requires, if the Director of Social Services determines that it is necessary to temporarily suspend a license of a residential care facility for the elderly in order to protect the residents or clients of the facility from physical or mental abuse, abandonment, or any other substantial threat to health or safety, the department to make every effort to minimize trauma for the residents. Existing law authorizes and requires the department, in the event of a temporary license suspension, to comply with specified procedures relating to the transfer of residents. This bill would make these provisions applicable in the event that the director determines that it is necessary to revoke the license of a residential care facility for the elderly. The bill also would require that, upon an order to revoke a license, except as specified, the licensee provide a 60-day written notice of license revocation that may lead to closure to the resident and the resident's responsible person within 24 hours of receipt of the department's order of revocation. The bill would authorize the department to allow the licensee to secure the services of a person who is not an immediate family member of the licensee or an entity that is not owned by the licensee to manage the day-to-day operations of the facility for at least 60 days, provided that the person or entity is licensed and in substantial compliance to operate a residential care facility for the elderly that is of comparable or greater size and comparable programming to the facility, and that the person or entity meets other specified requirements. The bill would require that a resident who transfers from the facility receive a refund of paid preadmission fees in accordance with specified provisions. The bill would require the licensee, within 10 days of all residents having left the facility, to submit a final list of names and new locations of all residents to the department and the local ombudsman program. By expanding the definition of a crime, 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 2066?
AB 2066 is sponsored by Monning.
What is the current status of AB 2066?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 23, 2012. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 2066?
Track AB 2066 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2066

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 2066

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →