California 2011-2012 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 320 — Public social services: hearings.

Last action — Set, second hearing. Held in committee and under submission.

Track this bill free

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

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

This bill died with 2011-2012 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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 authorizes an applicant for, or recipient of, public social services who is dissatisfied with certain actions of the county welfare department to request a hearing from the state department administering the social services. Existing law requires the hearing to be conducted by an administrative law judge, with an exception, and authorizes the administrative law judge, under certain circumstances, to render and adopt final decisions, with which decision the county director is required to comply and execute. This bill would require the county appeals representative to review all evidence in the county's possession prior to the hearing and, if the representative finds prescribed occurrences, to offer the claimant a conditional withdrawal or notice of action, as specified. This bill would require the conditional withdrawal to list the agreed-upon conditions that the claimant is required to meet, and require the county to issue any benefits for which the claimant is eligible following the claimant's meeting of those conditions. This bill would authorize a claimant to file for and reopen a state hearing under certain circumstances, at which the administrative law judge may render a decision. This bill would authorize a claimant to request a hearing conducted by telephone, or other electronic means, or at his or her home. This bill would require that certain notices relating to the hearing contain prescribed information. This bill would require the state department administering the social services to determine the format of the hearing if the county and the claimant disagree on its format. Existing law requires, if regulations require an agency to write a position statement concerning the issues in question in a fair hearing or if the agency chooses to develop such a statement, that not less than 2 working days prior to the date of the hearing the agency make available to the applicant for, or recipient of, public social services a copy of the agency's position statement, with an exception. This bill would require the county representative to prepare and transmit to a claimant who is scheduled for specified types of hearings and his or her representative the position statement so that it is received at least 2 working days prior to the hearing. This bill would require the administrative law judge to determine whether the county has met its burden of proof of establishing a prima facie case, with exceptions. This bill would require the administrative law judge to grant the claim if the judge finds that the county has not met its burden. By imposing a higher level of service on county appeals representatives, 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 these statutory provisions. This bill would make its provisions operative upon the State Department of Social Services making a specified finding on its Internet Web site relating to the modification of court orders regarding penalties payable to claimants, as agreed to by the parties, in 2 specified cases.

Bill Text

Action History

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

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

  3. (Corrected August 6.)

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

  5. (Corrected July 12.)

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

  7. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 2.) (June 26).

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

  9. Referred to Com. on HUM. S.

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

  11. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 32. Noes 7. Page 1226.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  12. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  13. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 2. Page 1115.) (May 26).

  14. Set for hearing May 26.

  15. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

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

  17. Set for hearing May 2.

  18. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 641.) (April 12). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

  20. Set for hearing April 12.

  21. Referred to Com. on HUMAN S.

  22. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 17.

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

Sponsors

  • Wright · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 3 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Wright

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

3rd Reading

Passed 32 Yea · 7 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 29701
Republican 1000
Democratic 2000
Total 32701
% of votes cast 80%18%0%3%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Harman — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
De León — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Price — Yea
Evans — Yea
Leno — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Negrete McLeod — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Runner — Nay
Fuller — Nay
Dutton — Nay
Alquist — Yea
Walters — Nay
Anderson — Nay
Blakeslee — Yea
Huff — Nay
Lieu — Yea
Liu — Yea
Vargas — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Wright — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Emmerson — Not Voting
Correa — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
La Malfa — Nay
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 6 Yea · 2 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 6201
Total 6201
% of votes cast 67%22%0%11%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
Runner — Nay
Price — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Walters — Nay
Emmerson — Not Voting

Official roll call →

Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.

Passed 9 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 9000
Total 9000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
Runner — Yea
Price — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Walters — Yea
Emmerson — 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 320 do?
Existing law authorizes an applicant for, or recipient of, public social services who is dissatisfied with certain actions of the county welfare department to request a hearing from the state department administering the social services. Existing law requires the hearing to be conducted by an administrative law judge, with an exception, and authorizes the administrative law judge, under certain circumstances, to render and adopt final decisions, with which decision the county director is required to comply and execute. This bill would require the county appeals representative to review all evidence in the county's possession prior to the hearing and, if the representative finds prescribed occurrences, to offer the claimant a conditional withdrawal or notice of action, as specified. This bill would require the conditional withdrawal to list the agreed-upon conditions that the claimant is required to meet, and require the county to issue any benefits for which the claimant is eligible following the claimant's meeting of those conditions. This bill would authorize a claimant to file for and reopen a state hearing under certain circumstances, at which the administrative law judge may render a decision. This bill would authorize a claimant to request a hearing conducted by telephone, or other electronic means, or at his or her home. This bill would require that certain notices relating to the hearing contain prescribed information. This bill would require the state department administering the social services to determine the format of the hearing if the county and the claimant disagree on its format. Existing law requires, if regulations require an agency to write a position statement concerning the issues in question in a fair hearing or if the agency chooses to develop such a statement, that not less than 2 working days prior to the date of the hearing the agency make available to the applicant for, or recipient of, public social services a copy of the agency's position statement, with an exception. This bill would require the county representative to prepare and transmit to a claimant who is scheduled for specified types of hearings and his or her representative the position statement so that it is received at least 2 working days prior to the hearing. This bill would require the administrative law judge to determine whether the county has met its burden of proof of establishing a prima facie case, with exceptions. This bill would require the administrative law judge to grant the claim if the judge finds that the county has not met its burden. By imposing a higher level of service on county appeals representatives, 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 these statutory provisions. This bill would make its provisions operative upon the State Department of Social Services making a specified finding on its Internet Web site relating to the modification of court orders regarding penalties payable to claimants, as agreed to by the parties, in 2 specified cases.
Who sponsors SB 320?
SB 320 is sponsored by Wright.
What is the current status of SB 320?
This bill died with 2011-2012 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 320?
Track SB 320 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 320

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 320

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →