California 2013-2014 Regular Session Status: In Committee

AB 2373 — Probation officers: funding.

Last action — From committee without further action.

Track this bill free

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

  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 2013-2014 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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 requires a probation officer to notify the presiding judge of the superior court and the board of supervisors of the county, or city and county, upon a determination that, in the probation officer's opinion, staff and financial resources available to him or her are insufficient to meet his or her statutory or court-ordered responsibilities. Under existing law, that notification is required to be in writing, to explain which of those responsibilities cannot be met, and to explain what resources are necessary to properly discharge those responsibilities. This bill would require a county, or city and county, within 30 days of receipt of the notification described above, to determine if it has the resources available to meet the probation officer's specified needs, and to either inform the probation officer and the presiding judge of the superior court that it has the resources and commence providing the probation officer with the resources he or she has identified as necessary in that notification to properly discharge those responsibilities, or if it makes a determination that it does not have the resources available to meet the probation officer's specified needs, to notify the probation officer and the presiding judge of the superior court of that determination. By creating new duties for local government, the 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.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From committee without further action.

  2. In committee: Set, second hearing. Held under submission.

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

  4. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (April 29). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

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

  7. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on PUB. S. (Ayes 6. Noes 2.) (April 9). Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  8. Re-referred to Com. on L. GOV.

  9. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on L. GOV. Read second time and amended.

  10. Referred to Coms. on L. GOV. and PUB. S.

  11. Read first time.

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

  13. Introduced. 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

Votes

Subjects

public-safety 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 2373 do?
Existing law requires a probation officer to notify the presiding judge of the superior court and the board of supervisors of the county, or city and county, upon a determination that, in the probation officer's opinion, staff and financial resources available to him or her are insufficient to meet his or her statutory or court-ordered responsibilities. Under existing law, that notification is required to be in writing, to explain which of those responsibilities cannot be met, and to explain what resources are necessary to properly discharge those responsibilities. This bill would require a county, or city and county, within 30 days of receipt of the notification described above, to determine if it has the resources available to meet the probation officer's specified needs, and to either inform the probation officer and the presiding judge of the superior court that it has the resources and commence providing the probation officer with the resources he or she has identified as necessary in that notification to properly discharge those responsibilities, or if it makes a determination that it does not have the resources available to meet the probation officer's specified needs, to notify the probation officer and the presiding judge of the superior court of that determination. By creating new duties for local government, the 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.
Who sponsors AB 2373?
AB 2373 is sponsored by Roger Hernández.
What is the current status of AB 2373?
This bill died with 2013-2014 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 2373?
Track AB 2373 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 2373

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 2373

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →