California 2015-2016 Regular Session Status: Enacted

AB 1519 — Judiciary omnibus: family support.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 416, Statutes of 2015.

  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 March 10, 2015. 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 8 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

(1) Existing law obligates a parent to support his or her child. Existing law establishes the Department of Child Support Services within the California Health and Human Services Agency, which administers all services and performs all functions necessary to establish, collect, and distribute child support. Existing law requires, if child support payments are directly deposited to an account of the recipient's choice, that the payments only be deposited to a qualifying account, as defined, and prohibits a person or entity that issues a prepaid card or maintains or manages a prepaid card account from accepting or facilitating the direct deposit of child support payments to a prepaid card account that does not meet the requirements of a qualifying account. Existing law prohibits the Department of Child Support Services from being held liable for authorizing a direct deposit of child support payments into a prepaid card account designated by the recipient that does not meet the requirements of a qualifying account. This bill would specify that the Department of Child Support Services has no obligation to determine whether an account at the financial institution of the recipient's choice is a qualifying account. (2) Existing law requires each party to a proceeding for dissolution of marriage or legal separation of the parties to serve on the other party a preliminary declaration of disclosure of assets, as specified, either concurrently with the petition for dissolution, or within 60 days of filing the petition. This bill would clarify that the petitioner is required to serve the preliminary declaration of disclosure either concurrently with the petition for dissolution or legal separation or within 60 days of filing the petition. (3) Existing law requires each county to maintain a local child support agency that has the responsibility, among other things, to promptly and effectively establish, modify, and enforce child support obligations. Existing law authorizes attorneys employed within the local child support agency to direct, control, and prosecute civil actions and proceedings in the name of the county in support of the child support activities of the Department of Child Support Services and the local child support agency. This bill, effective July 1, 2016, would authorize a local child support agency to electronically file pleadings signed by an agent of the local child support agency under penalty of perjury. The bill would require the Judicial Council to develop rules to implement this provision. (4) Existing law specifies the number of judges of the superior court for each county, and allocates additional judgeships to the various counties in accordance with uniform standards for factually determining additional need in each county, as approved by the Judicial Council, and other specified criteria. Existing law provides for the conversion of 146 subordinate judicial officer positions in eligible superior courts upon the occurrence of specified conditions, including that the proposed action is ratified by the Legislature, except that no more than 16 positions may be converted to judgeships in any fiscal year. Notwithstanding this provision, existing law authorizes up to 10 additional subordinate judicial officer positions to be converted to judgeships in any fiscal year if the conversions will result in a judge being assigned to a family law or juvenile law assignment previously presided over by a subordinate judicial officer and the proposed action is ratified by the Legislature. This bill would ratify the authority of the Judicial Council to convert 10 subordinate judicial officer positions to judgeships in the 2015–16 fiscal year when the conversion will result in a judge being assigned to a family law or juvenile law assignment previously presided over by a subordinate judicial officer. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2104 of the Family Code proposed by SB 340, which would become operative only if SB 340 and this bill are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2016, and this bill is chaptered last.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 416, Statutes of 2015.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 4 p.m.

  4. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 2921.).

  5. Assembly Rule 77 suspended. (Page 2915.)

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

  7. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 40. Noes 0. Page 2484.).

  8. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  9. Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  10. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  11. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 27).

  12. In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  13. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (July 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

  15. Referred to Com. on JUD.

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

  17. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 80. Noes 0. Page 1734.)

  18. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  19. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 28).

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

  21. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (April 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  22. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  23. From printer. May be heard in committee April 10.

  24. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Committee on Judiciary · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

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

Sponsors (1)

  • Committee on Judiciary

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

Passed 78 Yea · 0 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 69002
Democratic 4000
Republican 5000
Total 78002
% of votes cast 98%0%0%3%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Brown — Yea
Low — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mathis — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Perea — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Not Voting
Ting — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Williams — Yea
Wood — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Chu — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Daly — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Salas — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Burke — Yea
Harper — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Kim — Yea
Chang — Yea
Levine — Yea
Linder — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Gray — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Chau — Yea
Baker — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Weber — Yea
Lopez — Yea
Bonilla — Not Voting
Holden — Yea
Campos — Yea
Medina — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Hadley — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
Travis Allen — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 40 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 37000
Democratic 3000
Total 40000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Huff — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Allen — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Runner — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Hall — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hill — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Bates — Yea
Beall — Yea
Block — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Monning — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Pan — Yea
Roth — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Glazer — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Yea
Lara — Yea
Hill — Yea
Beall — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Nielsen — Yea

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Yea
Beall — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Nielsen — Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 80 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 70000
Democratic 4000
Republican 6000
Total 80000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Yea
Baker — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Brown — Yea
Holden — Yea
Levine — Yea
Low — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Ting — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Weber — Yea
Wood — Yea
Chang — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Daly — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Harper — Yea
Linder — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Salas — Yea
Chau — Yea
Chu — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Williams — Yea
Burke — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Kim — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Brough — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Perea — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Gray — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Campos — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Lopez — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Medina — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Hadley — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
Travis Allen — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 17 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 13000
Democratic 2000
Republican 2000
Total 17000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (17)
Member Party Vote
Bigelow — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Wood — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Chang — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Holden — Yea
Daly — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Weber — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

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 1519 do?
(1) Existing law obligates a parent to support his or her child. Existing law establishes the Department of Child Support Services within the California Health and Human Services Agency, which administers all services and performs all functions necessary to establish, collect, and distribute child support. Existing law requires, if child support payments are directly deposited to an account of the recipient's choice, that the payments only be deposited to a qualifying account, as defined, and prohibits a person or entity that issues a prepaid card or maintains or manages a prepaid card account from accepting or facilitating the direct deposit of child support payments to a prepaid card account that does not meet the requirements of a qualifying account. Existing law prohibits the Department of Child Support Services from being held liable for authorizing a direct deposit of child support payments into a prepaid card account designated by the recipient that does not meet the requirements of a qualifying account. This bill would specify that the Department of Child Support Services has no obligation to determine whether an account at the financial institution of the recipient's choice is a qualifying account. (2) Existing law requires each party to a proceeding for dissolution of marriage or legal separation of the parties to serve on the other party a preliminary declaration of disclosure of assets, as specified, either concurrently with the petition for dissolution, or within 60 days of filing the petition. This bill would clarify that the petitioner is required to serve the preliminary declaration of disclosure either concurrently with the petition for dissolution or legal separation or within 60 days of filing the petition. (3) Existing law requires each county to maintain a local child support agency that has the responsibility, among other things, to promptly and effectively establish, modify, and enforce child support obligations. Existing law authorizes attorneys employed within the local child support agency to direct, control, and prosecute civil actions and proceedings in the name of the county in support of the child support activities of the Department of Child Support Services and the local child support agency. This bill, effective July 1, 2016, would authorize a local child support agency to electronically file pleadings signed by an agent of the local child support agency under penalty of perjury. The bill would require the Judicial Council to develop rules to implement this provision. (4) Existing law specifies the number of judges of the superior court for each county, and allocates additional judgeships to the various counties in accordance with uniform standards for factually determining additional need in each county, as approved by the Judicial Council, and other specified criteria. Existing law provides for the conversion of 146 subordinate judicial officer positions in eligible superior courts upon the occurrence of specified conditions, including that the proposed action is ratified by the Legislature, except that no more than 16 positions may be converted to judgeships in any fiscal year. Notwithstanding this provision, existing law authorizes up to 10 additional subordinate judicial officer positions to be converted to judgeships in any fiscal year if the conversions will result in a judge being assigned to a family law or juvenile law assignment previously presided over by a subordinate judicial officer and the proposed action is ratified by the Legislature. This bill would ratify the authority of the Judicial Council to convert 10 subordinate judicial officer positions to judgeships in the 2015–16 fiscal year when the conversion will result in a judge being assigned to a family law or juvenile law assignment previously presided over by a subordinate judicial officer. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 2104 of the Family Code proposed by SB 340, which would become operative only if SB 340 and this bill are enacted and become effective on or before January 1, 2016, and this bill is chaptered last.
Who sponsors AB 1519?
AB 1519 is sponsored by Committee on Judiciary.
What is the current status of AB 1519?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced March 10, 2015. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 1519?
Track AB 1519 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 1519

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.

Stay ahead of AB 1519

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →