California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly 1 D cosponsors

AB 1643 — Developmental services: fair hearings.

Last action — 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.

Track this bill free

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

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

This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

The Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act requires the State Department of Developmental Services to contract with regional centers to provide services and supports to individuals with developmental disabilities. Under existing law, the regional centers purchase needed services for individuals with developmental disabilities through approved service providers or arrange for those services through other publicly funded agencies. Existing law requires a service agency, defined, in part, as a developmental center or regional center, to have a fair hearing procedure that meets prescribed requirements, including adequate notice standards, to resolve conflicts between the service provider and recipients of, or applicants for, service. Existing law provides that adequate notice be sent by certified mail to the applicant or recipient and the authorized representative in specified circumstances, including if the service agency makes certain decisions, such as to reduce, to terminate, or to change services described in an individual program plan, without the mutual consent of the service recipient or authorized representative. This bill would instead require the service agency to provide adequate notice by first-class mail, certified mail, or electronic mail, as prescribed, to the above-specified individuals if the service agency makes specified decisions relating to services, irrespective of whether the service agency makes this decision without mutual consent of the service recipient or authorized representative. The bill would make technical, conforming changes and other nonsubstantive changes.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. 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.

  2. In committee: Set, second hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  3. 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.

  4. In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.

  5. Referred to Com. on HUMAN S.

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

  7. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 77. Noes 0. Page 1830.)

  8. Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.

  9. From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 16. Noes 0.) (May 15).

  10. Joint Rule 62(a), file notice suspended. (Page 1609.)

  11. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (April 23). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

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

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

  14. Referred to Com. on HUM. S.

  15. Read first time.

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

  17. 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

Passed 77 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 45003
Republican 7000
Democratic 25000
Total 77003
% of votes cast 96%0%0%4%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Mathis — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Low — Yea
Burke — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Smith — Yea
Cunningham — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Gray — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Kamlager-Dove — Yea
Medina — Yea
Chu — Yea
Ting — Yea
McCarty — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Salas — Yea
Brough — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Holden — Yea
Daly — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Weber — Yea
Kiley — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Levine — Yea
Wood — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Mullin — Not Voting
Cooley — Not Voting
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Not Voting
Mark Stone — Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Yea
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Flora, Heath Republican Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 16 Yea · 0 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 7000
Unaffiliated 9002
Total 16002
% of votes cast 89%0%0%11%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Diep — Yea
Chau — Yea
Brough — Not Voting
Eduardo Garcia — Not Voting
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Passed 8 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 4000
Republican 1000
Democratic 3000
Total 8000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (8)
Member Party Vote
Friedman — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Choi, Steven S. 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 1643 do?
The Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act requires the State Department of Developmental Services to contract with regional centers to provide services and supports to individuals with developmental disabilities. Under existing law, the regional centers purchase needed services for individuals with developmental disabilities through approved service providers or arrange for those services through other publicly funded agencies. Existing law requires a service agency, defined, in part, as a developmental center or regional center, to have a fair hearing procedure that meets prescribed requirements, including adequate notice standards, to resolve conflicts between the service provider and recipients of, or applicants for, service. Existing law provides that adequate notice be sent by certified mail to the applicant or recipient and the authorized representative in specified circumstances, including if the service agency makes certain decisions, such as to reduce, to terminate, or to change services described in an individual program plan, without the mutual consent of the service recipient or authorized representative. This bill would instead require the service agency to provide adequate notice by first-class mail, certified mail, or electronic mail, as prescribed, to the above-specified individuals if the service agency makes specified decisions relating to services, irrespective of whether the service agency makes this decision without mutual consent of the service recipient or authorized representative. The bill would make technical, conforming changes and other nonsubstantive changes.
Who sponsors AB 1643?
AB 1643 is sponsored by Garcia, Robert (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 1643?
This bill died with 2019-2020 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Assembly” 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 1643?
Track AB 1643 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 1643

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 1643

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →