California 2019-2020 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly

AB 1007 — Local government financing: juvenile justice.

Last action — Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.

  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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

Under existing law, there is established in each county treasury a Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Account (SLESA) to receive all amounts allocated to a county for specified purposes. In any fiscal year for which a county receives moneys to be expended for implementation, existing law requires the county auditor to allocate the moneys in the county's SLESA within 30 days of the deposit of those moneys into the fund. Existing law requires the moneys to be allocated in specified amounts, including, but not limited to, 50% to a county or city and county to implement a comprehensive multiagency juvenile justice plan, as specified. Existing law requires the juvenile justice plan to be developed by the local juvenile justice coordinating council in each county and city and county. Existing law requires the plan to be annually reviewed and updated by the council and submitted to the Board of State and Community Corrections. Existing law requires the multiagency juvenile justice plan to include certain components, including, but not limited to, a local juvenile justice action strategy that provides for a continuum of responses to juvenile crime and delinquency. Existing law also requires each council to annually report to their board of supervisors and the board information on the effectiveness of the programs and strategies funded under these provisions, and requires the board to annually report this information to the Governor and the Legislature and post it on its internet website. This bill would revise and recast required components of the multiagency juvenile justice plan to, among other things, additionally require a plan to include an assessment of existing community-based youth development services, identification and prioritization of areas of the community that face significant public safety risk from violence and crime, documentation of the effectiveness of the programs funded under these provisions, and a description of the target population funded under these provisions. The bill would require programs and strategies funded under these provisions to, among other things, be modeled on trauma-informed and youth development approaches and in collaboration with community-based organizations. The bill would require that at least 95% of the funds allocated under these provisions be distributed to community-based organizations and other public agencies or departments that are not law enforcement entities, as specified. The bill would require a council to include additional information in its annual report to the board of supervisors and the board relating to their programs, including data on participants, and would impose additional requirements on the board with respect to those annual reports, including, but not limited to, providing a statewide analysis of county spending. Existing law requires a juvenile justice coordinating council to consist of certain members, including, but not limited to, the chief probation officer, as chair, and a representative from the district attorney's office, the public defender's office, and the sheriff's department, among others. This bill would revise and recast those membership provisions, and instead require each Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council to, at a minimum, include 7 members and consist of at least 50% community representatives with the remainder of the seats allocated to government agencies. The bill would require a council to select 2 cochairs from amongst its members, as specified. The bill would require a council to meet no less than 3 times per year and announce its meetings at least 10 days in advance of a meeting.

Bill Text

Action History

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

  2. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10(c).

  3. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

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

  5. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  6. Ordered to second reading.

  7. From inactive file.

  8. Ordered to inactive file at the request of Senator Mitchell.

  9. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  10. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (August 30).

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

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

  13. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (June 19).

  14. Referred to Com. on L., P.E. & R.

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

  16. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 54. Noes 18. Page 2041.)

  17. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  18. Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.

  19. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 13. Noes 5.) (May 16).

  20. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

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

  22. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 1.) (April 24). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  23. Re-referred to Com. on P.E. & R.

  24. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on P.E. & R. Read second time and amended.

  25. Referred to Com. on P.E. & R.

  26. From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.

  27. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

  • Jones-Sawyer · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 9 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Jones-Sawyer

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

Do pass

Passed 5 Yea · 2 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 4100
Democratic 1000
Republican 0100
Total 5200
% of votes cast 71%29%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Wieckowski — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Hill — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Bates — Nay
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay

Official roll call →

AB 1007 Jones-Sawyer Assembly Third Reading

Passed 54 Yea · 18 Nay · 8 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 0600
Unaffiliated 321208
Democratic 22000
Total 541808
% of votes cast 68%23%0%10%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Melendez — Nay
Cunningham — Nay
Diep — Nay
Gray — Not Voting
Frazier — Not Voting
Daly — Not Voting
Cooley — Not Voting
Ting — Not Voting
Eggman — Not Voting
Waldron — Not Voting
Salas — Yea
Smith — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Chau — Yea
Gloria — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Holden — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Friedman — Yea
Kamlager-Dove — Yea
Levine — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Low — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
Burke — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Wood — Yea
Medina — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Chu — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Weber — Yea
Fong — Nay
Voepel — Nay
Brough — Nay
Kiley — Nay
Mayes — Nay
Obernolte — Nay
Mathis — Nay
Bigelow — Nay
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Not Voting
Jim Patterson — Nay
Luz Rivas — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Wendy Carrillo — 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
Cervantes, Sabrina 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
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Nay
Choi, Steven S. Republican Nay
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Flora, Heath Republican Nay
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 13 Yea · 5 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 6100
Unaffiliated 7400
Total 13500
% of votes cast 72%28%0%0%
How each member voted (18)
Member Party Vote
Bloom — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Chau — Yea
Obernolte — Nay
Brough — Nay
Bigelow — Nay
Diep — Nay
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Nay
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

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 1007 do?
Under existing law, there is established in each county treasury a Supplemental Law Enforcement Services Account (SLESA) to receive all amounts allocated to a county for specified purposes. In any fiscal year for which a county receives moneys to be expended for implementation, existing law requires the county auditor to allocate the moneys in the county's SLESA within 30 days of the deposit of those moneys into the fund. Existing law requires the moneys to be allocated in specified amounts, including, but not limited to, 50% to a county or city and county to implement a comprehensive multiagency juvenile justice plan, as specified. Existing law requires the juvenile justice plan to be developed by the local juvenile justice coordinating council in each county and city and county. Existing law requires the plan to be annually reviewed and updated by the council and submitted to the Board of State and Community Corrections. Existing law requires the multiagency juvenile justice plan to include certain components, including, but not limited to, a local juvenile justice action strategy that provides for a continuum of responses to juvenile crime and delinquency. Existing law also requires each council to annually report to their board of supervisors and the board information on the effectiveness of the programs and strategies funded under these provisions, and requires the board to annually report this information to the Governor and the Legislature and post it on its internet website. This bill would revise and recast required components of the multiagency juvenile justice plan to, among other things, additionally require a plan to include an assessment of existing community-based youth development services, identification and prioritization of areas of the community that face significant public safety risk from violence and crime, documentation of the effectiveness of the programs funded under these provisions, and a description of the target population funded under these provisions. The bill would require programs and strategies funded under these provisions to, among other things, be modeled on trauma-informed and youth development approaches and in collaboration with community-based organizations. The bill would require that at least 95% of the funds allocated under these provisions be distributed to community-based organizations and other public agencies or departments that are not law enforcement entities, as specified. The bill would require a council to include additional information in its annual report to the board of supervisors and the board relating to their programs, including data on participants, and would impose additional requirements on the board with respect to those annual reports, including, but not limited to, providing a statewide analysis of county spending. Existing law requires a juvenile justice coordinating council to consist of certain members, including, but not limited to, the chief probation officer, as chair, and a representative from the district attorney's office, the public defender's office, and the sheriff's department, among others. This bill would revise and recast those membership provisions, and instead require each Juvenile Justice Coordinating Council to, at a minimum, include 7 members and consist of at least 50% community representatives with the remainder of the seats allocated to government agencies. The bill would require a council to select 2 cochairs from amongst its members, as specified. The bill would require a council to meet no less than 3 times per year and announce its meetings at least 10 days in advance of a meeting.
Who sponsors AB 1007?
AB 1007 is sponsored by Jones-Sawyer.
What is the current status of AB 1007?
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 1007?
Track AB 1007 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 1007

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 1007

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →