California 2021-2022 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate 1 R cosponsors

SB 348 — Veterans' homes: closure.

Last action — August 26 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 2021-2022 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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 establishes the Veterans' Home of California system within the Department of Veterans Affairs and provides for the establishment and operation of veterans' homes at various sites. Existing law requires the master plan for the overall operation of the veterans' homes system be revised by the department every 5 years. Under existing law, the master plan is required to discuss, among other things, the location of future facilities at or within the vicinity of United States Department of Veterans Affairs facilities, the closure of facilities, and the expansion of existing facilities or conversion of existing facilities to provide different levels of service. This bill would, in the event the department recommends or proposes to close a veterans' home, require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to convene a taskforce that includes representatives from the department, elected officials from the community where the home is located, residents of the home, staff employed at the home, and local veterans groups. The bill would require the taskforce to conduct a review of the proposed closure that includes a cost-benefit analysis specific to the home, a community impact analysis specific to the community where the home is located, and a review of community input, as specified. The bill would require the taskforce to submit recommendations regarding the proposed closure of the veterans' home to the Legislature.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. August 26 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  2. August 19 set for first hearing. Placed on suspense file.

  3. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (July 6). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  4. Referred to Com. on M. & V.A.

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

  6. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 1344.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  7. Ordered to special consent calendar.

  8. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  9. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 1188.) (May 20).

  10. Set for hearing May 20.

  11. May 3 hearing: Placed on APPR suspense file.

  12. Set for hearing May 3.

  13. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 796.) (April 14). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  14. Set for hearing April 14.

  15. Re-referred to Com. on M. & V.A.

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

  17. Joint Rule 55 suspended. (Ayes 32. Noes 4. Page 272.)

  18. (Ayes 32. Noes 4.)

  19. Art. IV. Sec. 8(a) of the Constitution dispensed with.

  20. Referred to Com. on RLS.

  21. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 12.

  22. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. 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

Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Passed 11 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 6000
Democratic 5000
Total 11000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Frazier — Yea
Daly — Yea
Smith — Yea
Voepel — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Salas — Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Special Consent SB348

Passed 39 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 13000
Unaffiliated 22001
Republican 4000
Total 39001
% of votes cast 98%0%0%3%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Pan — Yea
Rubio — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Melendez — Not Voting
Glazer — Yea
Roth — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Bates — Yea
Gonzalez — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Min — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Borgeas — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Newman — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Kamlager — Yea
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Becker, Josh Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 5000
Republican 1000
Democratic 1000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Wieckowski — Yea
Kamlager — Yea
Portantino — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Bates — Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 6 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 4001
Republican 1000
Democratic 1000
Total 6001
% of votes cast 86%0%0%14%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Portantino — Yea
Bradford — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Kamlager — Yea
Bates — Not Voting
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

veterans
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 348 do?
Existing law establishes the Veterans' Home of California system within the Department of Veterans Affairs and provides for the establishment and operation of veterans' homes at various sites. Existing law requires the master plan for the overall operation of the veterans' homes system be revised by the department every 5 years. Under existing law, the master plan is required to discuss, among other things, the location of future facilities at or within the vicinity of United States Department of Veterans Affairs facilities, the closure of facilities, and the expansion of existing facilities or conversion of existing facilities to provide different levels of service. This bill would, in the event the department recommends or proposes to close a veterans' home, require the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to convene a taskforce that includes representatives from the department, elected officials from the community where the home is located, residents of the home, staff employed at the home, and local veterans groups. The bill would require the taskforce to conduct a review of the proposed closure that includes a cost-benefit analysis specific to the home, a community impact analysis specific to the community where the home is located, and a review of community input, as specified. The bill would require the taskforce to submit recommendations regarding the proposed closure of the veterans' home to the Legislature.
Who sponsors SB 348?
SB 348 is sponsored by Grove, Shannon (Republican).
What is the current status of SB 348?
This bill died with 2021-2022 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 348?
Track SB 348 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 348

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 348

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →