California 2015-2016 Regular Session Status: Enacted

AB 1702 — Juveniles: dependent children: reunification services.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 124, Statutes of 2016.

Track this bill free

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

  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 January 25, 2016. Enacted.

Prognosis

Likely to advance 72% · 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.

  • 2 sponsors

    1 primary, 1 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 6 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

Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge children to be dependents of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law establishes the grounds for removal of a dependent child from the custody of his or her parents or guardian, and establishes procedures to determine temporary placement of a dependent child. Existing law generally requires the court to order the social worker to provide designated child welfare services, including family reunification services, to the child and the child's mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Existing law provides that reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that a specified event has occurred, including that the child has been adjudicated a dependent as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian. This bill would also provide that reunification services need not be provided when the court finds that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted, the sexual exploitation of the child, as prescribed, except if the parent or guardian demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was coerced into permitting, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child. Existing law requires the court, if it does not order reunification services pursuant to specified provisions, to determine at the dispositional hearing if a hearing shall be set in order to determine the most appropriate plan for the child. This bill would require the court to make that determination if it does not order reunification services because it found that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted, the sexual exploitation of the child, as prescribed.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 124, Statutes of 2016.

  2. Approved by the Governor.

  3. Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2:30 p.m.

  4. Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 76. Noes 0. Page 5636.).

  5. In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after July 29 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.

  6. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 37. Noes 0. Page 4646.).

  7. Read second time and amended. Ordered to consent calendar.

  8. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (June 14).

  9. Referred to Com. on JUD.

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

  11. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 76. Noes 0. Page 4624.)

  12. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  13. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0.) (April 26).

  14. In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.

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

  16. Read second time and amended.

  17. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on HUM. S. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (March 15).

  18. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

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

  20. Re-referred to Coms. on JUD. and HUM. S. pursuant to Assembly Rule 96.

  21. Referred to Coms. on HUM. S. and JUD.

  22. From printer. May be heard in committee February 25.

  23. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (1)

  • Maienschein

Not signed on (120)

120 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 120 →

"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

AB 1702 STONE Concurrence in Senate Amendments

Passed 76 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 66004
Democratic 5000
Republican 5000
Total 76004
% of votes cast 95%0%0%5%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Yea
Baker — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Brown — Yea
Linder — Not Voting
Low — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Yea
Ting — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Harper — Yea
Salas — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Medina — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Gray — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Lopez — Yea
Hadley — Yea
Holden — Yea
Kim — Yea
Levine — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Burke — Yea
Atkins — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Campos — Not Voting
Chang — Yea
Chau — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Chu — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Dababneh — Not Voting
Daly — Yea
Dodd — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Steinorth — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Weber — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Williams — Yea
Wood — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Not Voting
Travis Allen — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic 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 →

Consent Calendar 2nd AB1702 Mark Stone

Passed 37 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 34003
Democratic 3000
Total 37003
% of votes cast 93%0%0%8%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Block — Yea
Hill — Yea
Huff — Yea
Leno — Yea
Moorlach — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Allen — Yea
Cannella — Yea
Fuller — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Galgiani — Yea
Runner — Not Voting
Glazer — Yea
Hall — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Bates — Yea
Beall — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Liu — Yea
Mendoza — Not Voting
Monning — Yea
Morrell — Yea
Pan — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Roth — Yea
Vidak — Yea
Wolk — Not Voting
Hancock — 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 →

AB 1702 STONE Assembly Third Reading

Passed 76 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 66004
Democratic 5000
Republican 5000
Total 76004
% of votes cast 95%0%0%5%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Yea
Baker — Yea
Bigelow — Yea
Bloom — Yea
Brough — Yea
Brown — Yea
Holden — Yea
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Levine — Yea
Medina — Yea
Mullin — Yea
Obernolte — Yea
Quirk — Yea
Rendon — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Waldron — Yea
Williams — Not Voting
Burke — Yea
Campos — Yea
Chang — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Salas — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Gatto — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Gray — Yea
Harper — Yea
Lopez — Yea
Kim — Yea
Linder — Yea
Low — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Mayes — Yea
Chávez — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Cooley — Yea
Cooper — Yea
Dababneh — Yea
Daly — Yea
Dodd — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Melendez — Yea
Nazarian — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Olsen — Yea
Rodriguez — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Weber — Yea
Wilk — Yea
Atkins — Yea
Chau — Yea
Chu — Yea
Mathis — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Not Voting
Steinorth — Yea
Ting — Yea
Wood — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Gomez — Yea
Hadley — Yea
Beth Gaines — Not Voting
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Jim Patterson — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Not Voting
Travis Allen — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic 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 →

Do pass.

Passed 6 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 5000
Democratic 0001
Republican 1000
Total 6001
% of votes cast 86%0%0%14%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Lopez — Yea
Bonilla — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Thurmond — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Grove, Shannon Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended, and be re-referred to the Committee on [Human Services] with recommendation: To Consent Calendar

Passed 8 Yea · 0 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 8001
Republican 0001
Total 8002
% of votes cast 80%0%0%20%
How each member voted (10)
Member Party Vote
Holden — Yea
Maienschein — Yea
Wagner — Yea
Alejo — Yea
Chau — Yea
Chiu — Not Voting
Ting — Yea
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Not Voting

Official roll call →

Subjects

public-safety civil-rights
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 1702 do?
Existing law establishes the jurisdiction of the juvenile court, which may adjudge children to be dependents of the court under certain circumstances, including when the child suffered or there is a substantial risk that the child will suffer serious physical harm, or a parent fails to provide the child with adequate food, clothing, shelter, or medical treatment. Existing law establishes the grounds for removal of a dependent child from the custody of his or her parents or guardian, and establishes procedures to determine temporary placement of a dependent child. Existing law generally requires the court to order the social worker to provide designated child welfare services, including family reunification services, to the child and the child's mother and statutorily presumed father or guardians. Existing law provides that reunification services need not be provided to a parent or guardian when the court finds, by clear and convincing evidence, that a specified event has occurred, including that the child has been adjudicated a dependent as a result of severe sexual abuse or the infliction of severe physical harm to the child, a sibling, or a half sibling by a parent or guardian, and the court makes a factual finding that it would not benefit the child to pursue reunification services with the offending parent or guardian. This bill would also provide that reunification services need not be provided when the court finds that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted, the sexual exploitation of the child, as prescribed, except if the parent or guardian demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that he or she was coerced into permitting, or participating in, the sexual exploitation of the child. Existing law requires the court, if it does not order reunification services pursuant to specified provisions, to determine at the dispositional hearing if a hearing shall be set in order to determine the most appropriate plan for the child. This bill would require the court to make that determination if it does not order reunification services because it found that the parent or guardian knowingly participated in, or permitted, the sexual exploitation of the child, as prescribed.
Who sponsors AB 1702?
AB 1702 is sponsored by Maienschein and Mark Stone.
What is the current status of AB 1702?
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced January 25, 2016. Enacted.
Where can I track AB 1702?
Track AB 1702 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 1702

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 1702

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →