California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB381

Introduced
2/14/17  
Refer
2/23/17  
Refer
2/23/17  
Report Pass
3/22/17  
Report Pass
3/22/17  
Refer
3/22/17  
Refer
3/22/17  
Engrossed
4/6/17  
Engrossed
4/6/17  
Refer
5/18/17  
Refer
5/18/17  
Refer
6/6/17  
Refer
6/6/17  
Report Pass
6/13/17  
Report Pass
6/13/17  
Refer
6/13/17  
Report Pass
6/28/17  

Caption

Victims of crime: indemnification: applications.

Impact

The proposed amendments stipulate that if the Board does not meet the average 90-day processing standard, they will need to produce quarterly reports to the Legislature detailing their performance. This includes their progress in processing applications, the number of applications approved or denied, and those left incomplete. By increasing transparency and accountability, the bill hopes to improve the efficiency of the compensation process for victims of crime, ensuring they receive timely assistance during challenging circumstances.

Summary

Senate Bill 381, introduced by Senator De Len, focuses on the indemnification of victims of specified crimes by the California Victim Compensation Board. The bill aims to amend existing laws by defining the processing time for applications submitted by victims seeking compensation. Under the current law, applications must be processed within an average of 90 days and no longer than 180 days. SB 381 emphasizes accountability by requiring the Board to report progress on processing applications when they fail to meet the specified timeframes.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB 381 appears largely supportive, particularly from advocates for crime victims' rights, pointing out the need for a more responsive system that adequately accommodates victims’ needs. Stakeholders believe that enhancing the processing framework will ease the burden on victims, allowing them to access necessary resources and support more quickly. There may also be concerns about how effectively the Board can manage the additional reporting requirements without straining their resources.

Contention

While the bill seems to have broad support, some skepticism exists regarding the Board's capacity to meet new reporting mandates without a corresponding increase in funding or resources. Critics may argue that imposing additional accountability measures without giving the Board the tools needed to fulfill these obligations could lead to potential bureaucratic challenges rather than resolve existing delays in application processing.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB406

Oil and gas: operations: notice of intention: investigations: data availability.

CA AB2260

California FAIR Plan Association.

CA SB960

Transportation: planning: complete streets facilities: transit priority facilities.

CA AB2190

Hospitals: seismic safety.

CA AB793

Recycling: plastic beverage containers: minimum recycled content.

CA AB792

Recycling: plastic containers: minimum recycled content and labeling.

CA AB754

Regional notification centers: GIS data: excavations.

CA SB707

Continuing care contracts.