California 2019-2020 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1055

Introduced
2/21/19  
Introduced
2/21/19  
Refer
3/7/19  
Refer
3/7/19  
Report Pass
4/3/19  
Report Pass
4/3/19  
Refer
4/4/19  
Refer
4/4/19  
Refer
4/25/19  
Refer
4/25/19  
Failed
2/3/20  

Caption

Publicly funded technology projects.

Impact

One significant impact of AB 1055 is its requirement for public agencies managing large technology projects to develop comprehensive risk management plans and operate under enhanced oversight. This change is anticipated to improve decision-making in public projects and ensure that critical decisions are made with sufficient support and representation from various local agencies. Additionally, regarding mental health provisions, the bill ensures that individuals who are released after involuntary commitment will have additional care and treatment options scheduled, reflecting a systematic approach to post-release care.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1055, introduced by Assembly Member Levine, aims to address two primary areas: mental health services and the management of publicly funded major technology projects. The bill modifies existing laws regarding the involuntary commitment of individuals with mental health disorders and establishes requirements for publicly funded technology projects exceeding $100 million. It mandates that public agencies form oversight committees to ensure adherence to the Ralph M. Brown Act or Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, promoting transparency and accountability in project execution.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 1055 has been generally positive among advocates for mental health reform and increased transparency in public spending; however, concerns have been raised by some who fear that mandated oversight could slow down project execution. Supporters see this as a step toward improving the quality of care and ensuring individuals' rights are respected in mental health services, whereas critics point to potential bureaucratic hurdles that may emerge, complicating project delivery timelines.

Contention

Points of contention revolve around the balance of ensuring adequate mental health support while avoiding undue delays in project implementation. Some stakeholders express concern that while the intent is to enhance care after release from involuntary treatment, the requirement for outpatient appointments may be burdensome and may not fit seamlessly into existing healthcare frameworks. Furthermore, the establishment of oversight committees may face resistance from agencies that believe it could impose unnecessary regulation and impact technical efficiency in large-scale technology projects.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA AB2242

Mental health services.

AZ HB2066

Behavioral health transportation; providers; technicians

CA SB1227

Involuntary commitment: intensive treatment.

CA AB2015

Certification for intensive treatment: review hearing.

CA SB516

Certification for intensive treatment: review hearing.

AZ HB2041

Mental health; voluntary evaluations; payment

CA SB12

Mental health services: youth.

NJ A5182

Revises certain requirements for involuntary commitment for mental health treatment.