California Assembly Bill AB859

California 2019-2020 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/20/19
• Refer: 3/4/19
• Report Pass: 3/19/19
• Refer: 3/20/19
• Report Pass: 3/26/19
• Refer: 3/26/19
• Refer: 4/10/19
• Report Pass: 5/16/19
• Engrossed: 5/23/19
• Refer: 5/24/19
• Refer: 6/6/19
• Report Pass: 6/18/19
• Refer: 6/18/19
• Report Pass: 6/19/19
• Refer: 6/19/19
• Refer: 6/26/19
• Report Pass: 7/3/19
• Refer: 7/3/19
• Report Pass: 7/9/19
• Refer: 7/10/19
• Refer: 8/12/19
• Report Pass: 8/30/19
• Enrolled: 9/11/19
• Vetoed: 10/12/19

Caption

Juveniles: dependency: judicial caseloads.

Impact

The bill specifically impacts existing laws concerning juvenile dependency by emphasizing the necessity for appointed counsel for minors and nonminor dependents in dependency proceedings, particularly when such individuals are not already represented. By establishing recommendations from this stakeholder group by January 1, 2022, AB 859 seeks to elevate the standards and practices related to juvenile court operations, which are crucial for informed decision-making in the lives of dependent children.

Summary

Assembly Bill 859, introduced by Assembly Member Maienschein, aims to address the critical need for improved judicial processes in juvenile dependency cases by mandating the formation of a stakeholder group. The group is tasked with recommending measures to enhance child and family outcomes within juvenile dependency courts. This stakeholder group is required to be convened by January 1, 2021, by the State Department of Social Services, in consultation with the Judicial Council, reflecting a collaborative approach to reforming existing practices for dependent children.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding the bill is largely positive, with many stakeholders recognizing the importance of judicial representation for dependent minors. The bill is viewed as a progressive step towards ensuring that children’s voices are heard in court and that their best interests are prioritized. However, there may be concerns regarding the implementation and effectiveness of the recommendations made by the stakeholder group, which could lead to contentious discussions among various interest groups in the child welfare sector.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the potential for bureaucratic delays that might arise from the additional stakeholder consultations and the varying opinions on how best to ensure timely access to legal representation for dependent children. Moreover, while the bill's proponents argue for stronger safeguards for minors in dependency cases, opponents may express concerns over the adequacy of resources allocated to tackle the underlying issues in the juvenile court system.