BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 364
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 14, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
SB 364 (Steinberg) - As Amended: August 5, 2013
Policy Committee: HealthVote:19-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
As proposed to be amended, this bill revises numerous provisions
of the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act related to 72-hour
involuntary detention for mental health evaluation and treatment
(so-called "5150 holds," as defined in Section 5150 of the
Welfare and Institutions Code). Specifically, key provisions of
this bill:
1)Broaden the types of facilities counties may designate for
purposes of 72-hour evaluation and treatment.
2)Authorize the county mental health director to develop
procedures for the county's designation and training of
professionals who will be designated to perform functions
under Section 5150.
3)Recast Section 5150 by adding and modifying other existing
provisions related to the required sequencing of events.
4)Make numerous other clarifying, technical, and minor
substantive changes to Section 5150 and related provisions.
FISCAL EFFECT
Negligible state fiscal effect.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . This bill is intended make focused changes to the
landmark LPS Act, which the author states comprise a civil
rights act for persons with mental health disorders to ensure
their personal rights.
SB 364
Page 2
The author writes that this bill broadens the types of
facilities a county can designate for 5150 purposes in order
to provide counties with more options for assisting
individuals. Provisions authorizing county mental health
directors to develop procedures for the county designation of
LPS facilities and the training of professionals are intended
to improve consistency across counties, transparency, and
quality improvement in the 5150 process. In addition, the
author indicates this bill restructures and recasts several
provisions to more clearly articulate the sequencing of events
in the 5150 process. Finally, the bill modifies legislative
intent language, updates terminology, and emphasizes that
services need to be provided in the least restrictive
settings, as appropriate.
In support, the California Mental Health Directors Association
(CMHDA) writes that this bill provides helpful clarifications
to the LPS Act while upholding the original intent of these
landmark civil rights statutes. Disability Rights California,
also in support, believes this bill will help ensure people
with mental health disabilities are treated appropriately and
in the least restrictive environments.
2)Related Legislation .
a) AB 110 (Blumenfield), Chapter 20, Statutes of 2013,
enacts the 2013-14 Budget Act, which includes, among other
provisions, $206 million ($143 million one-time GF) for a
major investment in mental health services, including
additional residential treatment capacity, crisis treatment
teams, and triage personnel. AB 110 also designates
$400,000 for the development of consensus guidelines for
involuntary assessment and discharge regarding Section 5150
and related statutes, and training as appropriate,
including for peace officers.
b) SB 585 (Steinberg), also being heard today, clarifies
that Mental Health Services Act funds and various other
local funds may be used to provide mental health services
under the Assisted Outpatient Treatment Demonstration
Project Act of 2002, or Laura's Law, and allows counties to
opt to implement Laura's Law through the county budget
process.
SB 364
Page 3
1)Concern . The California American College of Emergency
Physicians (ACEP/CA) is opposed to a provision of the bill
that de-links requirements previously placed on "designated
facilities" and applies them to designated persons. ACEP/CA
requests an amendment to clarify that designated facilities
must provide certain services on a voluntary basis, instead of
providing the person a right to receive such services. The
Citizen's Commission on Human Rights is opposed to this bill
based on opposition to the current provisions of Section 5150
and to involuntary treatment broadly.
2)Amendments. Amendments reinstate the current law requirement
that DHCS approve designated facilities, clarify the 72-hour
limit also applies to circumstances where an individual is
taken into custody for assessment and evaluation without
necessarily being admitted to a designated facility, and
clarify one usage of the word "facility" refers to the
"admitting facility."
Analysis Prepared by : Lisa Murawski / APPR. / (916) 319-2081