BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 2813


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  May 4, 2016


                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS


                               Lorena Gonzalez, Chair


          AB  
          2813 (Bloom) - As Amended April 5, 2016


           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Policy       |Human Services                 |Vote:|6 - 1        |
          |Committee:   |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          Urgency:  No  State Mandated Local Program:  YesReimbursable:   
          No


          SUMMARY:  This bill prohibits a probation officer from  
          considering a minor's status as a foster youth or current  
          availability of a placement when making the decision whether or  
          not to detain. This bill also requires a probation officer to  
          immediately release a minor to the custody of the child welfare  
          services department, a caregiver, or a foster parent, unless it  








                                                                    AB 2813


                                                                    Page  2





          can be demonstrated that the minor's detention is necessary.


          FISCAL EFFECT:


          Negligible state fiscal impact.


          COMMENTS:


          1)Purpose.  According to the author, "Foster youth do not have  
            the same statutory protection that other children in our state  
            have and are often needlessly arrested and detained in  
            juvenile halls.  Children who enter the juvenile justice  
            system, even briefly, are more likely to engage in deviant  
            behavior and more likely to get arrested as adults.   
            Therefore, it is imperative that foster youth not be unfairly  
            detained.  Existing law requires minors to be released to  
            their parent or guardian unless they are a public safety risk  
            or flight risk and requires that a court's decision to detain  
            a minor not be based on their status as a foster youth;  
            however that same statutory protection does not exist for the  
            probation officer's decision to detain a foster youth.  This  
            bill will extend that statutory provision to probation  
            officers and will require that a probation officer's decision  
            to detain a foster youth not be based on their status as a  
            dependent of the court." 
            


          2)Background.  Current law authorizes counties to adopt  
            dual-status protocols in order to allow for better oversight  
            and provision of services to youth who are involved in both  
            the child welfare and juvenile justice systems. Counties that  
            elect to participate in this voluntary program are tasked with  
            creating a dual status protocol to permit a youth who meets  
            specified criteria to be designated as both a dependent child  








                                                                    AB 2813


                                                                    Page  3





            and a ward of the court simultaneously.
            According to Judicial Council, only 18 of California's 58  
            counties have elected to develop these protocols, but these  
            include the largest counties, Los Angeles, San Diego, Santa  
            Clara, Riverside, and San Bernardino, so most youth involved  
            with both the dependency and delinquency systems in California  
            today live in dual-status jurisdictions.


            AB 388 (Chesbro), Chapter 760, Statutes of 2014, addressed the  
            over-detention of foster youth at the detention hearing stage  
            by requiring that the court's decision to detain not be based  
            on a youth's status as a dependent, the bill did not apply to  
            a probation officer's initial decision to detain prior to the  
            court hearing.  This bill is intended to harmonize the  
            criteria for detention probation with those used by the court  
            at the detention hearing.  It is widely agreed that detention  
            can negatively impact a young person's mental and physical  
            well-being, education, and employment opportunities.  Time  
            spent in detention can increase a youth's likelihood to  
            recidivate and spend time in detention as an adult. 


          3)Current Legislation. AB 1911(Eggman), 2016, requires the  
            development and implementation of standardized definitions and  
            defined goals for dual status youth. This bill is before this  
            Committee today. 


          4)Prior Legislation. AB 388 (Chesbro), Chapter 760, Statutes of  
            2014, specified that a dependent ward of the juvenile court is  
            not necessarily subject to detention or other sanctions  
            because of their status as a dependent of the court.  


          











                                                                    AB 2813


                                                                    Page  4







          Analysis Prepared by:Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916)  
          319-2081