BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
SB 1060 (Leno) - Postadoption contact: siblings of dependent
children
-----------------------------------------------------------------
| |
| |
| |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Version: April 19, 2016 |Policy Vote: JUD. 6 - 0 |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Urgency: No |Mandate: Yes |
| | |
|--------------------------------+--------------------------------|
| | |
|Hearing Date: May 27, 2016 |Consultant: Jolie Onodera |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bill
Summary: SB 1060 would require a court in an adoption
proceeding for a dependent child to order the convening of a
child and family team (CFT) meeting, unless otherwise specified
by the court, regarding postadoptive contact with the siblings
of the child. This bill would require the court to additionally
include in its order for permanent placement of a ward of the
juvenile court, a specification of the nature and frequency of
visiting arrangements with siblings of the ward.
*********** ANALYSIS ADDENDUM - SUSPENSE FILE ***********
The following information is revised to reflect amendments
adopted by the committee on May 27, 2016
Fiscal
Impact:
Team meetings : Potentially significant increase in state
costs (General Fund*) for additional meetings to the extent
SB 1060 (Leno) Page 1 of
?
the meetings consist of CFT members. Estimated costs assuming
only 50 percent of the 6,400 annual dependent adoptions
require a CFT meeting could cost in the range of $850,000 to
over $1.7 million annually based on the average duration of
3.7 hours per CFT meeting and the attendance of one or two
local agency representatives. These costs do not include any
additional time CFT members may incur to identify and notify
non-dependent siblings to coordinate these meetings. Actual
costs could be substantially higher to the extent the
proportion of dependents with siblings is higher than assumed
above, or more than two CFT members representing local
agencies are in attendance at the meeting.
Sibling visitation : Potentially significant increase in state
costs (General Fund*) for local agencies to facilitate
additional sibling visits for dependent siblings of adopted
minors resulting from postadoptive sibling contact agreements.
Annual costs would be dependent on numerous factors that are
unknown at this time, including but not limited to the number
of adopted children with dependent siblings for which
postadoptive sibling contact agreements will be ordered, the
frequency of visits provided for in the agreements, and the
time involved for the social worker to provide for this
sibling visitation in each case (distance and duration).
Court impact : Minor workload impact and potentially future
cost savings to the extent the CFT meetings result in less
time spent during the court hearing on sibling visitation
issues.
Proposition 30* : Exempts the State from mandate reimbursement
for realigned responsibilities for "public safety services"
including the provision of child welfare services, however,
legislation enacted after September 30, 2012, that has an
overall effect of increasing the costs already borne by a
local agency for public safety services apply to local
agencies only to the extent that the State provides annual
funding for the cost increase. The provisions of Proposition
30 have not been interpreted through the formal court process
to date, however, to the extent the local agency costs
resulting from this measure are determined to be applicable
under the provisions of Proposition 30 could result in
additional costs to the State.
Author
Amendments: Define "sibling" and make other technical changes,
SB 1060 (Leno) Page 2 of
?
including the addition of a coauthor.
Committee
Amendments: Move the requirement to convene a meeting, which is
not specified as a CFT meeting, to consider postadoption sibling
contact earlier in the process under WIC § 16002, as follows:
16002 (e) If parental rights are terminated and the court orders
a dependent child or ward to be placed for adoption, the county
adoption agency or the State Department of Social Services shall
take all of the following steps to facilitate ongoing sibling
contact, except in those cases provided in subdivision (b) where
the court determines by clear and convincing evidence that
sibling interaction is contrary to the safety or well-being of
the child:
(1) Include in training provided to prospective adoptive
parents information about the importance of sibling
relationships to the adopted child and counseling on
methods for maintaining sibling relationships.
(2) Provide prospective adoptive parents with information
about siblings of the child, except the address where the
siblings of the children reside. However, this address may
be disclosed by court order for good cause shown.
(3) Encourage prospective adoptive parents to make a plan
for facilitating postadoptive contact between the child who
is the subject of a petition for adoption and any siblings
of this child. To the extent practical, the county placing
agency shall convene a meeting, with the child, sibling or
siblings of the child, the prospective adoptive parent or
parents, and a facilitator, for the purpose of deciding
whether to execute a voluntary postadoption sibling contact
agreement, as defined in Section 8616.5 of the Family Code.
Counsel to the child and counsel to the siblings who are
dependents of the court shall be notified of, and may
attend, the meeting.
Additionally, committee amendments require the court, at the
time of consideration of an adoption petition under WIC §
366.29, to inquire into the status of the development of a
voluntary postadoption contact agreement as described in WIC §
16002(e).
SB 1060 (Leno) Page 3 of
?
-- END --