Transcript Highlights:

• For context, a sexually violent predator, or SVP, is a person who has been convicted of, found not guilty
• When it appears that a person being released from confinement may meet the criteria of being an SVP,
• or the Attorney General files a petition and proves that the person meets the criteria of being an SVP
• Following commitment, under certain conditions, an SVP may petition for conditional release to a less
• DSHS is required to notify certain persons when an SVP is granted conditional release, changes address

Bills: HB2146, HB2349, HB2430, HB2457, HB2510, HB2532

Keywords: sexual exploitation, minors, human trafficking, child safety, law enforcement, victim support, sexually violent predator, SVP, civil commitment, community notification, release notification, conditional release, unconditional discharge, escape notification, victim notification, witness notification, prosecuting attorney, Department of Social and Health Services, DSHS, Department of Corrections

Summary: The committee heard public hearings on several public safety bills. House Bill 2146 would expand the sexual exploitation of a minor statute to cover causing a minor to view sexually explicit conduct when that conduct is photographed or performed live. The prime sponsor, Olympia police, and Pierce County prosecutors described cases involving adults masturbating in front of children and said current law often leaves only misdemeanor charges such as indecent exposure or communication with a minor for immoral purposes. They argued the bill would better address grooming behavior, allow felony-level investigation and forensic interviews, and provide stronger sentencing and no-contact consequences. No vote was taken. House Bill 2349 would expand notice requirements for sexually violent predator releases, conditional releases, address changes, discharges, and escapes to include local elected officials such as legislators, county leaders, and city officials. The sponsor said the bill would codify and standardize a practice that had been occurring inconsistently and would help officials respond to community questions with accurate information. Cities and DSHS supported the bill with technical amendments, while defense attorneys opposed it, warning that broader notice could undermine law enforcement’s role, fuel public pressure against releases, and create constitutional and safety concerns. The hearing was left open. The committee also heard House Bills 2430 and 2457 together on the crime victim penalty assessment. HB 2430 would restore the assessment for certain offenses, while HB 2457 would increase the assessment and add a surcharge for defendants with substantial financial resources. Sponsors and victim advocates said the 2023 changes left victim services underfunded and caused severe staffing cuts, while prosecutors said the bills would help restore constitutionally required victim services. Defense and legal aid groups opposed both bills, arguing they would reimpose burdensome fees on people who cannot pay and worsen reentry barriers. The chair directed the two sponsors to work together on a single proposal before executive action. House Bill 2532 would make it a gross misdemeanor to sell or distribute nitrous oxide devices or canisters, while exempting medical, dental, food, industrial, and automotive uses. The sponsor and supporters, including tribal representatives, the Attorney General’s office, public health officials, and the Washington Poison Center, described rising misuse, youth-targeted marketing, serious injuries, and deaths, and said the bill would reduce access and protect public health. A veterinary group asked for clarification on animal care uses. The hearing was held open. Finally, House Bill 2510 would require DOC supervision for people convicted of stalking who are sentenced to community custody. The sponsor said stalking is a serious crime against persons and that supervision is needed to hold offenders accountable and protect victims; the hearing began but no action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2003, the state started the CONREP program for SVPs, where courts can order that certain SVPs who
• Courts may also unconditionally release SVPs from state hospitals without the SVPs' participation in
• Separate from that, there have been 125 SVPs where the courts have unconditionally released SVPs without
• Twenty-four of the 125 unconditionally released SVPs were convicted of a new crime, and those 24 SVPs
• DSH, do you track any regional trends on SVP placement?

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit Committee held an oversight hearing on the state auditor’s October 2024 report on California’s Forensic Conditional Release Program (CONREP) for sexually violent predators. Members and witnesses discussed public safety, the long delays in finding community housing, the role of local housing committees, and the Department of State Hospitals’ oversight of Liberty Healthcare, which operates much of the program. Several legislators from rural and high-desert districts said their communities have been disproportionately affected by placements and questioned why many placements end up in remote areas. State Auditor Grant Parks said the audit found that CONREP participants were convicted of new offenses less often than sexually violent predators who were unconditionally released, but that 18 of 56 participants had been revoked and returned to state hospitals for noncompliance. He said it took an average of 17 months to place current participants in the community, with 20 additional people awaiting placement for an average of 20 months, and that the program incurred significant pre-placement costs. Parks also said local officials were often unclear about their role, DSH had not given clear guidance at the time of the audit, and California lacks a transitional housing option used in some other states. He reported that DSH had implemented four of the five audit recommendations, while declining the recommendation to explore state-owned transitional housing. DSH Director Stephanie Clendendon and Liberty representative Ken Carabello defended the program as a court-ordered, highly supervised treatment model intended to reduce reoffending and support reintegration. They said DSH is actively involved in placement review, that Liberty searches countywide under statutory restrictions, and that community feedback and court approval are part of the process. DSH said it has now implemented guidance for housing committee designees, formal program reviews, an outcome tracker, and an analysis of whether to separate some Liberty services into different contracts. DSH continued to oppose transitional housing, arguing it would not solve the core siting and statutory problems and would add cost. Several members remained critical, arguing the program is broken, costly, and unfairly concentrated in certain communities, and some called for major statutory changes or suspension of the program.

Transcript Highlights:

• Myron France, who was the last SVP of finance, made 436,000 in his role as an SVP.
• Myron France, who was the last SVP of finance, made 436,000 in his role as an SVP.
• Myron France, who was the last SVP of finance, made 436,000 in his role as an SVP.
• Myron France, who was the last SVP of finance, made 436,000 in his role as an SVP.
• Myron France, who was the last SVP of finance, made 436,000 in his role as an SVP.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• At the time SVP was created, it was limited just to determinate terms.
• And there was never the contemplation that those folks would enter the SVP process.
• As you all know, the SVP process...
• since we have an SVP program?
• The SVP proceedings are notorious...

Summary: The committee heard testimony on several public safety bills, with most of the discussion focused on AB 1650, AB 2014, AB 1886, AB 2126, AB 2624, and AB 2257. AB 1650 would require clearer identification on privately owned vehicles rented or leased to government agencies for enforcement operations; supporters framed it as a transparency and safety measure in response to ICE activity, while no opposition testified. AB 2014 would allow post-conviction habeas relief where gender bias or stereotypes were used at trial and may have affected the outcome; supporters described cases involving sexist and anti-LGBTQ stereotypes, while the California District Attorneys Association opposed the bill as overbroad and likely to restrict relevant evidence, though the author said recent amendments removed the evidence-code provisions and left only the habeas remedy. AB 1886 would extend a 12-month probation presumption to youth in out-of-home placements and those discharged from secure youth treatment facilities; youth advocates supported it as a fairness and rehabilitation measure, while judges, probation officials, and district attorneys opposed it as undoing a recent compromise and limiting individualized decisions. AB 2126 would speed hiring of peer partners in child welfare by creating a narrow exemption process for certain foster-youth-related offenses; it drew broad support and no opposition. AB 2624 would expand the Safe at Home address-confidentiality program to immigrant service providers, employees, and volunteers; supporters cited threats, doxing, and harassment, while one journalist opposed it over possible effects on reporting, and the author and committee members said the bill preserves press protections and is narrowly aimed at threats and harassment. AB 2257 would restore county authority to create a separate corrections department to run jails instead of the sheriff; supporters argued it would improve accountability and address jail deaths and fiscal problems, while sheriffs opposed it as unnecessary and said sheriffs are already subject to oversight. The committee also noted several bills pulled by their authors and adopted a consent calendar of unrelated measures. Votes were not always taken immediately because the committee was waiting for a quorum, but AB 2624 was moved on a do-pass-as-amended motion to Appropriations and left on call, and the chair indicated support or favorable recommendations on several of the other measures.

Transcript Highlights:

• purposes. ...clear definition of what constitutes a private school for SVP placement purposes, which
• As noted in the committee analysis, of the individuals conditionally released under the SVP program,
• In some cases, housing for a conditionally released SVP has gone on for years.
• The SVP scheme, which is a civil commitment scheme after the person has served their prison time, has
• That SVP history can no longer live around any children?

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• automatically get evaluated for possible civil commitment and rehabilitation as an SVP.
• At the time SVP was created, it was limited just to determinate terms.
• And there was never the contemplation that those folks would enter the SVP process.
• since we have an SVP program?
• The SVP proceedings are notorious.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• purposes. ...clear definition of what constitutes a private school for SVP placement purposes, which
• Housing for a conditionally released SVP in some cases has gone on actually for years.
• And the SVP scheme, which is a civil commitment scheme after the person has served their prison time,
• Is it to ensure anyone with an SVP history can no longer live around any children?
• That SVP history can no longer live around any children?

Summary: The Senate Public Safety Committee heard several bills, beginning with AB 647, which would clarify last year’s RV disposal pilot program for Los Angeles and Alameda counties so local agencies can remove abandoned, inoperable RVs more efficiently. Supporters, including a representative for Mayor Karen Bass, said the bill is needed to address public health, fire, sewage, and neighborhood safety hazards. Opponents argued the measure would be used to remove occupied RVs without adequate housing or service referrals and would harm vehicle residents. The committee later approved AB 647 on a do-pass motion to the Appropriations Committee. The committee also considered AB 1656, which would give judges discretion to delay human trafficking cases when the assigned prosecutor has another trial, preliminary hearing, or motion to suppress, with amendments limiting the continuance to one time and no more than 10 days. Supporters said the bill would help preserve vertical prosecution and trauma-informed continuity for survivors; opponents raised speedy-trial and due process concerns. After discussion about balancing victim continuity and constitutional rights, the committee passed AB 1656 as amended to the floor. AB 1917, a bill to require prosecutors to file a motion before reinstating charges dismissed at preliminary hearing, also drew support from public defenders and defense groups and opposition from district attorneys, who argued the bill used the wrong procedural mechanism. The author agreed to explore moving the process into the existing 995 framework, and the committee passed AB 1917 as amended to Appropriations. AB 2636 would require courts to consider possession of a loaded firearm when deciding whether a juvenile qualifies for deferred entry of judgment. Supporters, including probation and police chiefs, said the bill would add accountability for serious gun-related conduct while preserving rehabilitation options; opponents said it would reduce access to effective youth diversion and disproportionately affect Black and brown youth. The committee passed the bill to the floor. AB 1632, which would replace notarization with a penalty-of-perjury statement for 602 trespass authorization letters, was supported by cities and law enforcement as a way to reduce bureaucracy and help address trespass and vacant-property hazards, while opponents warned of abuse and Fourth Amendment concerns. The committee adopted the amendment and passed the bill to the floor. The hearing then moved on to AB 1974, a voluntary firearm safe-storage bill, with the author introducing the measure and witnesses from Pierce’s Pledge expected to testify.

Transcript Highlights:

• SVPs are deranged. It's not a question of if they will try to harm someone sexually, but when?
• Unfortunately, existing law allows for the release of SVPs into residential communities.
• San Diego County has had 90% of SVPs released in the state of California into our county.
• My district has had all but three SVPs released in the last eight years.
• , as well as prohibit the transitory release of SVPs.

Summary: The committee heard AB 82, which would expand privacy and safety protections for patients and providers of reproductive and gender-affirming care. The author and supporters said the bill is needed because of rising harassment, doxing, and threats, and because sensitive health data could be used by hostile actors; opponents argued it would create constitutional problems, enable abuse of safe-at-home protections, and improperly shield providers and records from scrutiny. Public testimony was heavily divided, with many advocates in support and many privacy, civil liberties, and anti-trafficking or sex-based policy groups in opposition. The bill was moved on a due pass recommendation and remained on call. The committee then heard AB 331, which would clarify that county election certification is a ministerial duty, prohibit misleading ballot return envelopes, and require voter information guides to be delivered to jails in an acceptable format. The Department of Justice and several good-government groups supported the measure, the Secretary of State had no position after amendments, and a committee member noted ongoing concerns but supported it after the changes. The bill passed on a do pass recommendation to Appropriations and was placed on call. AB 1178 followed, proposing to protect undercover peace officers’ names, images, and likenesses in public records while preserving disclosure of sustained misconduct records. Law enforcement and public safety groups supported the bill as a needed safety measure, while journalists, transparency advocates, and civil liberties groups opposed it, saying existing law already protects officers and the new language could lead to overbroad withholding. After discussion about the scope of undercover status and the need for judicial discretion, the bill passed as amended to Appropriations. The committee also adopted a consent calendar. Later, AB 981 was heard, creating a five-county pilot program requiring intelligent speed assistance devices for certain reckless driving convictions. Supporters, including traffic safety advocates and crash victims, said the bill could reduce repeat speeding and save lives; opponents raised concerns about cost, installer oversight, liability for automakers, and the breadth of the pilot. The bill passed as amended to Appropriations. AB 22, which would repeal Proposition 57 and restrict release of sexually violent predators and certain sex offenders, drew strong opposition from youth justice, public defender, and civil liberties groups who said it would be unconstitutional and harmful; the chair recommended no, no motion was made, and the bill was held. Finally, AB 897, a squatter-removal bill, was presented with the author arguing it would protect property owners through a faster due-process process; the transcript cuts off during early support testimony and does not show a final action on that measure.

Transcript Highlights:

• A sexually violent predator, or SVP, is an individual convicted of a sexually violent offense and diagnosed
• When an SVP is determined ready for release from civil commitment under the Department of State Hospitals
• Department of State Hospitals to ensure that department vendors consider public safety in all placements of SVPs
• common-sense updates will afford more oversight to the process and help ensure more appropriate placements of SVPs
• The SVP placement system, we've had a lot of controversy, and I've testified in opposition to the system

Summary: The Assembly Public Safety Committee met and adopted a consent calendar that included SB 4, SB 229, SB 385, SB 459, and SB 553. SB 221 was pulled by the committee and will return later. The committee then heard several bills, with members repeatedly noting the next hearing would be July 1 in Room 126. SB 281 by Senator Perez would require judges to use the exact statutory immigration-consequences advisement when taking pleas from noncitizen defendants. Supporters said judges have been deviating from the required language, creating confusion and harming defendants; opponents, including district attorneys, warned that the bill could affect plea withdrawals and appellate litigation unless amended. The committee discussed possible amendments, including a nonretroactivity clarification and language proposed by the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office, and the bill was passed on call. SB 337 by Senator Menjivar would strengthen protections against sexual abuse and misconduct in prisons, especially women’s prisons, by requiring documentation of searches, extending grievance timelines, limiting hiring of people with violent or sexual convictions, and improving investigation procedures. Supporters emphasized staff abuse, retaliation concerns, and the need for oversight; opposition testimony focused on transgender inmate placement and was criticized by committee members as not germane. The bill passed 9-0 to Appropriations. SB 379 by Senator Jones, dealing with oversight of sexually violent predator conditional release placements, passed to Appropriations after support from law enforcement and prosecutors and no opposition. SB 734 by Senator Caballero, which would provide due process protections for law enforcement officers affected by California Racial Justice Act findings, also passed to Appropriations with support from police and district attorney groups and no opposition. SB 551 by Senator Cortese, which would codify normalization and dynamic security principles in corrections, passed to Appropriations despite concerns from one member that it went too far in making prisons too home-like.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, proceedings under the SVP laws, like juvenile proceedings, are generally not open to the public
• Under the SVP laws, like juvenile proceedings, proceedings are generally not open to the public.
• Specifically, SVP proceedings are not punitive and are about determining an individual's mental status
• Courts have held it is up to judges to determine which parts of SVP proceedings are public and which
• County Superior Court judge sent out a press release inviting the public to appear remotely for an SVP

Summary: The committee heard a large public safety agenda and began by announcing several bills off calendar and limiting testimony to two witnesses per side. The first major item was AB 2698, which would authorize local governments to create youth court diversion programs for first-time juvenile offenders. The author and supporters, including Bakersfield Police Department representatives and a student participant, described the program as restorative, record-clearing, and successful in Bakersfield. Opponents argued it was not true diversion because it occurs after adjudication, could widen system involvement, and should instead be replaced by pre-arrest community-based diversion. The bill was moved on a due pass motion to Appropriations, but remained on call with some members not voting. The committee also adopted a consent calendar of ten bills without opposition. The committee then heard AB 1959, which would create a narrow exception allowing resentencing in adult court for certain violent juvenile offenders in a case arising from the Santana High School shooting. The author, San Diego County District Attorney Summer Stephan, and a survivor/city councilmember argued the bill would close a loophole that could lead to resentencing and early release despite parole denials. Several organizations registered opposition or opposed unless amended, but many noted they were reviewing the amended version. The bill was moved due pass as amended to Appropriations and remained on call. AB 1628, extending California’s safe surrender window for newborns from 72 hours to 30 days, drew broad support from the author, firefighters, medical and child welfare groups, and no opposition; it was moved due pass to Human Services and remained on call. The committee also approved AB 1974, which authorizes law enforcement agencies to create voluntary temporary firearm storage programs. The author and supporters from San Francisco law enforcement, Giffords, and gun safety groups said the bill would expand safe storage options during crises and in custody disputes; there was no opposition, and it passed due pass as amended. AB 2297, requiring restitution in diversion cases, drew support from the author, district attorneys, and victims’ advocates, while opponents argued it was duplicative, could burden low-income participants, and might undermine diversion success. After discussion about restitution law and ability to pay, the bill passed due pass. Finally, AB 2438, which would require people sentenced to more than six years to serve in state prison rather than county jail, drew support from the author and Riverside County Sheriff Bianco, who said realignment had overcrowded county jails and strained resources. Opponents warned it could worsen state prison overcrowding and conflict with realignment’s purpose. The chair recommended no, and the bill was moved due pass and re-refer to Appropriations, remaining on call.

Transcript Highlights:

• For context, a sexually violent predator, or SVP, is a person who has been convicted of, found not guilty
• When it appears that a person being released from confinement may meet the criteria of being an SVP,
• or the Attorney General files a petition and proves that the person meets the criteria of being an SVP
• Following commitment, under certain conditions, an SVP may then petition for their conditional release
• DSHS is required to notify certain persons when an SVP is granted conditional release, changes address

Summary: The committee heard public hearings on several bills, with testimony limited because of the large number of sign-ups. House Bill 2146 would expand the crime of sexual exploitation of a minor to include causing a minor to view sexually explicit conduct that is being photographed or shown in a live performance. The prime sponsor, Olympia police, and Pierce County prosecutors described cases involving adults masturbating in front of children and argued the current law leaves a gap by treating such conduct as only misdemeanor indecent exposure or communication with a minor. Committee members asked about comparisons to other states, forensic interviews, and whether related offenses could be enhanced. House Bill 2349 would expand notice requirements for sexually violent predator releases, conditional releases, address changes, discharges, and escapes to include local elected officials such as sheriffs, county executives, city officials, and legislators. The sponsor said the bill would codify a practice already occurring in some cases and help officials respond to community concerns with accurate information. DSHS supported increased communication but requested technical amendments. Several city officials testified in support, saying they had not always been notified in advance of placements in their communities. Defense advocates opposed the bill, warning that broader notification could fuel public pressure, vigilante responses, and constitutional problems for the civil commitment system. The hearing on the bill was left open for amendments. House Bill 2532 would make it a gross misdemeanor to sell or distribute nitrous oxide canisters or similar containers, with exemptions for medical, dental, food, industrial, and automotive uses. The sponsor and supporters described rising misuse among youth and young adults, public health harms, and incidents involving impaired driving and overdose deaths. Tribal representatives, the Attorney General’s Office, the Washington Poison Center, and public health officials supported the bill, while veterinary representatives asked for clarification or an amendment to preserve veterinary use. The committee also heard testimony on House Bills 2430 and 2457, which both concern the crime victim penalty assessment. Representative Barno’s bill would restore the assessment for certain offenses involving victims, while Representative Davis’s bill would increase the assessment and add a surcharge for defendants with substantial financial resources. Victim advocates, prosecutors, and sheriffs supported the bills as needed to restore funding for victim services, while defense groups opposed them as burdensome fees on indigent defendants. The chair directed the two sponsors to work together on a single proposal, and the hearings were held open.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, proceedings under the SVP laws, like juvenile proceedings, are generally not open to the public
• Specifically, SVP proceedings are not punitive and are about determining an individual's mental status
• Courts have held it is up to judges to determine which parts of SVP proceedings are public and which
• County Superior Court judge sent out a press release inviting the public to appear remotely for an SVP
• because we have designed a system in California that is wholly unfair in that we are not releasing SVPs

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• existing school protections as it relates to the conditional release of sexually violent predators, or SVPs
• common-sense measure would close a loophole in existing law and allow communities to feel safe when SVPs
• common-sense measure would close a loophole in existing law and allow communities to feel safe when SVPs
• my colleagues for their support, and this is a very important issue as most of us are experiencing SVPs

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly met after a quorum call and proceeded with a largely ceremonial opening, including a prayer, Pledge of Allegiance, guest introductions, and several recognitions of visitors, students, community college delegations, and retiring staff. Members also offered adjournment-in-memory tributes, including remembrances of Kathy Wooten and Rowena Ramos, before adjourning to a later date. The chamber then took up a long third-reading file of bills covering energy, climate, agriculture, behavioral health, housing, education, privacy, transportation, public safety, and retirement. Among the measures discussed were AB 34 on renewable portfolio standard exemptions for publicly owned utilities; AB 35 to speed implementation of Proposition 4 climate-resilience funds; AB 52 on agricultural advisory committees; AB 277 on background checks for behavioral health employees; AB 664 authorizing targeted bachelor’s programs at Southwestern Community College; AB 673 creating a grant program for unaccompanied homeless youth; AB 710 on dynamic electricity pricing; AB 748 on pre-approved housing plans; AB 767 expanding school and daycare protections in sexually violent predator placement decisions; AB 883 protecting officials’ personal information from data brokers; AB 1054 on a deferred retirement option program for CHP and Cal Fire; AB 1159 on student data privacy; AB 1204 revising school funding formulas; AB 1265 extending historic building tax relief; AB 1349 banning speculative ticketing; and AB 1359 allowing seniors 80 and older to opt out of jury service without a doctor’s note. Most bills received broad support and passed, often unanimously or with only a few no votes. Notable opposition came on AB 1054, where one member argued the retirement option would worsen pension costs, and on AB 1349, where members emphasized consumer protection and artist support. Several bills were described as cleanup, technical, or implementation measures, and members repeatedly cited local needs, workforce shortages, public safety, education access, and consumer protection as reasons for support. After completing the file, the Assembly adopted adjournment motions and set the next session for Thursday, January 29 at 9 a.m. A few vote changes were entered from the dais after adjournment, including changes on AB 710, AB 673, AB 52, and AB 643.

Transcript Highlights:

• learned, and I think Senator Torres mentioned, was that LRAs are for many kinds of individuals, not just SVP
• learned, and I think Senator Torres mentioned, was that LRAs are for many kinds of individuals, not just SVP
• of this bill and anything really related to just the complexities of our work as we think about our SVPs

Bills: SB6339, SB6184, SB6224, SB6255, SB5977, SB5979, SB6249, SB6007, SB6186, SGA9299

Keywords: alternative placements, individual ownership, restrictive policies, healthcare, operational control, homeless youth, youth services, mental health, support programs, state law, behavioral health, children, support services, poverty reduction, intergenerational poverty, WorkFirst, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, TANF, self-sufficiency, economic justice

Summary: The Human Services Committee met on policy cutoff day to finish executive action on several bills and then hold a public hearing on Senate Bill 6339. In executive session, the committee advanced Senate Bill 6224, which creates a Children and Youth Behavioral Health Leadership Council and an executive coordination officer, sending it to Ways and Means. Senate Bill 6255, which updates the Lupro poverty-reduction task force and related council duties, was amended and passed to Rules. Senate Bills 5977 (near-fatality reports), 5979 (in-home dependencies), and 6249 (DOC supervision for stalking convictions) also passed, with 5977 and 6249 sent to Rules and 5979 sent to Rules as well. Senate Bill 6007, directing WSIPP to evaluate child welfare screening and risk assessment tools, was amended and sent to Ways and Means. The committee also confirmed gubernatorial appointee Angela Ramirez. The committee then waived the five-day notice rule to hear Senate Bill 6339, which would require that a less restrictive alternative placement for a sexually violent predator be owned and operated by the same person or persons providing or monitoring treatment. Supporters, including the bill sponsor, the City of Kennewick, and several residents, argued the bill would improve accountability, transparency, and community safety, especially in response to a proposed placement in Kennewick near schools and homes. Opponents, including the Department of Social and Health Services, public defense attorneys, and Disability Rights Washington, said the bill would create conflicts of interest, be difficult or impossible to implement, and could undermine the constitutional LRA process by making release to the community unrealistic. Committee members asked questions about liability, supervision, and how LRAs are currently reviewed and monitored. Agency witnesses explained that DOC investigates proposed LRA sites, that residents remain under conditions and monitoring, and that ownership and treatment are typically separate functions. The chair closed the hearing without taking action on Senate Bill 6339, saying more work and discussion were needed.

Transcript Highlights:

• learned, and I think Senator Torres mentioned, was that LRAs are for many kinds of individuals, not just SVP
• learned, and I think Senator Torres mentioned, was that LRAs are for many kinds of individuals, not just SVP
• of this bill and anything really related to just the complexities of our work as we think about our SVPs

Summary: The Human Services Committee met on policy cutoff day and first completed executive action on several bills. Members advanced Senate Bill 6224 on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Leadership Council to Ways and Means, Senate Bill 6255 on the poverty task force/council changes to Rules, Senate Bill 5977 on DCYF near-fatality reports to Rules, Senate Bill 5979 on in-home dependency procedures to Rules, Senate Bill 6249 on DOC supervision of stalking convictions to Rules, and Senate Bill 6007 on WISIP’s evaluation of child welfare screening tools to Ways and Means. The committee also confirmed gubernatorial appointee Angela Ramirez. Several proposed amendments were debated, mostly offered by Senator Christian, but most failed; one technical amendment to SB 6184 was adopted, and an amendment to SB 6007 removing the risk-assessment portion of the study was adopted before the bill advanced. The committee also moved to waive the five-day notice rule for Senate Bill 6339 so it could be heard that day. The public hearing on Senate Bill 6339 focused on a proposed requirement that a less restrictive alternative (LRA) placement for sexually violent predators be owned and operated by the same individuals. Senator Torres and Senator Banke argued the bill would improve accountability, transparency, and community safety, citing a proposed Kennewick placement near schools and children. Supporters from the city of Kennewick and community members said the current process lacked transparency and that owner-operators should have a direct stake in safe operation. Opponents, including DSHS, the Washington Defender Association, the Office of Public Defense, and Disability Rights Washington, said the bill would create conflicts of interest, be difficult or impossible to implement, and could undermine the constitutional LRA process by making community placement unattainable. Committee members asked about liability, supervision, and the difference between LRA placements and unconditional release, and the chair said more work was needed on the issue. No final action was taken on SB 6339 during the hearing. The chair closed the hearing after noting the committee was at cutoff and that further discussion would continue later.

Transcript Highlights:

• First proceedings under the SVP Act, like juvenile proceedings, are not...
• Proceedings under the SVP Act, like juvenile proceedings, are not generally open to the public.
• Specifically, SVP proceedings are not punitive and are about determining an individual's mental status
• Courts have held that it's up to judges to determine which parts of the SVP proceedings are public and
• County, where we have three SVPs that have been in place in the Antelope Valley.

Summary: The committee began without a quorum and heard several bills in subcommittee format. AB 1546, which would increase penalties for repeat DUI offenders by allowing a third DUI within 10 years to be charged as a wobbler, requiring a fifth DUI to be a felony, and lengthening ignition interlock and license revocation periods, drew strong support from law enforcement and district attorney groups and opposition from public defenders and reform advocates who argued the bill would further criminalize substance use and mental health issues. No vote was taken because there was no quorum at the time. AB 1595, aimed at standardizing post-conviction procedures for wrongful conviction claims and clarifying courts’ authority to consider new evidence, was supported by innocence and public defender organizations and opposed by district attorneys, who said existing habeas law is already clear and that the bill would add complexity and burden courts. AB 292, which would impose mandatory jail time for repeat felony domestic violence offenders within seven years, was supported by sheriffs, prosecutors, probation officers, and local governments, but opposed by domestic violence survivor advocates and public defender groups who warned it would not deter abuse and could criminalize survivors and divert resources from services. AB 1816, allowing courts to extend probation up to one additional year for sex offenders who have not completed required treatment, drew support from probation and law enforcement groups and opposition from public defenders and civil liberties advocates concerned about longer supervision, technical violations, and barriers such as poverty and treatment access; the committee later took a roll call and passed the bill 3-1, with one member not voting, sending it to Appropriations. After quorum was established, the committee also passed AB 1627, which would bar people with misconduct in immigration enforcement from becoming California peace officers, and AB 1927, which would create a misdemeanor for falsely impersonating a bail agent to solicit bail, both on due pass motions to Judiciary/Appropriations as amended. AB 1854, a shield-law measure expanding protections for reproductive and gender-affirming health care providers, patients, and related businesses from out-of-state legal process, was supported by the Attorney General’s office and reproductive rights groups and opposed by anti-abortion and family policy organizations; it was moved on a due pass motion to Judiciary. The committee then heard AB 1872, which would make repeat adult swatting offenses a felony/wobbler and require restitution for property damage, with support from law enforcement, prosecutors, and civil liberties advocates and opposition from public defenders and justice reform groups who argued the bill would not deter conduct and could disproportionately affect people with mental illness or undocumented status. A motion to advance AB 1872 was made, but the transcript cuts off before any final vote on that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• Then I'll turn it over to Chief Deputy Director Edens to provide the updates on Con Rep non-SVP and answer
• I will be covering the conditional release program non-SVP caseloading.
• conduct a feasibility analysis on the establishment of transitional housing facilities for the CONREP SVP
• Where are we currently housing people, and how many people do we have on the CONREP SVP programs?
• There was an audit report that was released on the CONREP SVP program, and it did recommend at that point

Summary: The subcommittee heard presentations from the Department of State Hospitals (DSH), the Commission for Behavioral Health, and the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) on budget proposals and implementation updates. DSH outlined its proposed 2026-27 budget, including funding for patient operating expenses, IST solutions savings, conditional release program costs, LPS bed allocation changes, electrical infrastructure projects at Napa and Patton, SB 380 transitional housing feasibility work, and expanded dental services at Metropolitan and Patton. DSH also reported that it has met court-ordered IST treatment benchmarks in the Stiavedi v. Clinton case, with average time to initiate treatment down to about five days and pending placements reduced to roughly 250, while noting that Proposition 36 could increase referrals and SB 1323 may divert some individuals earlier into community-based treatment. Members asked about rising outside hospitalization costs, Medicare enrollment, the timing and structure of capital projects, and whether IST solution funds are being fully used; DSH said the savings reflect slower-than-expected ramp-up of community programs and that the Central California FACT replacement program is still on track for January 2027 activation. The Commission for Behavioral Health described its role under the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA), including data, evaluation, grantmaking, technical assistance, and transparency work. It highlighted the new statewide Innovation Partnership Fund, a five-year, $20 million-per-year program with small and large grant categories; the first RFA drew strong interest, with more than 400 questions and over 1,000 bidders’ conference participants. The Commission also discussed a proposed extension to spend down about $4.1 million remaining for the Alcove Youth Drop-in Center grants so sites can finish implementation and Stanford can complete the final evaluation. Members asked about grant duration, whether projects can be renewed, what qualifies as innovation, and whether the fund could support service delivery rather than awareness campaigns or training; the Commission said awards are expected to be three-year contracts and that proposals must be new or meaningfully expanded approaches that support BHSA priority populations. DHCS reviewed major behavioral health changes under CalAIM and BH Connect, including peer support, mobile crisis, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, updated specialty mental health access criteria, and new substance use treatment standards based on ASAM’s fourth edition. DHCS reported strong contingency management results, with more than 13,000 members served and 95% testing negative for stimulant use during treatment, and said 21 Indian health care providers have been approved to offer traditional health care practices. It also described BH Connect initiatives such as the $1.9 billion access reform and outcomes incentive program, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation by four counties, and transitional rent services. On BHSA implementation, DHCS said it is not tracking individual county contract cuts but is monitoring county plans and statewide outcomes, while stakeholders raised concerns about local prevention and service gaps. DHCS also outlined its H.R. 1 implementation strategy, including outreach, streamlined renewals, exemptions for disabled, substance use, and medically frail individuals, and proposed clinic navigator and outreach funding; it said it has not yet produced a focused estimate of H.R. 1 impacts on behavioral health populations. The discussion ended with DHCS noting that B-CHIP bond funding has supported 437 infrastructure projects, creating 546 new or expanded facilities and more than 9,500 residential beds across the state.

Transcript Highlights:

• Then I'll turn it over to Chief Deputy Director Edens to provide the updates on CONREP, non-SVP, and
• I will be covering the conditional release program non-SVP caseload item.
• conduct a feasibility analysis on the establishment of transitional housing facilities for the CONREP SVP
• Where are we currently housing people, and how many people do we have on the CONREP SVP programs?
• Until the court deems that they either no longer meet the criteria for SVP and may be unconditionally

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Then I'll turn it over to Chief Deputy Director Edens to provide the updates on CONREP, non-SVP, and
• I will be covering the conditional release program non-SVP caseload item.
• conduct a feasibility analysis on the establishment of transitional housing facilities for the CONREP SVP
• Where are we currently housing people, and how many people do we have on the CONREP SVP programs?
• Until the court deems that they are no longer, either no longer meet the criteria for SVP and may be

Summary: The subcommittee heard budget and policy updates from the Department of State Hospitals, the Commission for Behavioral Health, and the Department of Health Care Services. DSH described its proposed 2026-27 budget of $3.2 billion, including savings tied to IST solutions, higher patient-driven operating costs, and a small increase in caseload projections. Officials said the department has met court-ordered IST treatment benchmarks, with wait times reduced from a pandemic peak of 1,953 pending placements to about 250, and average treatment initiation now around five days. Members asked about the effects of Proposition 36 and SB 1323, rising outside hospitalization costs, Medicare enrollment, and whether IST solution funding was being overbudgeted; DSH said referrals are slightly down overall, aging and medically complex patients are driving outside care costs, and the IST solution savings reflect slower-than-expected program activation rather than a service gap. The department also outlined proposed funding for CONREP cost increases, a new county-by-county LPS bed allocation model, electrical infrastructure upgrades at Napa and Patton, SB 380 transitional housing feasibility work, and additional dental staffing and space at Metropolitan and Patton. The Commission for Behavioral Health reviewed its role in the Behavioral Health Services Act transition and its new Innovation Partnership Fund. Staff said the commission is shifting from county-level innovation oversight to a statewide grant strategy, with the first $20 million RFA drawing strong interest and awards expected in mid-June. Members asked how “innovation” would be defined, whether grants could be renewed after the initial three-year contracts, and how the state would ensure the money supports real service delivery rather than general outreach or training. The commission also sought a liquidation deadline extension for the Alcove youth drop-in center grants so remaining funds can be spent before they revert, allowing sites to finish implementation and support the final evaluation. DHCS provided an overview of CalAIM and BH Connect implementation, including updated specialty mental health access criteria, new ASAM-based substance use treatment standards, contingency management, traditional health care practices for tribal members, workforce investments, evidence-based practice expansion, IMD participation, and transitional rent services. The department also addressed BHSA implementation, saying it does not track specific local program cuts but will monitor county three-year plans, performance measures, and outcomes as counties shift to the new funding structure. On H.R. 1, DHCS said it is preparing outreach, eligibility simplification, and exemption strategies to reduce Medi-Cal coverage losses, including clinic navigators, a statewide outreach campaign, and possible employment supports through a future waiver. The department also reported that BH-CHIP bond funds have supported 437 infrastructure projects, creating 546 facilities and more than 9,500 residential beds, with additional outpatient capacity and tribal investments. Finally, DHCS outlined a proposed 988 trailer bill to create a statewide designation process for 988 centers and mobile crisis teams, with implementation no earlier than October 1, 2027.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, proceedings under the SVP Act, like juvenile proceedings, are not...
• Proceedings under the SVP Act, like juvenile proceedings, are not generally open to the public.
• Specifically, SVP proceedings are not punitive and are about determining an individual's mental status
• And so under the SVP Act, the individual is allowed... ...Act, the individual is allowed to petition
• County, where we have three SVPs that have in place in the Antelope Valley.

Keywords: 987, senate, all