Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Behavioral Health Care topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assembly advances SB 27 to expand Care Court eligibility and streamline referrals; counties urge caution
Summary
SB 27 would expand and clarify eligibility and referral procedures for California's Care Court program (behavioral-health civil proceedings). The committee heard county behavioral-health directors and disability advocates warn of expansion risks; bill passed to Appropriations after debate and amended language to expedite petitions.
The committee advanced SB 27 to the Appropriations Committee after a lengthy hearing that included psychiatric clinicians, judicial council officials, county behavioral-health directors and advocates for people living with severe mental illness.
Sen. Umberg described SB 27 as a measure to refine the Care Court program to prioritize people with schizophrenia or schizophrenia-like conditions and to provide more efficient referral pathways for people found incompetent to stand trial on misdemeanor charges. Psychiatrist Aaron Meyer told the committee that prioritizing individuals with bipolar I disorder with psychotic features or schizophrenia could increase linkage to stabilizing treatment and reduce avoidable hospitalizations and incarceration.
The Judicial Council provided technical suggestions that the bill reflected in committee amendments, including allowing parallel evaluations for diversion and care proceedings and treating some criminal-court referrals as petitions to speed transfers. Several counties' behavioral-health directors and disability-rights advocates urged caution. County directors said the bill blurred the boundary between a voluntary civil Care Court process and criminal proceedings and warned the bill could make Care Court coercive if rereferrals to criminal court occur without clear standards. Disability advocates and advocacy groups urged the Legislature not to expand the program without stronger evidence of effectiveness, citing racial disparities and high per-person administrative costs.
Committee action: After debate and amendments, the committee voted to pass SB 27, as amended, to Appropriations with a recommendation of "aye." Members stressed the need for continued technical work with counties and disability advocates as the bill proceeds.
Ending: Proponents described the bill as improving access to treatment for people with severe mental illness; opponents called for more safeguards, better data and protections against racial disparities and loss of civil rights.
