Senate Health Committee weighs a package of bills on directories, access to addiction care, prior authorization and local health systems

The Senate Committee on Health heard extended presentations and public testimony on a series of health-related bills addressing consumer access, local system oversight, workforce data, addiction treatment continuity, prior authorization timelines, wildfire-related behavioral-health access and investments in youth and community violence prevention.

AB 280 — a bill to improve the accuracy of health plan provider directories — drew sustained testimony from the bill’s sponsor, consumer advocates and mental-health providers who described “ghost” listings that leave patients unable to find in-network care. The proposal would set escalating accuracy benchmarks culminating at 95% by 2029, require timelines for providers to respond to plan information requests, allow plans to flag unverified listings for consumers, and give the Department of Managed Health Care authority to require use of a central utility database and to impose penalties for noncompliance. Supporters including Katie Van Dynes of Health Access California and Sarah Sorokin, a licensed clinical social worker, said inaccurate directories delay or block care; plan representatives and provider groups urged further conversations about implementation, reimbursement and the new central-utility role.

AB 356 would create a state-level working group within the Department of Health Care Access and Information to evaluate public health infrastructure in North San Diego County, with a particular focus on the long-term sustainability of the Palomar Health Care District. Assemblymember Samara Patel presented the bill as a transparency and accountability measure after reported governance and financial troubles at Palomar. Adam Wilson of San Diego LAFCO described how a forthcoming municipal services review (MSR) could dovetail with the working group. The Association of California Health Care Districts and Palomar Health raised concerns that the bill’s scope had broadened beyond public districts to include all hospitals and urged narrowed language; supporters said the measure is intended to be complementary to the LAFCO process.

AB 1418 would strengthen state capacity to track health workforce trends through the Department of Health Care Access and Information, creating centralized data collection about workforce availability, coverage waiting periods and related indicators. SEIU representatives and a physician in training testified that early-career health workers often face coverage waiting periods that can leave them uninsured at critical times; proponents said better data is a prerequisite for targeted policy responses.

AB 669 would set a floor for continuity of treatment for people receiving inpatient addiction care by preventing insurers from terminating residential substance use disorder services prematurely. Supporters framed the bill as life-or-death policy after family testimony describing a patient discharged from residential care after a few days despite provider recommendations for a longer stay. Psychiatric and addiction specialists highlighted clinical timelines for recovery and elevated post-discharge mortality risk when tolerance is lost.

AB 512 would shorten insurer response times for prior authorization requests, lowering the time window for urgent electronic requests to 24 hours (48 hours non-electronic) and for non-urgent electronic requests to three business days (keeping five business days for non-electronic). Physicians and hospital leaders described delayed approvals that prolong hospital stays and increase costs; insurers supported modernization and electronic submission but sought phased implementation and clarifying language about clinically complete submissions.

AB 1032 would let commercial-plan enrollees in counties affected by declared wildfires access up to 12 behavioral-health visits from qualified providers — including out-of-network options — to address trauma, displacement and other wildfire-related impacts. AltaMed and survivors who testified recounted a sharp increase in behavioral health need after recent LA-area wildfires; insurers warned that existing disaster-related processes and parity laws already provide pathways and raised concerns about selective benefits that exclude Medi-Cal and other enrollees.

AB 749 would create a time-limited blue-ribbon commission within the California Health and Human Services Agency to develop a statewide framework for equitable access to youth sports. Sponsors said the commission would study costs, program quality and unequal access so the state can propose standards and investments. Youth-sports and coaching groups testified in support.

AB 785 would establish a community violence intervention grant program administered by the Health and Human Services Agency and funded by savings from future prison closures. Proponents said community-driven violence-interruption programs reduce shootings and provide alternatives to incarceration; local governments and survivor organizations voiced support.

Across bills, committee members and witnesses repeatedly urged further technical fixes, implementation timelines, and attention to equity — especially the reach and exclusions of wildfire-related coverage and whether Medi-Cal enrollees would be covered. Several bills drew bipartisan interest but also requests from insurers, providers and local entities to address operational and fiscal details. When the committee later moved several bills out of committee, members noted ongoing negotiations and signaled more amendments could be expected on the floor.

Votes at a glance - File items discussed in this hearing were moved out of committee for further consideration or referral to appropriations; several motions were carried and refer to appropriations or local government. (See committee record for roll-call details and final vote tallies.)

What’s next Several authors and sponsors said they would continue negotiating implementing language with stakeholders, and committee members asked staff to monitor interactions with Medi-Cal policy and LAFCO findings. Sponsors of measures that advanced said they intended to return with refinements before floor votes.