CA SB 1052
in committeeState Council on Developmental Disabilities: appointing authorized representatives.
California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper
Subscribe in a feed reader. The feed covers recorded actions from the last 30 days; Bill Commons may record an action after it happened at the legislature.
Quick answers
Did CA SB 1052 pass?
Not yet. CA SB 1052 is in committee and has not come to a final vote. Latest recorded action (2026-05-14): May 14 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
What is CA SB 1052 about?
Existing law, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, establishes the State Council on Developmental Disabilities to, among other things, develop, review, and revise the California Developmental Disabilities State Plan, and monitor and evaluate the implementation of the plan. Existing law authorizes the state council to implement the state plan by conducting specified activities, including, among other things, appointing an authorized representative for persons with developmental disabilities. Existing law authorizes the appointment of an authorized representative to assist the person in expressing the person's desires and in making decisions and advocating for the person's needs, preferences, and choices, when the person with developmental disabilities has no parent, guardian, or conservator legally authorized to represent them, and the person has either requested the appointment of a representative or the rights or interests of the person, as determined by the state council, will not be properly protected or advocated for without the appointment of a representative. Existing law prescribes the order of preference for selection of the representative to be the person's parent, involved family members, or a volunteer selected by the state council, if the person does not express a preference, and requires the request of the parents or involved family members to be appointed to be honored unless the person expresses otherwise or good cause otherwise exists. This bill would limit the appointment of an authorized representative to up to one year, with annual renewals, and would authorize the state council to conduct an investigation to determine whether the interests of the person will not be properly protected or advocated for without the appointment of a representative. The bill would also authorize the state council to make contingent appointments of authorized representatives, as specified, and would authorize the state council to remove an authorized representative or contingent authorized representative at any time for good cause or if the authorized representative is unwilling or unable to continue serving. The bill would provide that "good cause" for purposes of the previously-described provisions exist when the proposed authorized representative has made, or is likely to make, decisions that are inconsistent with the expressed wishes of the person with developmental disabilities or inconsistent with protecting the person's rights or interests.
Who sponsors CA SB 1052?
Gonzalez is the primary sponsor of CA SB 1052.
Description
Existing law, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, establishes the State Council on Developmental Disabilities to, among other things, develop, review, and revise the California Developmental Disabilities State Plan, and monitor and evaluate the implementation of the plan. Existing law authorizes the state council to implement the state plan by conducting specified activities, including, among other things, appointing an authorized representative for persons with developmental disabilities. Existing law authorizes the appointment of an authorized representative to assist the person in expressing the person's desires and in making decisions and advocating for the person's needs, preferences, and choices, when the person with developmental disabilities has no parent, guardian, or conservator legally authorized to represent them, and the person has either requested the appointment of a representative or the rights or interests of the person, as determined by the state council, will not be properly protected or advocated for without the appointment of a representative. Existing law prescribes the order of preference for selection of the representative to be the person's parent, involved family members, or a volunteer selected by the state council, if the person does not express a preference, and requires the request of the parents or involved family members to be appointed to be honored unless the person expresses otherwise or good cause otherwise exists. This bill would limit the appointment of an authorized representative to up to one year, with annual renewals, and would authorize the state council to conduct an investigation to determine whether the interests of the person will not be properly protected or advocated for without the appointment of a representative. The bill would also authorize the state council to make contingent appointments of authorized representatives, as specified, and would authorize the state council to remove an authorized representative or contingent authorized representative at any time for good cause or if the authorized representative is unwilling or unable to continue serving. The bill would provide that "good cause" for purposes of the previously-described provisions exist when the proposed authorized representative has made, or is likely to make, decisions that are inconsistent with the expressed wishes of the person with developmental disabilities or inconsistent with protecting the person's rights or interests.
- Introduced
- 2026-02-12
- Latest action
- 2026-05-14 — May 14 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
- Bill type
- bill
- Last updated
- —
Subjects
Sponsors
- Gonzalezauthor
Committees
Not provided by source.
Action timeline
Newest first
2026-05-14
May 14 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
2026-05-08
Set for hearing May 14.
2026-04-20
April 20 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
2026-04-10
Set for hearing April 20.
2026-04-07
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 0. Page 3740.) (April 6). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee
2026-03-26
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on HUMAN S.
amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee
2026-03-17
Set for hearing April 6.
2026-02-26
Referred to Com. on HUMAN S.
referral-committee
2026-02-13
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 15.
2026-02-12
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
introduction,reading-1,referral-committee
Versions
Documents
- application/pdf
- application/pdf
- text/html
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
- application/pdf(no extracted text yet)
Votes
Do pass, but first be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
2026-04-06 · pass · 4-0
Member-level votes (5)
- Becker: yes
- Laird: yes
- Weber Pierson: yes
- Pérez: yes
- Ochoa Bogh: other
Placed on suspense file
2026-04-20 · pass · 7-0
Member-level votes (7)
- Cervantes: yes
- Dahle: yes
- Wahab: yes
- Cabaldon: yes
- Grayson: yes
- Richardson: yes
- Seyarto: yes
Related bills
No related bills recorded for this bill.
Official source
Attribution
Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z
Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:
Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:
Use this data
Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=SB 1052. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.
Known limitations
- Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
- Committee referrals are not yet captured.
- Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.
See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.