Senate Bill Archives - Page 3 of 5 - Mental Health America of California

SB 1397 (Eggman) Behavioral Health Services Coverage – Support

May 31, 2024

The Honorable Mia Bonta
Assembly Health Committee
1020 N Street, Room 390
Sacramento, CA 95814

Subject: Support for SB 1397 (Eggman) Behavioral Health Services Coverage

Dear Chair Bonta,

Mental Health America of California is pleased to support SB 1397 (Eggman), legislation which would allow county behavioral health agencies to be reimbursed for full-service partnership services through health plans and insurers that cover medically necessary mental health and substance use disorder treatment.

MHAC is a peer-run organization leading the state in behavioral health public policy and advocacy since 1957. The mission of MHAC is to assist and encourage communities, families and individuals to experience hope, wellness and recovery from mental health and substance use disorder issues through voluntary services that are delivered in their local community with compassion and respect for everyone’s dignity and autonomy.

To improve access to care in local communities, this bill allows counties to be reimbursed for services provided and covered through an individual’s health insurance. By reducing costs to counties and ensuring maximum coverage and access to care, this bill seeks to address some of the funding limitations imposed by Proposition 1. It supplements a portion of the lost revenue by requiring health plans to reimburse counties for medically necessary mental health and substance use disorder treatments.

For these reasons, we support SB 1397 (Eggman). If you have any questions or if MHAC can be of assistance on this or any other behavioral health bill, please feel free to contact me or our Public Policy Director, Karen Vicari, at kvicari@mhaofca.org.

In Community,

Heidi L. Strunk
President & CEO

SB 1353 (Wahab) The Youth Bill of Rights – Support

June 3, 2024

The Honorable Kevin McCarty
Chair, Assembly Public Safety
1020 N Street, Room 111
Sacramento, CA 95814

Re: SB 1353 (Wahab) Youth Bill of Rights Mental Health Resources – SUPPORT

Dear Chair McCarty,

The California Youth Empowerment Network (CAYEN) is pleased to support Senate Bill 1353 (Wahab), legislation which would establish youth rights to timely access to mental and behavioral health services.

CAYEN is led by Transition Aged Youth (TAY), ages 15 to 26, comprising of TAY Action Teams and CAYEN Board members throughout California, which engages and empowers TAY to advocate for mental health policy that directly affects them. Since our establishment in 2006, our youth have persistently campaigned for enhanced accessibility to mental health services and support for all TAY, as well as the promotion of civil rights, restorative justice, and harm reduction practices to mitigate substance misuse among youth. Additionally, we strive to enhance and amplify the representation of TAY voices in the decision-making processes.

Timely access to mental and behavioral health services are one of the barriers preventing youth from receiving the care they want. Given that 75% of all mental health disorders emerge by age 24 access to services and supports are vital to a youth’s development.[1] This is extremely prevalent among justice-involved youth, specifically youth of color, as they have the highest prevalence of trauma and Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACES) and the least likely to be offered services until they experience a crisis. SB 1353 empowers youth by adding to the Youth Bill of Rights the right to timely access to these services, including access to counselors, therapists, mentors, or any related services necessary for mental well-being. Addressing mental health issues will also support these youth in leading whole, healthy, and productive lives reducing recidivism.

For these reasons, we support SB 1353 (Wahab) and ask for your “Aye” vote. If you have any questions, or if CAYEN can provide assistance on this bill or any other behavioral health legislation, please do not hesitate to contact me at dthirakul@mhac.org.

In Community,

Danny Thirakul
Public Policy Coordinator
California Youth Empowerment Network

[1] California, S. of. (2024, March 21). Early psychosis intervention plus. MHSOAC. https://mhsoac.ca.gov/initiatives/ear ly-psychosis-intervention-plus/

SB 1238 (Eggman) Designated Facilities – Opposed

June 14, 2024

The Honorable Mia Bonta
Chair, Assembly Committee on Health
California State Assembly
1020 N Street, Room 390
Sacramento, CA 95814

RE: Opposition to SB 1238 (Eggman)

Dear Chair Bonta,

Mental Health America of California (MHAC) respectfully opposes Senate Bill 1238 (Eggman), legislation which seeks to expands the definition of “facility designated by the county for evaluation and treatment” or “designated facility” for the purpose of involuntarily holding and treating people with standalone substance use disorder.

Last year, Senate Bill 43 (Eggman) expanded the definition of “gravely disabled” to include individuals with substance use disorder, allowing them to be placed on a 5150 hold and receive forced treatment. Senate Bill 1238 (Eggman) seeks to address the increase in people being held for standalone substance use disorder by permitting designated facilities to admit individuals with SUD. Those placed on a 5150 hold must be taken to a designated facility that meets specific safety standards, has the proper resources, and complies with state and federal laws. Our primary concerns with this bill are as follows:

Ineffectiveness of Involuntary Treatment

Involuntary treatment for individuals with substance use disorder is ineffective. Forcing people into environments not properly suited for recovery can cause additional trauma. When resources and services are available, people are more likely to seek help voluntarily. This bill does not ensure that individuals will be placed in facilities with the proper infrastructure or resources needed for a healthy recovery.

2. Bypassing the Regulatory Process

The amended language in the bill allows the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) to bypass public notice and comment requirements in the rule-making process. This means the DHCS can “implement, interpret, or make specific [the bill], in whole or in part, by means of plan or county letters, information notices, plan or provider bulletins, or other similar instructions, without taking any further regulatory action.”

Expanding the capabilities of facilities to involuntarily hold and treat individuals with standalone substance use disorders jeopardizes their health and places them in environments that are not conducive to recovery. For this reason, we oppose SB 1238 (Eggman) and ask for your “No” vote. If you have any questions, or if MHAC can provide any assistance on this bill or any other behavioral health legislation, please do not hesitate to contact me or our Public Policy Director, Karen Vicari, at kvicari@mhaofca.org.

In Community,

Heidi L. Strunk

President & CEO

SB 1184 (Eggman) Involuntary Treatment and Antipsychotic Medication – Oppose

June 5, 2024

The Honorable Chair Mia Bonta
Assembly Health Committee
California State Assembly
1020 N Street, Room 390
Sacramento, CA 95814

Subject: Oppose Senate Bill 1184 (Eggman)

Dear Chair Bonta,

Mental Health America of California (MHAC) opposes Senate Bill 1184 (Eggman), which seeks to extend the timeframe during which a person is deemed incapable of refusing and can be compelled to receive antipsychotic medication during the various phases of an involuntary psychiatric hold.

MHAC is a peer-run organization leading the state in behavioral health public policy and advocacy since 1957. The mission of MHAC is to assist and encourage communities, families and individuals to experience hope, wellness and recovery from mental health and substance use disorder challenges through voluntary services that are delivered in their local community with compassion and respect for everyone’s dignity and autonomy. The use of forced treatment takes away people’s autonomy to choose the services and supports that best supports their recovery.

Current law provides for the rights of individuals when undergoing involuntary treatment. Sections 5332, 5334, and 5336 of the Welfare and Institutions Code details the rights of an individual regarding the involuntary administration of antipsychotic medication, the process for determining a person’s incapacity, and the timeframe of how long a determination of incapacity lasts. Senate Bill 1184 (Eggman) would ensure that a person’s determination of incapacity to refuse medication remains in effect during each phase of an involuntary psychiatric hold. While new amendments require a petition at each phase of the hold to determine incapacity, the bill still subjects individuals to prologued forced administration of antipsychotic medication until the court hears a petition for that detention period and issues a decision.

The initial 72-hour involuntary hold is significantly different from the potentially 30 days of continued intensive treatment. It is vital for people that find themselves in crisis to be provided with every opportunity to have their own self-determination of care at every phase of an involuntary hold. For this reason, we oppose SB 1184 (Eggman) and ask for your “No” vote. If you have any questions, or if MHAC can provide any assistance on this bill or any other behavioral health legislation, please do not hesitate to contact me or our Public Policy Director, Karen Vicari, at kvicari@mhaofca.org.

In Community,

Heidi L. Strunk
President & CEO

SB 1063 (Grove) Pupil Identification Cards – Support

April 30, 2024

The Honorable Al Muratsuchi
Chair, Assembly Education Committee
California State Assembly
1020 N Street, Room 159|
Sacramento, CA 95814

RE: Support for SB 1063 (Grove)

Dear Chair Muratsuchi,

The California Youth Empowerment Network (CAYEN) is pleased to support Senate Bill 1063 (Grove), legislation which would require schools to add a link or QR code to local mental health services on a student’s identification card.

CAYEN is led by Transition Aged Youth (TAY), ages 15 to 26, comprising of TAY Action Teams and CAYEN Board members throughout California which engages, empowers TAY to advocate for mental health policy that directly affects them. Since our establishment in 2006, our youth have persistently campaigned for enhanced accessibility to mental health services and support for all TAY, as well as the promotion of civil rights, restorative justice, and harm reduction practices to mitigate substance misuse among youth. Additionally, we strive to enhance and amplify the representation of TAY voices in the decision-making processes.

This bill aims to enhance access to mental health services for Transition Aged Youth (TAY), which are crucial for youth development, especially given that 75% of mental health disorders manifest by age 24.[1] By providing youth with the tools and resources necessary to manage their mental health challenges, this bill seeks to support their overall well-being and resilience.

For these reasons, we support SB 1063 (Grove) and ask for your “Aye” vote. If you have any questions, or if CAYEN can provide assistance on this bill or any other behavioral health legislation, please do not hesitate to contact me at dthirakul@mhac.org.

In Community,

Danny Thirakul
Public Policy Coordinator
California Youth Empowerment Network

[1] California, S. of. (2024, March 21). Early psychosis intervention plus. MHSOAC. https://mhsoac.ca.gov/initiatives/early-psychosis-intervention-plus/

SB 1011 (Jones) Encampment Restrictions – Oppose

April 2, 2024

The Honorable Aisha Wahab
Chair, Senate Public Safety Committee
California State Senate
1020 N Street, Room 545
Sacramento, CA 95814

RE: Senate Bill 1011 (Jones) — OPPOSE

Dear Senator Wahab:

Mental Health America of California (MHAC) stands in opposition to Senate Bill 1011 (Jones), legislation that prohibits individuals from sitting, lying, sleeping, or storing personal property on streets or sidewalks if they have access to a homeless shelter or are within 500 feet of a public or private school, open space, or major transit stop. The bill also mandates a 72-hour notice before any enforcement action can be taken against individuals found in violation of these provisions.

This legislation poses a significant threat to the safety and well-being of individuals living with mental and behavioral health challenges, particularly those experiencing homelessness. Approximately 25% of unhoused individuals in California live with a serious mental illness (SMI), with 71% of them unsheltered.[1] To effectively provide necessary services and support, including shelter, resources must be easily accessible to all in need. Unfortunately, this bill fails to allocate any additional funding to assist individuals on their path to recovery. Instead, it penalizes them for circumstances beyond their control, exacerbating rather than alleviating their challenges. This concern is underscored by the 2018 decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the Boise, Idaho case, affirming that it is unconstitutional to criminalize homelessness when adequate shelter is unavailable.[2]

Moreover, this legislation is unduly broad and would appear to modify the penal code to potentially affect all Californians, extending beyond the intent of impacting the unhoused community. As written, individuals would be prohibited from hosting picnics or barbeques in parks or open spaces. Anyone waiting for the local bus at a transit stop would also be prohibited from placing their personal property at their feet. Additionally, street vendors may be at risk of losing their ability to conduct business in public spaces under the proposed changes.

For these reasons, we strongly oppose Senate Bill 1011 and ask for your “No” vote. If you or your staff have any questions, or if Mental Health America of California can be of any assistance on this or any other behavioral health bill, please do not hesitate to contact me at hstrunk@mhac.org, or our Interim Director of Public Policy, Karen Vicari at kvicari@mhacofca.org.

In Community,

Heidi Strunk
President & CEO
Mental Health America of California

[1] Coc homeless populations and subpopulations reports – Hud Exchange. HUD Exchange. (n.d.). https://w ww.hudexchange.info/programs/coc/coc-homeless-populations-and-subpopulations-reports/

[2] Robert Martin v. City of Boise. 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. (n.d.-b). https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2018/09/04/15-35845.pdf

SB 997 (Portantino) Access to Narcan – Support

March 15, 2024

The Honorable Josh Newman
Chair, Senate Committee on Education
California State Senate
1021 O Street, Room 6740
Sacramento, CA 95814

Re: Support for Senate Bill 997 (Portantino)

Dear Senator Newman,

The California Youth Empowerment Network (CAYEN) is pleased to support SB 997 (Portantino), legislation which would permit middle school and high school students to carry federally approved opioid antagonist medicines, such as Narcan, while they are on campus. Additionally, SB 997 requires middle schools and high schools to stock fentanyl testing strips and notify students of their location.

CAYEN is a youth-led statewide network comprised of TAY Action Teams and CAYEN Board members which engages, empowers, and represents Transitional Age Youth (TAY), ages 15-26, in mental health advocacy on issues that directly affect TAY. Since CAYEN’s inception in 2006, CAYEN has taken many forms of action to empower TAY in their personal lives and spark progressive change in public policy. We support the implementation of harm reduction policies that will reduce the use and effects of substance use. SB 997 calls for the implementation of measures to deter the rising rate of opioid related deaths among middle school and high school students. If students are engaging in drugs, the focus is to ensure safe use that avoids potential death from substance use.

Fentanyl, an opioid that proves to be up to 50 times more intense than Heroin, is one of the overarching drugs driving the rate of drug related overdoses in California and the United States.[1] When laced, Fentanyl is undetectable unless a fentanyl test strip is utilized. In the case of an opioid overdose, Naloxone, which is available to purchase over the counter, can help counteract its effects. As reported by the California Department of Public Health, the state of California carries a total of 7,000 opioid related deaths, with Fentanyl being the culprit of 88% of the deaths.[2] LA County reported the highest rates of Fentanyl overdose deaths in impoverished communities.[3]

Senate Bill 997 would allow middle school and high schools to adopt policy guidelines that allow students to carry opioid reversal medication. Additionally, it requires public schools to provide and communicate the access of Fentanyl testing strips. For these reasons we support SB 997 (Portantino) and request your “Aye” vote. If you have any questions, or if CAYEN can provide assistance on this bill or any other behavioral health legislation, please do not hesitate to contact me at dthirakul@mhac.org.

Sincerely,

Danny Thirakul
Public Policy Coordinator

[1] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2023b, September 6). Fentanyl facts. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/stopoverdose/fentanyl/index.html

[2] California Overdose Surveillance Dashboard. Prepared by California Department of Public Health (CDPH – Substance and Addiction Prevention Branch (SAPB). Accessed on 03/11/24. https://skyl ab.cdph.ca.gov/ODdash/.

[3] Data report: Fentanyl overdoses in Los Angeles County. (n.d.). http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/sapc/MDU/SpecialReport/FentanylOverdosesInLosAngelesCounty.pdf

SB 483 (Cortese) Prone Restraints in School – Support

April 30, 2024

The Honorable Al Muratsuchi
Chair, Assembly Education Committee
California State Assembly
1020 N Street, Room 159
Sacramento, CA 95814

RE: Support of Senate Bill 483 (Cortese)

Dear Chair Muratsuchi,

The California Youth Empowerment Network (CAYEN) is pleased to support Senate Bill 483 (Cortese), legislation which would prohibit in all California schools the use of “prone restraint”, a technique that physically or mechanically restrains students in a face down position.

The California Youth Empowerment Network (CAYEN) is a Transitional Age Youth (TAY), ages 15 to 26, led statewide program of Mental Health America of California which engages, empowers and represents TAY in mental health advocacy on issues that directly affect TAY. Established in 2006, CAYEN has taken many forms of action to empower TAY in their personal lives and spark progressive change in public policy.

The use of prone restraints is a dangerous and sometime lethal practice used on students if they are experiencing a behavioral health crisis. This practice has also become synonymous as a method of discipline, with a disproportionate impact on students of color. Prone restraints are not a mental or behavioral health support, instead they traumatize or even injure students.

For these reasons, we support Senate Bill 483 (Cortese) and ask for your, “Aye” vote. If you or your staff have any questions, of if the California Youth Empowerment Network can be of any assistance regarding youth behavioral health policy, please do not hesitate to contact me at dthirakul@mhac.org, or our Director of Public Policy, Karen Vicari at kvicari@mhacofca.org.

In Community,

Danny Thirakul

Public Policy Coordinator
California Youth Empowerment Network

SB 26 (Umberg) Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Scholarship Program at HCAI – Oppose

May 31, 2024

The Honorable Thomas Umberg
1021 O St, Suite 6530
Sacramento, California 95814

Re: SB 26 – as amended 1/11/24
OPPOSE UNLESS AMENDED

Dear Senator Umberg:

The undersigned organizations regret that we must respectfully oppose your SB 26, which would establish the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Scholarship Program at HCAI, unless it is amended to broaden the scholarship to more comprehensively address mental health workforce needs related to the population SB 26 seeks to serve.

Our organizations share your interest in expanding the workforce available to support individuals living with serious mental illness who are unlikely to survive safely in the community without supports, and whose condition is substantially deteriorating. As you described in your author’s statement about SB 26, many of these individuals are unhoused in our community and face high risks for repeated hospitalization, incarceration, institutionalization, mental health conservatorship, and premature death. The numbers show that California does not have enough mental health professionals, peers, and outreach workers specialized in supporting this population, and we agree that the State must immediately take steps to fill this gap.

In light of this need, we urge you to expand SB 26 to incentivize mental health professionals to serve in an array of roles and programs evidenced to meet the needs of individuals with serious mental illness and housing instability. The undersigned organizations will oppose SB 26 unless it is amended to expand the proposed scholarship program to accept applicants who agree to work for a county behavioral health agency for at least 3 years in support of any of the county’s programs to treat individuals with serious mental illness and housing instability, not just CARE Court as SB 26 currently proposes.
In addition to our proposed amendments, we recommend expanding scholarship opportunities to assist the certification of other critical types of professionals who serve individuals with serious mental illness and housing instability, such as certified peer support specialists.

Counties across California have myriad unfilled job postings for licensed mental health professionals to serve this exact population in outpatient care, outreach and case management roles, crisis response
programs, and other settings. Counties are also working to roll out new mental health programs that will require significant personnel, such as mobile crisis teams. However, SB 26 proposes to only incentivize licensed mental health professionals to serve in roles related to CARE Court, a new program that has no evidence basis or proven results, while leaving counties still unable to fill roles in their existing and other emerging programs.

This year, the challenging budget climate will limit the new programs state agencies can create, and many existing safety-net mental health programs are at risk due to changes to the Mental Health Services Act. It is critical that California builds systems that stabilize and strengthen its existing mental health programs and all its new initiatives, rather than hyper-focusing workforce development and funding efforts on untested CARE Court initiatives.

Our commitment to these proposed amendments is further reinforced by our conviction that CARE Court is the wrong approach to address the growing houselessness and mental health crises in California and is likely to do real harm to the populations it aims to help. Our concerns are deepened by the striking lack of research evidence for any clinical or social benefits deriving from court-ordered outpatient programs such as CARE Court when compared to voluntary community-based treatment. California and its counties are already dedicating overwhelming funding and operations resources to CARE Court while other, less restrictive, more effective approaches flounder for lack of funding and personnel. Let us not also take this faulty approach to addressing mental health workforce shortages.

We should consider whether counties’ difficulty finding mental health professionals to work in CARE Court programs is rooted in reasons deeper than the mental health workforce crisis. Arguably, the court-based and coercive setting of CARE Court programs conflicts with the core principles of many mental health professions, who have a duty to provide services in the least restrictive environment. For example, as articulated in their professional code of ethics, social workers have an ethical responsibility to “respect and promote the right of clients to self-determination and assist clients in their efforts to identify and clarify their goals.” Emerging professionals may be unwilling to provide services in an environment that invites moral and ethical conflict and lacks evidence basis for success, but perhaps would be willing to work in other county programs serving the same population if they had financial incentive to do so via SB 26 as we propose to amend it.

For these reasons, our organizations will respectfully oppose SB 26 unless it is amended to broaden the scholarship applicant pool and address workforce shortages across all county-based programs that serve high-risk individuals living with serious mental illness.

Sincerely,

Carmen-Nicole Cox, Director of Government Affairs
ACLU California Action

Danny Thirukal, Public Policy Coordinator
California Youth Empowerment Network (CAYEN)

Deb Roth, Senior Legislative Advocate
Disability Rights California

Karen Vicari, Director of Public Policy
Mental Health America (MHA) of California

cc: Members and Committee Staff, Assembly Health Committee

SB 326 (EGGMAN) Behavioral Health Services Act – Proposed Amendments

July 13, 2023

Submitted via Web Portal and E-mail

Assembly Member Jim Wood, Chair
Assembly Health Committee
1020 N Street, Room 390
Sacramento, CA 95814

RE: SB 326 (Eggman) Proposed Amendments

Dear Assembly Member Wood:

The California Youth Empowerment Network requests the following amendment detailed below to SB 326, the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA). The California Youth Empowerment Network (CAYEN) is a youth-led statewide network comprised of TAY Action Teams and CAYEN Board members which engages, empowers and represents Transitional Age Youth (TAY), ages 15-26, in mental health advocacy on issues that directly affect TAY. Since CAYEN’s inception in 2006, CAYEN has taken many forms of action to empower TAY in their personal lives and spark progressive change in public policy.

We have included in our submission a separate, red-lined markup of the Word Document for Amendments including the requested amendment. Justification for the requested amendment is as follows:

Page 66. Amend Section 5845 to include two Transition Age Youth (TAY) aged 16-26 at the time of appointment on the Behavioral Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission

5848. (a) The Behavioral Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission is hereby established to administer grants, identify key policy issues and emerging best practices, and promote high-quality programs implemented pursuant to Section 5892 through the examination of data and outcomes.

(b) (1) The commission shall replace the advisory committee established pursuant to Section 5814.

(2) The commission shall consist of 22 voting members as follows:

(A) The Attorney General or the Attorney General’s designee.

(B) The Superintendent of Public Instruction or the Superintendent’s designee.

(C) The Chairperson of the Senate Committee on Health, the Chairperson of the Senate Committee on Human Services, or another member of the Senate selected by the President pro Tempore of the Senate. Page 2 of 2

(D) The Chairperson of the Assembly Committee on Health or another Member of the Assembly selected by the Speaker of the Assembly.

(E) A county behavioral health director.

(F) (i) The following individuals, all appointed by the Governor:

(I) One adult or older adult who has or who has had a serious mental illness.

(II) One adult or older adult who has or who has had a substance use disorder.

(III) Two Transition Age Youth ages 16-26 at the time of appointment to the Commission.

(IV) A family member of an adult or older adult with a serious mental illness.

Justification: The voices of our TAY with lived experience are essential to the BHSOAC. Additionally, family members should never outnumber people with lived experience on boards or commissions. TAY with lived experience possess unique and vital knowledge that is separate and distinct from the knowledge possessed by family members.

Currently, SB 326 includes 4 family members and 2 individuals with lived experience. CAYEN recommends that there be two additional people with lived experience on the BHSOAC, and these members should be Transition Age Youth (TAY). Half of the family representation in SB 326 is parents of children and youth. This is because the needs and experiences of children and youth with behavioral health challenges are very different than the needs and experiences of adults. When parents are represented, TAY should be equally represented to complement the family perspectives. Youth and young adults on commissions are often subject to tokenism. To avoid tokenism, it is essential that at least two TAY serve on the BHSOAC to provide support and encourage dialogue.

CAYEN is grateful for the opportunity to offer the suggested amendment to SB 326 to strengthen TAY representation within the BHSA. If you or your staff have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at dthirakul@mhac.org, or our Interim Director of Public Policy, Karen Vicari at kvicari@mhacofca.org.

In Community,

Danny Thirakul
Public Policy Coordinator
California Youth Empowerment Network