SB 1221 California Senate · 2025-2026 Regular Session

Lanterman-Petris-Short Act: conservatorships.

Summary
(1) Existing law, the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act, authorizes the involuntary commitment and treatment of a person, when the person, as a result of a mental health disorder, is a danger to themselves or others, or is gravely disabled. For the purposes of these provisions, existing law defines "gravely disabled" as a condition in which a person, as a result of a mental health disorder, a severe substance use disorder, or a co-occurring mental health disorder and a severe substance use disorder, is unable to provide for their basic personal needs for food, clothing, shelter, personal safety, or necessary medical care. Existing law also authorizes a conservator of a person, estate, or person and the estate to be appointed for a person who is gravely disabled or impaired by chronic alcoholism, subject to specified procedures. Existing law provides the person for whom conservatorship is sought to have the right to demand a court or jury trial on the issue of whether the person is gravely disabled. Existing law prohibits a person from being tried or adjudged to punishment while that person is mentally incompetent, and establishes a process by which a defendant's mental competency is evaluated. This bill would prohibit a court, for purposes of LPS conservatorship, from determining a person's ability to provide for their basic personal needs based solely on the fact that the person has temporary access to those basic personal needs while incarcerated. The bill would also authorize a district attorney to be present and represent public safety interests at any hearing to determine whether an individual is gravely disabled for purposes of the LPS Act. Existing law requires the court to determine the most appropriate placement for a conservatee who is gravely disabled, as defined. Existing law requires the officer providing conservatorship investigation to investigate all available alternatives to conservatorship, as applicable, and to render to the court a comprehensive, written report of the investigation prior to the hearing, as specified. This bill would authorize the district attorney to review all filed documents regarding the investigation, initiation, termination, or modification of, and to be present and represent public safety interests at all hearings that consider, a conservatorship of a person who is gravely disabled, as defined by being found mentally incompetent and meeting the above-described conditions, to provide input to the court about appropriate placement or interim placement by the public conservator. The bill would require a copy of the conservatorship investigation report to be transmitted to the district attorney if the investigation was initiated as part of a determination of mental competence for trial. The bill would authorize the district attorney, if the individual has been appointed a conservator under specified provisions, to challenge the recommendation of the public conservator after the conservatorship investigation for an abuse of discretion in a contested hearing before a judge. The bill would prohibit the district attorney from using the information contained in these reports in subsequent criminal proceedings, except as specified. To the extent the bill imposes a higher level of service on county agencies that prepare and transmit conservatorship investigation reports and on a district attorney to receive those reports, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would authorize a county with a population size of 750,000 or greater to consider prioritizing the placement of specified conservatees in a state hospital run by the State Department of State Hospitals if at least 40 of those conservatees are waiting for placement in a state hospital. The bill would also authorize the placement to be on an interim basis at a county detention facility pending acceptance into a facility that achieves the purposes of treatment of the conservatee and protection of the public. The bill would require the conservatee to receive treatment services in accordance with the conservatorship plan within the detention facility pending permanent placement and would require the court to review the conservator's placement efforts every 60 calendar days. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Bill status in committee 1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2026
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 19, 2026 Last action May 14, 2026
Maddy AI version diff · 3 comparisons

What changed between versions

04/16/26 - Amended Senate 04/27/26 - Amended Senate · 7 edits · Apr 27, 2026
MODERATE
The April 27 amendment to SB 1221 makes several substantive changes to LPS conservatorship law. Most notably, it removes the requirement that the State Department of State Hospitals prioritize placement of mentally incompetent conservatees over other gravely disabled conservatees, adds authority for interim placement in county detention facilities with mandatory treatment and 60-day court reviews, narrows the prohibition on considering incarceration access to basic needs from 'based on' to 'based solely on,' removes the 'outside of an incarcerated setting' evaluation language from the statutory definition of gravely disabled, and adds a prohibition on district attorneys using conservatorship investigation reports in subsequent criminal proceedings.
Scope change
The bill's scope expanded to include interim detention facility placement as a permissible conservatorship arrangement, broadened DA access to investigation reports and participation in hearings, and narrowed both the definition of gravely disabled (by removing the outside-incarceration evaluation requirement) and the prohibition on considering incarceration access to basic needs.
REQUIREMENT

Removed the requirement that the State Department of State Hospitals prioritize placement of conservatees who are gravely disabled due to being found mentally incompetent over conservatees who are gravely disabled due to inability to provide basic personal needs.

Added authorization for interim placement of a conservatee at a county detention facility pending acceptance into a treatment facility, with requirements that the conservatee receive treatment services per the conservatorship plan and that the court review the conservator's placement efforts every 60 calendar days.

DEFINITION

Removed subclause (ii) from Section 5008(h)(1)(A) that required evaluation of a person's ability to provide for basic personal needs to be based on their ability outside of an incarcerated setting and that temporary access while incarceration shall not be a basis to conclude the person is able to provide for needs.

ELIGIBILITY

Changed Section 5350(d)(3) from prohibiting a court from determining ability to provide basic personal needs 'based on' temporary access while incarcerated to 'based solely on' that fact, narrowing the prohibition and allowing incarceration access to be one factor among others.

ENFORCEMENT

Added a prohibition on district attorneys using information contained in conservatorship investigation reports in subsequent criminal proceedings, except as specified.

Added authorization for a district attorney to be present and represent public safety interests at any hearing to determine whether an individual is gravely disabled for purposes of the LPS Act (beyond the existing authority limited to mentally incompetent conservatees).

SCOPE

Broadened the condition under which conservatorship investigation reports must be transmitted to the district attorney from investigations initiated pursuant to a specific Penal Code paragraph (Section 1370(c)(3)) to any investigation initiated as part of a determination of mental competence for trial.

Floor votes

How they voted

No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history

Actions timeline

Total actions
16
Key actions
6
Committee
4
Amendments
4
May 14, 2026
Upper · Passed
May 14 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
upper
Apr 27, 2026
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Apr 23, 2026
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0. Page 3983.) (April 21).
upper
Apr 16, 2026
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on PUB. S.
upper
Apr 16, 2026
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.
upper
Apr 15, 2026
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on RLS. (Ayes 8. Noes 0. Page 3901.) (April 15).
upper
Apr 6, 2026
Upper · Passed
April 8 hearing postponed by committee.
upper
Mar 4, 2026
Committee
Referred to Coms. on HEALTH and JUD.
upper
Feb 19, 2026
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors

Sponsors

Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Photo of Henry Stern
Henry Stern
DDemocratic
CA
27