Bellino

I concur in the order that writs of mandate issue directing the superior court to review the merits of petitioners’ applications wherein they request the Department to commence wardship proceedings in juvenile hall on behalf of these minors.

However, I would like to stake out our position with some specificity. The above is all we are doing. We are simply holding that these or any other abandoned children come within the jurisdiction of the juvenile court under Welfare & Institutions Code section 300 et seq.

However, these cases are but the preliminary event. The main event is to follow. That main event is a fight over money—a fight between the county and the state as to just which entity has the financial responsibility for the care of these unfortunate youngsters. That matter will probably come before us as a result of some kind of litigation between the state *832 and the county. I just want to make crystal clear that the discussion in our opinion of the responsibility between these two entities refers only to those issues as confined to our basic determination in regard to the responsibility of the juvenile court. I don’t want any party coming in later and claiming law of…

No appearance for Real Parties in Interest Minors.

OPINION

McDANIEL, J.

This is a consolidation of five writ proceedings which present two interrelated issues: (1) whether the County has the responsibility to initiate wardship proceedings for abandoned developmentally disabled minors and (2) whether the juvenile court has jurisdiction to determine the merits of applications to establish court dependencies for such minors.

In each of the five cases, a counselor with the Inland Counties Developmental Disabilities Services filed an "Application for Juvenile Court Petition," requesting the Riverside County Department of Public Social Services (Department) to commence proceedings to establish court dependencies for the developmentally disabled minors all of whom have been abandoned by their respective parents. Over three weeks then elapsed during which the probation officer, acting for the Department, did not file the requested petitions. (If the probation officer does not file a petition within 21 days after the application is made, the probation officer shall notify the applicant of the decision not to proceed further and the reasons therefor. (See Welf. & Inst. Code, §…

This is a consolidation of five writ proceedings which present two interrelated issues: (1) whether the County has the responsibility to initiate wardship proceedings for abandoned developmentally disabled minors and (2) whether the juvenile court has jurisdiction to determine the merits of applications to establish court dependencies for such minors.

In each of the five cases, a counselor with the Inland Counties Developmental Disabilities Services filed an “Application for Juvenile Court Petition,” requesting the Riverside County Department of Public Social Services (Department) to commence proceedings to establish *827 court dependencies for the developmental disabled minors all of whom have been abandoned by their respective parents. Over three weeks then elapsed during which the probation officer, acting for the Department, did not file the requested petitions. (If the probation officer does not file a petition within 21 days after the application is made, the probation officer shall notify the applicant of the decision not to proceed further and the reasons therefor. (See Welf. & Inst. Code, § 653.))

The counselors then filed an “Application to Juvenile Court to…