SB 1432: School attendance: pupil transfer options: school districts of choice.

Session Year: 2015-2016
House: Senate

Version:

(1)Existing law requires each person between the ages of 6 and 18 years, who is not otherwise exempt, to attend the public full-time day school in the school district in which his or her parent or guardian is a resident. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to accept pupils from other school districts by adopting a resolution to become a school district of choice, as defined, and authorizes the governing board of a school district of choice to ensure, by resolution, that pupils accepted for transfer are selected through a random, unbiased process that prohibits an evaluation of whether or not the pupil should be enrolled based upon his or her academic or athletic performance. Existing law authorizes either a pupils school district of residence or a school district of choice to prohibit the transfer of a pupil into a school district of choice or limit the number of pupils transferred into a school district of choice if the governing board of the school district determines that the transfer would negatively impact a court-ordered or voluntary desegregation plan of the school district or the racial and ethnic balance of the school district. Existing law requires a school district of choice, at its expense, to ensure that the auditor who conducts the annual financial audit of the school district reviews compliance with the requirements for a random, unbiased selection process and appropriate communications at the same time that he or she is conducting the annual audit, and requires the school district to notify the auditor regarding this compliance review prior to the commencement of the annual audit. in accordance with specified procedural requirements and limitations.

This bill would require, instead of authorize, the governing board of the school district of choice to ensure, by resolution, that pupils accepted for transfer are selected through a random, unbiased process that prohibits an evaluation of whether or not the pupil should be enrolled based upon his or her academic or athletic performance. The bill would authorize only a pupils school district of residence to prohibit the transfer of a pupil into a school district of choice or limit the number of pupils transferred into a school district of choice if the governing board of the school district of residence determines that the transfer would negatively impact a court-ordered or voluntary desegregation plan of the school district of residence or the racial and ethnic balance of the school district of residence. The bill would revise the provisions relating to the audit. To the extent this would impose additional duties on county superintendents of schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(2)Existing law authorizes a school district of residence, as defined, to limit the number of pupils who transfer out each year by a certain percentage, and also authorizes a school district with an average daily attendance of less than 50,000 to limit the maximum number of pupils transferring out for the duration of the program to 10% of the average daily attendance for that period. Existing law authorizes a school district of residence to limit transfers if it has a negative or qualified status on the most recent budget certification, or to limit the number of pupils to a number identified by the county superintendent of schools, as specified, if the county superintendent determines that the school district will not meet the standards and criteria for fiscal stability for the subsequent fiscal year due to the impact of additional pupil transfers in that fiscal year.

This bill would authorize a school district of residence with an average daily attendance of 50,000 or less to limit the maximum number of pupils enrolled in all school districts of choice, at any given time, to 10% of the average daily attendance. The bill would also establish procedures, as provided, by which school districts of residence may implement the limits.

(3)Existing law authorizes a school district of choice to notify a school district of residence when the school district of choice accepts a pupil from that school district of residence.

This bill would instead require a school district of choice to notify a school district of residence when the school district of choice accepts or provisionally accepts a pupil from that school district of residence, as specified.

(4)Existing law authorizes school districts to make information regarding their schools, programs, policies, and procedures available to any interested person upon request.

This bill would require a school district of choice to make public announcements regarding its schools, programs, policies, and procedures during the enrollment period. To the extent this would impose additional duties on school districts, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

(5)Existing law requires the Legislative Analyst annually to make specified information regarding districts of choice transfers available to the Governor and the appropriate fiscal and policy committees of the Legislature.

This bill would instead assign those duties to the Superintendent of Public Instruction.

(6)Existing law requires the Legislative Analyst to conduct, after consulting with appropriate legislative staff, a comprehensive evaluation of the district of choice program, make recommendations regarding the extension of the program, incorporate in that evaluation the data annually made available by the Department of Finance, and complete and submit the evaluation and the recommendations to the appropriate education policy committees of the Legislature and the Governor by January 31, 2016.

This bill would, instead, require the Legislative Analyst to complete and submit the evaluation and the recommendations to the appropriate education policy committees of the Legislature and the Governor by January 31, 2020.

This bill would revise and recast these provisions. The bill would, among other things, revise the limits that a school district of residence may impose on the total number of pupils that may transfer out of the school district of residence to a school district of choice, would expand the list of pupil characteristics that a school district of choice is prohibited from considering in selecting pupils for admission, and would revise the requirements for admitting and rejecting and the manner of selecting pupils who apply to transfer to a school district of choice. The bill would revise the procedural requirements for becoming a school district of choice, including requiring a school district to register with the Superintendent of Public Instruction as a school district of choice, and would set forth a procedure for hearing complaints or appeals by a school district of choice, a school district of residence, or a pupil who is denied a transfer, as specified. The bill would revise requirements for providing transportation assistance for transfer pupils, including requiring a school district of choice to provide a pupil who is eligible for free and reduced-price meals free transportation assistance, subject to specified requirements. To the extent the bill would impose additional duties on school districts and other local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would revise data, information, and reporting requirements relating to the school district of choice program, including, among other things, requiring the Superintendent to maintain a list of the school districts of choice in the state and to collect specified other information relating to school districts of choice, and by requiring the Superintendent rather than the Legislative Analyst to make specified information available to the Legislature and the Governor each year. The bill would require the Legislative Analyst to complete and submit an evaluation and recommendations regarding the program to the appropriate education policy committees of the Legislature and the Governor by January 31, 2020.

(7)

(2)Existing law makes the school district of choice program inoperative on July 1, 2017, and repeals the program on January 1, 2018.

This bill would extend the inoperative date to July 1, 2022, and the repeal date to January 1, 2023.

(8)This bill would make other related changes, make clarifying changes, recast certain provisions of existing law, and make other nonsubstantive changes.

(9)

(3)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 these statutory provisions.

Discussed in Hearing