BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Alan Lowenthal, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
BILL NO: AB 1729
AUTHOR: Ammiano
AMENDED: May 25, 2012
FISCAL COMM: No HEARING DATE: June 27, 2012
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Lynn Lorber
SUBJECT : Pupil suspension.
SUMMARY
This bill recasts provisions relative to the suspension of a
pupil upon a first offense, and authorizes the use and
documentation of other means of correction.
BACKGROUND
Current law prohibits a pupil from being suspended or
recommended for expulsion unless the principal of the school
determines that the pupil has committed certain acts, and
gives schools the discretion to take action for most
offenses. (Education Code § 48900)
Discretion to suspend
Schools may suspend a pupil for violating any number of acts,
some of which include:
1) Attempting to cause or threatening to cause physical
injury to another person. (Expulsion must be
recommended for causing serious physical injury.) (EC §
48915))
2) Being under the influence of a controlled substance.
(Expulsion must be recommended for possession or the
sale of controlled substances.)
(EC § 48915)
3) Caused or attempted to cause damage to school property.
4) Possessed or used tobacco.
5) Committed an obscene act or engaged in habitual
AB 1729
Page 2
profanity or vulgarity.
6) Possessed, offered, arranged or negotiated to sell drug
paraphernalia.
7) Engaged in, or attempted to engage in, hazing.
8) Disrupting school activities or otherwise willfully
defying the valid authority of supervisor, teachers,
administrators, school officials, or other school
personnel engaged in the performance of their duties.
9) Engaged in an act of bullying. (EC § 48900, § 48900.2,
§ 48900.3,
§ 48900.4, § 48900.7)
Pupils may be suspended for a first offense if the school
principal determines that the pupil committed certain acts or
that pupil's presence causes a danger to persons or property
or threatens to disrupt the instructional process or the
pupil committed certain acts. (EC § 48900.5)
Prior to suspension
Current law states that suspension shall be imposed only when
other means of correction fail to bring about proper conduct.
(EC § 48900.5)
Suspension by the principal must be preceded by an informal
conference between the principal, pupil and whenever
practicable, the teacher, supervisor or school employee who
referred the pupil to the principal. School principals may
suspend a pupil without first holding an informal conference
with the pupil if an emergency situation exists. A school
employee is required to make a reasonable effort to contact
the pupil's parents at the time of suspension; however,
whenever a pupil is suspended from school (as opposed to
suspension from a class) the parent must be notified in
writing. (EC § 48911)
Decision to suspend
The governing board of a school district is required, unless
a request has been made to the contrary, to hold closed
sessions if the board is considering suspending or taking
AB 1729
Page 3
other disciplinary action (other than expulsion) if a public
hearing would lead to the release of confidential
information. School districts are required to notify, in
writing, the pupil and the pupil's parent of the intent to
call and hold a closed session. (EC § 48912)
Alternatives to out-of-school suspension
School district superintendents and school principals are
authorized to use discretion to provide alternatives to
suspension or expulsion, including counseling and an anger
management program. (EC § 48900(v))
School principals are authorized to assign a suspended pupil
to a supervised suspension classroom for the entire period of
suspension if the pupil poses no imminent danger or threat to
the campus, pupils, or staff, or if an action to expel the
pupil has not been initiated. (EC § 48911.1)
Current law states that schools should consider implementing
at least one of the following if the number of pupils
suspended during the prior school year exceeded 30% of the
school's enrollment:
1) A supervised suspension program.
2) A progressive discipline approach during the schoolday
on campus (as an alternative to off-campus suspension),
using any of the following activities:
a) Conferences between the school staff, parents
and pupils.
b) Referral to the school counselor,
psychologist, child welfare, attendance personnel,
or other school support service staff.
c) Detention.
d) Study teams, guidance teams, resource panel
teams, or other assessment-related teams. (EC §
48911.2)
Teachers may suspend pupils from class for the day and the
following day. If the pupil is to remain on campus during
AB 1729
Page 4
that suspension, the pupil must be under appropriate
supervision. Teachers must ask the parent to attend a
parent-teacher conference regarding the suspension. Pupils
are prohibited from returning to the class from which he or
she was suspended, during the period of the suspension,
without the concurrence of the teacher and principal.
(EC § 48910)
Schools are authorized to require a pupil to perform
community service as part of or instead of suspension or
expulsion for most offenses. (EC § 48900.6)
Missed assignments
The teacher of any class from which a pupil is suspended is
authorized to require the pupil to complete any assignments
and tests missed during the suspension. (EC § 48913)
Number of days of suspension
The number of days that a pupil may be suspended from school
is capped at five consecutive schooldays. (EC § 48911)
With some exception, the total number of days for which a
pupil may be suspended is capped at 20 schooldays per school
year, unless the pupil enrolls in or is transferred to
another regular school, an opportunity school or a
continuation school, in which case the cap is 30 schooldays
per school year. School districts are authorized to count
suspensions that occur while a pupil is enrolled in another
school district toward the maximum numbers of days for which
a pupil may be suspended in any school year. (EC § 48903)
In cases where expulsion from any school or suspension for
the remainder of the semester from continuation schools is
being processed by a school district, the district
superintendent may extend the suspension until the governing
board has rendered a decision. (EC § 48911(g))
Pupils with exceptional needs
Schools are authorized to suspend or expel an individual with
exceptional needs in accordance with federal law. If a pupil
with an individualized education program (IEP) exhibits
behavior problems, the IEP team must make a determination if
AB 1729
Page 5
the behavior is a manifestation of the disability and whether
the strategies in the IEP are effective to address the
behavior. If it is determined that the IEP is ineffective, a
functional analysis is then amended to include a behavior
intervention plan. (EC § 48915.5, § 56523, and California
Code of Regulations Title 5, § 3052)
ANALYSIS
This bill recasts provisions relative to the suspension of a
pupil upon a first offense, and authorizes the use and
documentation of other means of correction. Specifically,
this bill:
1) Removes the consideration of whether the pupil's
presence is a danger to property or threatens to disrupt
the instructional process when a school principal is
determining whether to suspend a pupil upon a first
offense. (Discretion remains to suspend upon a first
offense if the principal determines the pupil's presence
is a danger to people.)
2) Specifies that the existing limitation on imposing
suspension only when other means of correction fail also
includes supervised suspension (in-school suspension).
3) Authorizes school districts to document other corrective
action used and place that documentation in the pupil's
record.
4) Authorizes other means of correction to include:
a) A conference between school
personnel, the pupil's parent or guardian, and the
pupil.
b) Referrals to the school counselor,
psychologist, social worker, child welfare
attendance personnel, or other school support
personnel for case management and counseling.
c) Study teams, guidance teams,
resource panel teams, or other intervention-related
AB 1729
Page 6
teams that assess the behavior, and develop and
implement individualized plans to address the
behavior in partnership with the pupil and his or
her parents.
d) Referral for a comprehensive
psychosocial or psychoeducational assessment,
including for purposes of creating an
individualized education program (IEP or a 504
plan).
e) Enrollment in a program for teaching
prosocial behavior or anger management.
f) Participation in a restorative
justice program.
g) A positive behavior support approach
with tiered interventions that occur during the
schoolday on campus.
h) After school programs that address
specific behavioral issues or expose pupils to
positive activities and behaviors, including those
operated in collaboration with local parent and
community groups.
i) Community services, as described in
current law.
5) Recasts options that may be considered as alternatives
to suspension or expulsion, by striking reference to
counseling and anger management, and replacing with
alternatives that are age appropriate and designed to
address and correct the pupil's specific misbehavior.
6) Makes legislative findings and declarations that it is
state policy to:
a) Ensure that school discipline
policies and practices support the creation of
safe, positive, supportive, and equitable school
environments where pupils can learn.
b) Provide effective interventions for
AB 1729
Page 7
pupils who engage in acts of problematic behavior
to help them change their behavior and avoid
exclusion from school.
c) Ensure that school discipline
policies and practices are implemented and enforced
evenhandedly and are not disproportionately applied
to any class or group of pupils.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill . According to the author,
"Superintendents and principals deal with discipline
almost exclusively through suspension or expulsion
despite research which correlates exclusionary
discipline with lower academic achievement, lower
graduation rates and increased pupil dropout rates - all
without making campuses safer. Current law requires
that 'other means of correction' fail before a student
is suspended for a non-mandatory reason. Schools are
not required to document these efforts, making it
difficult to discern what is most effective or even what
has previously been attempted prior to expulsion or
suspension. These ineffective policies
disproportionately affect our state's most vulnerable
populations, especially black males and students with
disabilities; and leads to disproportionate rates of
involvement in the juvenile justice system, and later
adult incarceration."
2) Suspension upon first offense . Current law requires
schools to impose other means of correction prior to
suspension. However, current law authorizes schools to
suspend a pupil upon the first offense of certain
serious acts (such as causing physical injury, or
selling a weapon or drugs) or for any act (for which
schools have the discretion to suspend) if the principal
or superintendent determines that the pupil's presence
causes a danger to persons or property or threatens to
disrupt the instructional process. This bill removes
the consideration of whether a pupil is a danger to
property or threatens to disrupt the instructional
process when a school principal is determining whether
to suspend a pupil upon a first offense. Schools would
AB 1729
Page 8
retain the ability to suspend a pupil upon the first
offense for acts such as defiance or willful disruption
if the principal determines the pupil's presence poses a
danger to people.
3) Other means of correction . Current law states that
suspension is to be imposed only when other means of
correction fail to bring about proper conduct.
Suspension by the principal must be preceded by an
informal conference between the principal, pupil and
whenever practicable, the teacher, supervisor or school
employee who referred the pupil to the principal, unless
an emergency situation exists. Schools are currently
authorized to use discretion to provide alternatives to
suspension or expulsion, and should consider
implementing alternatives to suspension if the number of
pupils suspended during the prior school year exceeded
30% of the school's enrollment. This bill specifies
activities that may be used as alternatives to
suspension and authorizes schools to document those
activities in a pupil's record.
4) Discretion . Current law grants the discretion to school
principals to suspend pupils for approximately twenty
acts. Current law requires suspension to be imposed
only when other means of correction fail to bring about
proper conduct. Current law provides an exception that
gives school principals the discretion to suspend a
pupil upon a first offense if the principal determines
the pupil's presence causes a danger to persons or
property or threatens to disrupt the instructional
process. This bill removes from that determination
consideration of whether the pupil's presence is a
danger to property or threatens to disrupt the
instructional process. Discretion remains to suspend
upon a first offense if the principal determines the
pupil's presence is a danger to people.
5) Capacity . Implementation of alternative means of
correction could include the need for staff training,
school counselors and psychologists, staff to supervise
pupils who serve in-school suspensions and classrooms to
house pupils who serve in-school suspensions. This bill
does not require schools to use alternative means of
AB 1729
Page 9
correction.
6) Los Angeles Unified School District . On October 11,
2011, it was announced that the Los Angeles Unified
School District (LAUSD) entered into a voluntary
agreement with the federal Department of Education's
Office of Civil Rights. Under the agreement, LAUSD will
revamp its entire program for English learners and
accelerate its efforts focused on closing the
achievement and opportunity gap for African-American
pupils. As part of the agreement, LAUSD is to take
steps to report disparate discipline rates, and
eliminate inequitable and disproportionate discipline
practices.
7) Related legislation . SB 1088 (Price) requires school
districts to conduct a second review for the readmission
of pupils who have been expelled and denied readmission,
and prohibits school from denying enrollment or
readmission to pupils solely on the basis that he or she
has had contact with the juvenile justice system. SB
1088 is scheduled to be heard by the Assembly Education
Committee on June 27.
SB 1235 (Steinberg) requires schools that have suspended more
than 25% of the school's enrollment or more than 25% of
any numerically significant racial or ethnic subgroup of
the school's enrollment in the prior school year to
implement, for at least three years, at least one
specified strategies to reduce the suspension rate or
disproportionality. SB 1235 is scheduled to be heard by
the Assembly Education Committee on June 27.
AB 1732 (Campos) identifies conduct that would constitute a
post on a social media website, relative to
cyberbullying. AB 1732 is pending on the Senate Floor.
AB 1909 (Ammiano) requires schools to notify a foster youth's
attorney and representative of the county child welfare
agency of pending expulsion or other disciplinary
proceedings. AB 1909 is scheduled to be heard by the
Senate Human Services Committee on June 26, 2012.
AB 2032 (Mendoza) requires charter schools to be subject to
AB 1729
Page 10
the same suspension and expulsion provisions as other
public schools. AB 2032 was held on the Assembly
Appropriations Committee's suspense file.
AB 2145 (Alejo) requires the California Department of
Education to disaggregate and report data related to
referrals to a school attendance review board and post
disaggregated expulsion and suspension data on its
website, and requires schools districts to maintain data
relative to expended suspensions. AB 2145 is scheduled
to be heard by this Committee on June 27, 2012.
AB 2242 (Dickinson) prohibits pupils who are found to have
disrupted school activities or otherwise willfully
defied the authority of school officials from being
subject to extended suspension or recommended for
expulsion. AB 2242 is scheduled to be heard by this
Committee on June 27, 2012.
AB 2300 (Swanson) requires school districts to expunge from a
pupil's records a suspension for certain acts if the
pupil completes five hours of community service. AB
2300 was held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee's
suspense file.
AB 2537 (V. Manuel Perez) grants discretion to school
principals to make a determination of the
appropriateness of the expulsion of a pupil who has
unlawfully sold a controlled substance, and makes other
changes relative to mandatory expulsions. AB 2537 is
scheduled to be heard by this Committee on June 27,
2012.
AB 2616 (Carter) creates a new option for the first time
a truancy report is issued, shifts the existing
consequences for the first truancy to the second
truancy, and eliminates the mandate that a pupil found
truant for the fourth time in one school year be
referred to the juvenile court. AB 2616 is scheduled to
be heard by this Committee on June 27, 2012.
AB 1729
Page 11
SUPPORT
Advancement Project
American Civil Liberties Union
Black Organizing Project
Black Parallel School Board
California Association for Parent-Child Advocacy
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
California State Conference of the National Association for
the Advancement of
Colored People
Center on Juvenile & Criminal Justice
Children Now
Children's Defense Fund-California
Community Asset Development Re-Defining Education
Community Coalition
Disability Rights California
Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund
Disability Rights Legal Center
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids
Gay-Straight Alliance Network
InnerCity Struggle
Labor/Community Strategy Center
Legal Advocates for Children & Youth
Legal Services for Children
Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce
Los Angeles Unified School District
Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund
National Center for Youth Law
Northern California Association of Counsel for Children
PICO California
PolicyLink
Public Counsel
Restorative Schools Vision Project
Youth & Education Law Project, Mills Legal Clinic
Youth Justice Coalition
Youth Law Center
An individual
OPPOSITION
California County Superintendents Educational Services
AB 1729
Page 12