BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  AB 2616
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   May 16, 2012

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                Felipe Fuentes, Chair

                     AB 2616 (Carter) - As Amended:  May 9, 2012 

          Policy Committee:                              Education 
          Vote:10-0

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program: 
          No     Reimbursable:              No

           SUMMARY  

          This bill makes the following modifications to truancy 
          requirements: 

          1)Defines "valid excuse" as including, but not limited to, the 
            current reasons for which a pupil is excused from school.  
            Further authorizes other reasons that are within the 
            discretion of school administrators and based on the pupil's 
            circumstances.

          2)Authorizes the parent/guardian, the first time the truancy 
            report is issued, to request a meeting with a school counselor 
            or other school designee to discuss the root causes of the 
            attendance issue and develop a joint plan to improve the 
            pupil's attendance.  

          3)Authorizes a peace officer, the second time a truancy report 
            is issued within the same school year, to give a pupil a 
            written warning, as specified under current law.  Further 
            authorizes the school to assign a pupil to an afterschool or 
            weekend study program located within the same county as his or 
            her school.  

          4)Requires the pupil, if he or she fails to successfully 
            complete the assigned study program, to be classified as a 
            habitual truant, and authorizes the school to require the 
            pupil to attend an attendance review board or truancy 
            mediation program, as specified in current law.  

          5)Authorizes rather than requires a pupil to be within the 
            jurisdiction of the juvenile court the fourth time a truancy 








                                                                 AB 2616
                                                                  Page  2

            report is issued within the same school year.  

          6)Reduces, from $100 to $50, the fine a pupil (the parent/legal 
            guardian is liable) must pay if he or she is adjudged a ward 
            of the juvenile court.  Specifies the fine is not subject to 
            penalties and assessments.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          1)GF/98 cost pressure, likely between $2 million and $4 million, 
            for school districts to comply with a parent/guardian's 
            request to attend a meeting with a counselor, upon receipt of 
            the first truancy report, as specified.  This assumes between 
            5% and 10% of pupils who were classified as truant in 2010-11 
            participate in this options.  

          2)Potential GF savings, likely in the tens of thousands of 
            dollars, to the court system to repeal the mandate that a 
            pupil  a ward of the juvenile court upon a fourth truancy 
            report within the same school year.    
           COMMENTS  

           1)Purpose  .  According to the author, "Effective school 
            attendance improvement methods involve assessing the pupil to 
            determine the primary cause of the attendance issue, involving 
            the parent early in the process, using incentives to improve 
            attendance, and targeting more intensive interventions, like 
            cognitive behavior therapy, for students who do not respond to 
            lower levels of intervention."  

            The author further states: "A County-wide task force convened 
            in 2011 by Los Angeles County Supervising Delinquency and 
            Dependency Judge Michael Nash, which involved local police and 
            the district attorney's office, among others, found that 
            'research on effective approaches overwhelmingly supports 
            school-based rather than law enforcement-based interventions 
            as the most effective for both improving attendance rates and 
            reducing rates of chronic absence.'  In addition, studies have 
            shown that children referred to the Juvenile Court are four 
            times more likely to drop out of schools, such that juvenile 
            court involvement may not be the best strategy in all truancy 
            cases."

            This bill modifies the existing statute regarding truancy 
            requirements.     








                                                                  AB 2616
                                                                  Page  3


           2)Background  .  Existing law requires each person between six and 
            18 years of age to attend public, full-time day school and 
            requires his or her parent/guardian to send them unless 
            legally exempt.  

            Current law defines a truant as a pupil missing more than 30 
            minutes of instruction without a valid excuse three times 
            during the school year.   Likewise, statute defines a chronic 
            truant as any pupil who is absent from school without a valid 
            excuse for 10% or more of the school days in one school year, 
            as specified.  According to the State Department of Education, 
            there were 1.84 million pupils classified as truants in the 
            2010-11 school year.  The number equals a 29.76% truancy rate 
            in the state.    

            Statute also requires a school district to notify the pupil's 
            parent/guardian of the following information, using the most 
            effective method possible, including electronic mail or a 
            telephone call:  

             a)   A pupil is a truant. 
             b)   The parent/guardian is obligated to compel the pupil to 
               attend school and the parent/guardian who fails to meet 
               this obligation may be guilty of an infraction and subject 
               to prosecution.  
             c)   There are alternative educational programs available in 
               the district. 
             d)   The pupil may be subject to prosecution under existing 
               law. 
             e)   The pupil may be subject to suspension, restriction, or 
               delay of the pupil's driving privilege.  
             f)   The recommendation that the parent/guardian accompanies 
               the pupil and attends his or her classes for one day.   


            Under current law, a minor who is reported as a truant may be 
            required to attend make-up classes conducted on one day of a 
            weekend and is subject to the following: 

             a)   A written warning by a peace officer, as part of the 
               first truancy report.
             b)   Assignment to an afterschool or weekend study program 
               located within the same county as the pupil, as part of the 
               second truancy report issued within the same school year. 








                                                                  AB 2616
                                                                  Page  4

             c)   A pupil classified as a habitual truant may be required 
               to attend an attendance review board or truancy mediation 
               program, as part of the third truancy report issued within 
               the same school year.   
             d)   A pupil becomes a ward of the juvenile court, as part of 
               the fourth truancy report issued within the same school 
               year.  

           1)Unpaid K-12 mandates  . According to the Legislative Analyst's 
            Office, the state owes approximately $3.4 billion in K-12 
            mandate costs for prior years. Prior to the 2010 Budget Act, 
            the state deferred mandate payments for several years with the 
            promise of making the payments to school districts in future 
            years. As a result, districts did not received payment for 
            annual services they were required to conduct, including the 
            school safety plan mandate. The K-12 pupil truancy mandates 
            total approximately $22.8 million GF/98 annually.

            SB 90 (Committee on Budget and Fiscal Review), Chapter 7, 
            Statutes of 2011 allocated $80 million GF/98 to school 
            districts for annual K-12 mandate costs; the state, however, 
            still owes school districts for the prior year costs. 
















           Analysis Prepared by :    Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916) 
          319-2081