BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 381|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 381
Author: Pavley (D), et al
Amended: 4/6/11
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE : 9-0, 3/30/11
AYES: Lowenthal, Runner, Alquist, Blakeslee, Hancock,
Huff, Price, Simitian, Vargas
NO VOTE RECORDED: Liu, Vacancy
SUBJECT : School attendance: residency requirements
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill extends authorization for a pupil to
enroll in school where the parent or guardian of that pupil
is employed during a majority of the hours that the pupil
is scheduled to be in school, rather than where the pupil
resides. The inoperative date will be extended from July
1, 2012 to July 1, 2017.
ANALYSIS : Current law provides several means to
authorize a pupil who reside in one school district to
attend public school in another district. The main
authorization provides for inter-district attendance when
the district of residence and district of proposed
attendance establish, for a period of up to five years, an
interdistrict transfer agreement.
In addition to interdistrict attendance agreements, current
CONTINUED
SB 381
Page
2
law authorizes pupils to attend school in a district where
the pupil's parent works, rather than where the pupil and
parent reside. The district where the parent is employed
is not required to admit the pupil but is prohibited from
refusing admission on the basis of the arbitrary
consideration such as race, ethnicity, sex, parental
income, scholastic achievement. The receiving (parental
employment) district may also refuse the transfer if it
determines that the costs of the transfer would exceed the
added revenues (thus preventing mandated costs). Either
district of residence or parental employment may prohibit
the transfer if it would negatively affect a desegregation
plan and the district of residence is not required to allow
more transfers than specified limits based upon the size of
the district.
This bill extends authorization for a pupil to enroll in
school where the parent or guardian of that pupil is
employed during a majority of the hours that the pupil is
scheduled to be in school. The inoperative date will be
changed from July 1, 2012 to July 1, 2017.
Comments
Continuing to provide parents and guardians with the
flexibility to enroll their children in schools near their
workplace provides parents with the opportunity to engage
in their children's education. However, there have been
reports where a parent obtains part-time weekend employment
within the boundaries of another school district and uses
that employment to justify school attendance for their
child.
The author accepted amendment in Senate Education Committee
that limits the abuses of current law, which can be
interpreted to allow any employment to qualify under
current statute, even if only part-time and weekends,
unassociated with the timing of a school day. This will
also maintain the underlying integrity of the statute which
is to permit parents the flexibility to engage in their
child's education if having to commute long distances to
their place of employment.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
CONTINUED
SB 381
Page
3
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 4/6/11)
Clovis Unified School District
Conejo Valley Unified School District
Las Virgenes Unified School District
Los Angeles Unified School District
Long Beach Unified School District
Oak Park Unified School District
Orange County Department of Education
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
continuing to provide parents and legal guardians with the
flexibility of enrolling their children in school near
their workplace, gives them an opportunity to participate
in their children's education. This measure extends an
option that has been available to working parents and does
not place any new requirements on school districts. This
option has proven to be invaluable to families and should
be continued."
CPM:cm 4/6/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED