BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Alan Lowenthal, Chair
2011-12 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 433
AUTHOR: Liu
INTRODUCED: February 16, 2011
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: May 4, 2011
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Beth Graybill
SUBJECT : Charter schools: pupil suspension and expulsion.
SUMMARY
This bill requires charter schools to comply with state
statutes governing the suspension and expulsion of pupils.
BACKGROUND
Existing law, the Charter Schools Act of 1992, provides for
the establishment of Charter schools in California for the
purpose, among other things, of improving student learning and
expanding learning experiences for pupils who are identified
as academically low achieving. Charter schools are exempt
from most laws governing school districts except where
specifically noted. Existing law requires charter schools to
comply with the provisions of its charter and provisions of
the Education Code that apply to charter schools. (Education
Code § 47601 et. seq.)
Existing law authorizes anyone to circulate, and submit a
petition to establish a charter school and requires governing
boards to grant a charter unless the petition fails to meet
one or more of the following:
1) The charter school presents an unsound educational
program;
2) The petitioners are demonstrably unlikely to
successfully implement the program described in the
petition;
3) The petition does not contain the number of required
signatures;
SB 433
Page 2
4) The petition does not contain an affirmation that it
will be nonsectarian and nondiscriminatory in its
programs and policies, will not charge tuition and other
affirmations, as specified.
5) The petition does not contain reasonably comprehensive
descriptions of 16 specific elements, including the
procedures by which pupils can be suspended or expelled.
(EC § 47605)
Existing law provides that if a pupil is expelled or leaves a
charter school without graduating or completing the school
year, the charter schools must notify the superintendent of
the school district of the pupil's last known address within
30 days and provide, upon request, that district with a copy
of the pupil's cumulative student record, including a
transcript of grades or report card and health information.
(EC § 47605)
Existing law establishes various statutes governing the
suspension or expulsion of pupils from traditional public
schools, including the grounds for suspension or expulsion and
the procedures teachers, principals, school districts,
governing boards and county offices of education must follow
when a student is suspended or recommended for expulsion.
This Article establishes specific requirements with regard to
expulsion hearings, the education of students during the
expulsion period, and the appeal rights of students. Existing
law prohibits a pupil's suspension or recommendation for
expulsion unless the superintendent or the principal of the
school determines that the pupil has committed specified acts.
(EC § 48900 et. seq.)
ANALYSIS
This bill :
1) Requires a charter school to comply with Article 1
(commencing with Section 48900) of Chapter 6 of Part 27
of the Education Code, which governs the suspension or
expulsion of pupils.
2) Adds the following definitions for purposes of Article 1
(commencing with Section 48900) of Chapter 6 of Part 27
SB 433
Page 3
of the Education Code:
a) Defines "governing board" to mean the governing
board of a school district or the governing body of
a charter school.
b) Defines "principal" to mean the principal of
the school or the site administrator of a charter
school.
c) Specifies "school" to include a charter school.
3) Requires reimbursement to local agencies and school
districts to be made if the Commission on State Mandates
determines that this act contains costs mandated by the
state.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill . According to the author's office, the
purpose of this bill is to address two issues of concern
with respect to students who are expelled from charter
schools: The first is to ensure that a receiving school
district
receives more complete information about a student's
expulsion; the second is to ensure greater consistency in
the expulsion policies of charter schools and ensure due
process rights of students recommended for expulsion from
a charter school.
Although charter schools are required to notify a
student's home school district when a student is expelled
or leaves the school without graduating, current law does
not require the charter school to provide a reason for
the expulsion or an explanation of the circumstances for
the student's departure. According to the sponsor of
this bill, the Los Angeles Unified School District
(LAUSD), this lack of information may result in an
inappropriate placement of the student, which can
jeopardize the safety of other pupils or a failure to
meet the needs of the student returning to the district.
SB 433
Page 4
Additionally, the LAUSD reports it has experienced wide
variations in the offenses for which a student can be
expelled from a charter school and notes that some
charters do not afford students at least minimum due
process when they are to be expelled. Given the serious
and negative impact an expulsion can have on a student's
education, the author's office argues that these issues
raise concerns about whether students who attend charter
schools enjoy the same protections and rights in the
discipline process as students who attend traditional
public schools.
2) Charter requirements . Charter schools establish their
own student discipline procedures and articulate those
procedures in their charter petition. School districts,
as charter authorizers, are responsible for ensuring that
the suspension/expulsion procedures described in the
charter are reasonably comprehensive. An argument could
be made that a district could require charter petitions
to include suspension/expulsion procedures that provide
for pupils' due process and appeal rights. A school
district and charter school could also articulate
additional expectations with regard to how the charter
school and school district will communicate about
students who are referred back to the district in a
Memorandum of Understanding that specifies operational
agreements between the charter and the district. Given
these avenues already exist, could this bill
unnecessarily subject all charter schools to a set of
statutes that may limit their ability to operate
independently from school district structures as the
Legislature intended in enacting the Charter School Act?
3) What is the problem ? It is not clear if the root of the
problem is the inadequacy of the procedures or schools
that do not follow the procedures.
If the problem is the inadequacy of the communication between
a charter school and a school district following a
pupil's expulsion, would it be better to amend the
notification provisions of the Charter School Act to
require charter schools to provide timely (less than 30
days) notification that includes information about the
reason for the student's departure or expulsion?
SB 433
Page 5
If the problem is that students in some charter schools
do not have due process rights when they are to be
suspended or expelled, would it be more appropriate to
amend the Charter School Act to require a charter's
description of the procedures by which pupils can be
suspended or expelled to specifically address the
offenses for which a student may be suspended or expelled
as well as a description of a student's due process and
appeal rights during those procedures? An argument can
also be made that charter schools are already required by
state and federal constitutional law to afford a pupil
due process when he or she has been recommended for
expulsion.
If the problem is that some charter schools are not
complying with the provisions of their charter or the
notification provisions of the Charter School Act is that
a problem that requires a different remedy? If the
problem is that current law does not provide sufficient
guidance to charter schools and school district governing
boards, amending the Charter Schools Act may be a more
appropriate remedy.
If the Committee chooses to pass this bill, staff
recommends amendments to delete the requirement that
charter schools comply with Article 1 and instead:
a) Amend Section 47605 (d) (3) to require charter
schools to notify the a district of a pupil's
disenrollment or expulsion within 10 school days and
require the school to provide a copy of the pupil's
cumulative student record including the reason for
the pupil's departure.
b) Amend Section 47605 (b) (5) (J) to require
charters, in outlining the procedures by which
pupils can be suspended or expelled, to specify the
acts for which a pupil may be suspended or expelled
and a pupil's due process rights.
4) Which prevails ? While requiring charter schools to
comply with the expulsion and suspension provisions of
the Education Code could provide greater consistency
regarding student discipline, could it limit a charter
school's flexibility to require students to follow rules
that are integral to the theme, culture, or focus of the
SB 433
Page 6
school? For example, would a charter school that
requires its students to wear uniforms be precluded from
expelling a pupil who refuses to wear the uniform? If
there was a conflict between the procedures defined in a
charter and those prescribed in statute, which would
prevail?
Although this bill defines governing board to mean the
governing board of a school district or the governing
body of a charter school, it is unclear what role the
charter school's governing board would have in the
process or how the roles and responsibilities of the two
different bodies would be differentiated. It is possible
that Article 1 would need to be amended to clearly define
the roles and responsibilities with respect to charter
schools in order for the provisions to be workable. How
would these provisions apply to statewide or countywide
charters that operate in more than one jurisdiction?
5) Mandated costs . The Legislative Counsel's Digest notes
that this bill imposes a state-mandated local program.
According to a May 2006 decision by the Commission on
State Mandates, charter schools are not eligible to claim
mandate reimbursements. However, by requiring charter
schools to comply with the suspension and expulsion
provisions of the Education Code, this bill could impose
a higher level of service on school districts and county
boards of education who would have specific
responsibilities with regard to students expelled from
charter schools that they currently do not have. Could
this bill impose a new financial burden on these local
education agencies and charter schools that are facing
significant budget constraints?
6) Related legislation .
AB 269 (Ma) would, among other things, require a charter
school to comply with all laws governing the health and
safety of pupils and school employees.
AB 925 (Lara and Alejo) requires a charter school to comply
with specified laws governing school employees,
including, among others, those governing classified
employees.
SUPPORT
SB 433
Page 7
Advancement Project
American Civil Liberties Union of California
California School Boards Association
California School Employees Association
Public Advocates
Riverside County School Superintendents' Association
An Individual
OPPOSITION
California Charter Schools Association
Charter Schools Development Center
Oakland Military Institute - College Preparatory Academy