BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 202 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 17, 2013 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION Joan Buchanan, Chair AB 202 (Donnelly) - As Amended: March 5, 2013 [Note: This bill is doubled referred to the Assembly Judiciary Committee and will be heard as it relates to issues under its jurisdiction.] SUBJECT : School security: School Marshal Plan SUMMARY : Establishes the School Marshal Plan and authorizes school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools to use general purpose funds to provide training for school marshals. Defines "school marshal" as a school employee who, in accordance with the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995, and pursuant to locally adopted policies, is authorized to possess a firearm at a schoolsite or designated school activities. Exempts from disclosure the personally identifiable information of a school marshal in an application for a license to carry a firearm, or in a license to carry a firearm, issued by the sheriff of a county or the chief of other head of a municipal police department. EXISTING LAW : 1)Authorizes the governing board of any school district to establish a security department under the supervision of a chief of security or a police department under the supervision of a chief of police, as designated by, and under the direction of, the superintendent of the school district. (Education Code (EC) Section 38000) 2)Authorizes the governing board of a school district to establish a school police reserve officer corps to supplement a police department. (EC 38000) 3)Specifies that individuals employed by a police department, when appointed and duly sworn, are peace officers and may carry firearms if authorized by the governing board. (EC 38001) 4)Defines "school security officer" as any person primarily employed or assigned to provide security services as a AB 202 Page 2 watchperson, security guard, or patrolperson on or about premises owned or operated by a school district to protect persons or property or to prevent the theft or unlawful taking of district property of any kind or to report any unlawful activity to the district and local law enforcement agencies. (EC 38001.5) 5)Establishes the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995. Specifies that any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone shall be punished by imprisonment as specified, unless it is with the written permission of the superintendent, his or her designee, or equivalent school authority. (Penal Code Section 626.9) FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown COMMENTS : This bill authorizes local educational agencies and charter schools to use general funds to provide training for school marshals. A school marshal is defined as someone who is authorized by the superintendent, his or her designee, or an equivalent school authority, and in accordance with locally adopted policies, to possess a firearm at a schoolsite or at school activities. Purpose of the bill . The author states, "In light of recent tragedies involving violent intruders in our classrooms, we have a moral imperative to protect the children in our schools. We must do so without abandoning our oath to protect the Constitutional rights of all Californians. This bill will empower local school districts to protect the lives entrusted to their care during the school day, and will protect the School Marshals from identification so they do not become targets. This program would create an invisible line of defense between our children and a predator intent on committing violent acts against our students or teachers. Further, this bill will serve as a deterrent to future possible intruders, as they will no longer have assurance of a defenseless prey if they enter our classrooms." This bill is consistent with the recommendations of the National Rifle Association (NRA). In December 2012, following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton, Connecticut, the NRA called for placing armed guards at every school campus. Recently, an April 2, 2013 report by the NRA's National School AB 202 Page 3 Shield Task Force issued a report that includes a recommendation to arm school employees after 40 to 60 hours of training. The report also recommends changing state laws to allow school staff to carry a firearm and for states to approve professional training programs for armed school personnel using private sector approved and certified trainers as well as traditional state law enforcement trainers. Is this bill necessary ? Local governing boards already have discretion on the use of general funds. It is not necessary to give authority to school districts for this purpose. A question can be raised as to whether using funds for training school staff in use of firearms is a good use of funds. There are other safety measures, such as communication systems, fencing, inside door locks, panic buttons and other security strategies that may be more important. Districts also already have discretion to allow such training . Districts can authorize such trainings, with or without the use of district funds, at their discretion. For example, Galt Joint Union Elementary School District recently partnered with the Galt Police Department to provide a gun awareness and safety training to school personnel, but the district does not allow school staff to carry a firearm at school. Districts have authority to assign armed individuals on schoolsites . Governing boards are authorized to establish a police department headed by a chief of police. Individuals employed and compensated as members of a police department of a school district, when appointed and duly sworn, are considered peace officers. These officers must go through the Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) trainings and must be recertified on a regular basis. Districts without police departments may participate in a School Resource Officer (SRO) program through a local city or county law enforcement agency. The SRO program assigns one or more police officers to work with school districts to create and maintain a safe environment and provide support and training to school and district officials on crime prevention, gang intervention and school safety. Some SROs may assign one officer to each middle and/or high school or one officer to work with several middle and/or high schools, while others may assign one officer to work with the whole district. Some SROs are on campuses daily. The Gun-Free School Zone Act was established to keep guns away AB 202 Page 4 from schools. The law imposes a penalty of up to five years of imprisonment to anyone possessing or discharging a firearm in a school zone, defined as within 1,000 feet of a public or private school. However, the law also allows a district superintendent to give an exception to the law. Is arming school staff a good solution for school safety? The California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees supports the bill and cites the following from an April 6, 2013 New York Times article, "Research on mass shootings over the last decade has bolstered the idea that people at the scene of an attack have a better chance of survival if they take an active stance rather than waiting to be rescued by the police, who in many cases cannot get there fast enough to prevent the loss of life?..In 16 of the attacks studied by the researchers, civilians were able to stop the perpetrator, subduing him in 13 cases and shooting him in 3 cases. In other attacks, civilians have obstructed or delayed the gunman until the police arrived." Parents, educators, law enforcement agencies and others, however, have expressed objections to proposals to increase police presence or to arm school staff. In an article in eClassroom News, a college educator from Massachusetts and a mother of two young children was quoted as saying, "Schools shouldn't be about guns. It should be a safe place to learn, free from weapons and the like. I understand wanting to protect our children, but I don't know if that's the right solution. It's a scary solution." New Jersey Governor Chris Christie said, "You can't make this [school] an armed camp for kids." Law enforcement fears the unintended consequences of having armed staff on schoolsites. The San Diego Schools Police Officers Association states, "As law enforcement officers, having civilians armed with no knowledge of the level of training they receive not only makes it a huge liability to that school district but it also makes it dangerous to that teacher when a crisis occurs. Responding officers may mistakenly assume that school employee is the suspected attacker and must address that employee as such until confirmed as an employee authorized to be armed on site. Precious time would take away officers who should be searching for the actual suspect. During the time the officers are concentrated on the employee the officers must place themselves in danger from also becoming victims to the same attacker by exposing themselves as they take the employee AB 202 Page 5 into custody." The California Police Chiefs Association also fears that untrained persons are perpetually at risk for misplacing their firearms and having them fall into the wrong hands. In December 2012, the National Association of Secondary School Principals and the National Association of Elementary School Principals issued a joint statement denouncing proposals to allow teachers and principals to carry firearms in school. The organizations believe that such policies will not make schools more secure and may do more harm than good. "It is not reasonable to expect that a school official could intervene in a deadly force incident, even with a modicum of training, quickly and safely enough to save lives," said the statement. Instead, the organizations advocate for building trusting relationships with students and people in the community to improve communication so that threats can be identified, and efforts to address mental health needs of students and all community members. The California Teachers Association (CTA) opposes the bill and states, "CTA members strongly believe there must be a comprehensive approach to school safety based on input from communities and educators that includes access to school counselors, mental health services, investing in infrastructure and critical programs and common sense gun safety measures like universal background checks for gun purchases. We do not believe training "any or all" school employee(s) to carry a firearm while on a school site or during school activities is suitable given other provisions in current law that provide appropriate and necessary training and avenues for schools to employ school personnel authorized to carry firearms." In a January 2013 statewide voter survey on school safety conducted by the California Endowment, the policy voters objected to the most, with 67 percent opposed, was allowing teachers trained in firearms to carry guns. Voters support more prevention-oriented strategies, such as improving mental health services and having trained guidance counselors in every school, over response-oriented strategies, such as armed guards or teachers or police on campus. Related legislation . A number of school safety-type bills have been introduced this year. AB 549 (Jones-Sawyer), pending in AB 202 Page 6 this Committee, requires the comprehensive school safety plan to establish guidelines for the roles and responsibilities of police officers on campus. AB 514 (Bonta), pending in this Committee, requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to include on his Internet Web site a list of statewide resources for youth that have been affected by gangs, gun violence, and psychological trauma. AB 699 (Donnelly), also scheduled for the April 17th hearing, gives a parent or guardian of a public elementary or secondary school pupil the option to remove his or her child from an unsafe school and enroll his or her child in another school within the same school district or a school in another district if no safe school exists in the district. AB 1264 (Conway), pending in this Committee, requires school districts and county offices of education to adopt a tactical response plan in the school safety plan, publicly announce its adoption or update of a tactical response plan, develop a protocol for teachers to provide notification of pupils identified as having a potential mental health issue, and requires the annual audit of school district funds to include a summary of the extent to which a local educational agency has complied with the requirement to develop a comprehensive school safety plan. SB 49 (Lieu), pending in the Senate Education Committee, adds procedures related to individuals with guns on school campuses and at school-related functions as a requirement in the school safety plan, requires charter schools to develop a school safety plan, requires the annual audit of school district funds to include a summary of the extent to which a local educational agency (LEA) has complied with the requirement to develop a comprehensive school safety plan, and requires the SPI to withhold the next principal apportionment from a LEA if the SPI receives an audit report that finds that the LEA has not complied with the requirement that each school develop a school safety plan, or the SPI finds that a superintendent of a school district or county office of education has failed to provide written notification to the SPI identifying the schools that had not complied. SB 316 (Block), pending in the Senate Education Committee, AB 202 Page 7 requires all modernization projects submitted to the Division of State Architect, and the governing board of each school district and each county superintendent of schools to, by January 1, 2015, equip the doors of every classroom and every room with an occupancy of five or more persons with locks that allow the doors to be locked from the inside. SB 561 (Fuller), pending in the Senate Education Committee, prohibits a student who has been expelled for specified actions from enrolling in any other school or school district during the period of expulsion unless he or she has undergone a mental health evaluation conducted by a licensed clinical psychologist, and the school at which he or she enrolls is a county community school or a juvenile court school or a community day school. SB 634 (Price), pending in the Senate Education Committee, requires a comprehensive school safety plan to establish minimum requirements and standards for schools to follow when conducting school safety drills and reviewing school emergency and crisis response plans, requires all school districts and county offices of education to incorporate specified safety drills into their school safety plan, and requires each school to conduct two school evacuation drills and one law enforcement school lockdown drill during each school year. REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION : Support California Association of Federal Firearms Licensees Opposition Association of California School Administrators California Association of Regional Occupational Centers and Programs California Chapters of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence California Police Chiefs Association California Teachers Association Labor/Community Strategy Center Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence Los Angeles Unified School District Peace Officers Research Association of California Public Counsel Law Center AB 202 Page 8 San Diego Schools Police Officers Association San Francisco Unified School District Violence Prevention Coalition of Greater Los Angeles Youth Justice Coalition Analysis Prepared by : Sophia Kwong Kim / ED. / (916) 319-2087