BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 622|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 622
Author: Campos (D)
Amended: 9/3/13 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE : 8-1, 7/3/13
AYES: Liu, Wyland, Block, Correa, Hancock, Hueso, Monning,
Torres
NOES: Huff
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-2, 8/30/13
AYES: De Le�n, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Gaines
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 62-13, 5/29/13 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Charter schools: petitions
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill requires a proposed or existing charter
school and its authorizer to post on their Internet Web sites, a
copy of the summary of the petition, the initial petition,
renewal petition, and any substantive revisions to the petition
submitted to the charter school authorizer, as specified.
ANALYSIS : Existing law authorizes anyone to develop,
circulate, and submit a petition to establish a charter school.
Existing law requires charter developers to collect certain
signatures in support of the petition and requires petitions to
CONTINUED
AB 622
Page
2
include a prominent statement that a signature means that the
person signing has a meaningful interest in teaching in or
having his/her children attend the school.
1.For petitions that propose to establish a new charter school,
the charter developers must obtain the signatures of either
the parents of at least half of the pupils expected to enroll
at the school or half of the teachers expected to be employed
at the school during its first year of operation.
2.For petitions that propose to convert an existing public
school to a charter school, the charter developer must collect
the signatures of not less than 50% of the permanent status
teachers at the school to be converted.
This bill:
1.Provides that if the petitioners of a proposed charter school
maintain an Internet Web site for the proposed or an existing
charter school, the petitioners shall post on the proposed or
existing charter school's Internet Web site a copy of the
summary of the petition and a copy of the initial petition,
renewal petition, or appeal petition, and any substantive
revisions to the petition submitted to the charter school
authorizer that contains all the information required to be
part of the petition for the establishment of a charter
school.
2.Provides that a charter school that maintains an Internet Web
site shall post a copy of the summary of the charter school's
petition and a copy of the charter school's petition on the
school's Internet Web site.
3.Requires a charter school authorizer to post on its Internet
Web site all of the following:
A. A summary of the petition and a copy of the initial
petition, renewal petition, or appeal petition submitted
for the establishment of a charter school that is submitted
to the charter school authorizer for approval, renewal, or
appeal.
B. Any substantive revisions of the petition submitted for
initial approval or renewal.
CONTINUED
AB 622
Page
3
C. A summary of the charter school petition and the charter
school petition for each charter school it has authorized.
1.Provides that an initial petition, a renewal petition, or an
appeal petition submitted to a charter school authorizer for
purposes of establishing a charter school shall simultaneously
include an electronic copy of the summary of the charter
school petition and the charter school petition. Requires
that any substantive revisions to the initial petition or
renewal petition submitted to the charter school authorizer to
be submitted in electronic form.
2.Provides that "charter school authorizer" means the governing
board of a school district, the county board of education, or
the state board, as the case may be.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Mandate: Potentially significant reimbursable new state
mandate on school districts and county offices of education.
SUPPORT : (Verified 9/3/13)
California Federation of Teachers
California School Employees Association
California Teachers Association
Santa Clara County Office of Education
OPPOSITION : (Verified 9/3/13)
Charter Schools Development Center
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office, this
bill provides communities contemplating the formation of a
charter school with information necessary for a comprehensive
assessment of the proposal. Currently, parents, teachers,
school employees, and other interested parties have no way to
review a charter school petition in its entirety prior to
adoption by the charter authorizing entity. The charter is the
guiding document for the potential school that includes, among
CONTINUED
AB 622
Page
4
other important information, the school's academic goals for
students and the methods for student achievement. This
foundational document lays out vital details about how the
school will operate. A community must be able to review and
evaluate all of these particulars before they can make a truly
informed decision. According to the author's office, AB 622
simply requires that a charter school petition be posted online
and thereby available for the public and interested parties to
examine prior to a vote by the authorizing entity. This would
help ensure that parents, teachers and community members are
well informed when making decisions about establishing a charter
school.
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 62-13, 5/29/13
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bloom, Blumenfield,
Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian
Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Cooley, Daly,
Dickinson, Eggman, Fong, Fox, Frazier, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez,
Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Hagman, Hall, Roger Hern�ndez, Jones,
Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Lowenthal, Medina, Melendez, Mitchell,
Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Patterson,
Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas,
Skinner, Stone, Ting, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams,
Yamada, John A. P�rez
NOES: Allen, Conway, Dahle, Donnelly, Beth Gaines, Grove,
Harkey, Linder, Logue, Maienschein, Mansoor, Morrell, Wagner
NO VOTE RECORDED: Bigelow, Gorell, Holden, Waldron, Vacancy
PQ:ej 9/3/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED