BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                            Senator Kevin de León, Chair


          AB 2276 (Bocanegra) - Transfers from Juvenile Court Schools
          
          Amended: June 17, 2014          Policy Vote: Education 6-1 
          Urgency: No                     Mandate: Yes
          Hearing Date: August 14, 2014                                
          Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-Hernandez                       
          
          SUSPENSE FILE. AS PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED.
          
          
          Bill Summary: AB 2276 makes various changes to requirements  
          relative to the transfer of pupils from juvenile court schools  
          to district schools. AB 2276 also requires the Superintendent of  
          Public Instruction (SPI) and the Board of State and Community  
          Corrections (BSCC) to convene a statewide stakeholder group to  
          develop a model for the immediate transfer of educational  
          records, uniform systems for calculating and awarding credits,  
          transition planning, and the immediate enrollment of pupils who  
          are being transferred from juvenile court schools, and to report  
          recommendations for state action to the Legislature by January  
          1, 2016.

          Fiscal Impact: 
              Stakeholder process: Significant costs in 2015-16 to the  
              California Department of Education (CDE) to convene the  
              stakeholder group, to staff its meetings and work, and to  
              write the report. Staff costs are likely to be $100,000  
              (General Fund) for 1 PY; costs for the actual stakeholder  
              meetings (including travel expenses and meeting space) will  
              depend on the size of the group and the location of its  
              members, but would likely be in the tens of thousands of  
              dollars (General Fund).
              Report recommendations: Significant ongoing General Fund  
              cost pressure for the state to implement the group's  
              recommendations.
               Mandate: Potentially significant reimbursable state  
              mandate on county offices of education (COEs) and county  
              probation departments to have joint transition planning  
              policies, as specified.
              Local cost pressure: This bill "strongly encourages" local  
              educational agencies (LEAs) to enter into memoranda of  
              understanding (MOUs) and create joint policies, systems,  








          AB 2276 (Bocanegra)
          Page 1


              including data sharing systems, transition centers, and  
              other joint structures that will allow for the immediate  
              transfer of educational records, create uniform systems for  
              calculating and awarding course credit, and allow for the  
              immediate enrollment of pupils transferring from juvenile  
              court schools. To the extent that LEAs consider the state's  
              "strong encouragement," the bill creates cost pressure to  
              take on that additional workload.

          Background: Existing law provides that public school or classes  
          in any juvenile hall or home, day center, juvenile ranch or  
          camp, regional youth educational facility, or Orange County  
          youth correctional center, or in any group home housing 25 or  
          more children and operating one or more additional sites under a  
          central administration, with acceptable school structures at one  
          or more centrally located sites to serve the single or composite  
          populations of juvenile court school pupils shall be known as  
          juvenile court schools.  
          (Education Code § 48645.1)
     
          Existing law requires the county board of education to provide  
          for the administration and operation of juvenile court schools  
          by the county superintendent of schools or by contract with the  
          respective governing boards of the elementary, high school, or  
          unified school district in which the juvenile court school is  
          located. It further specifies that juvenile court schools shall  
          be conducted in a manner prescribed by the county board of  
          education and requires the schooldays to be 240 minutes.  (EC §  
          48645.2 et seq.)

          Existing law further requires that pupils expelled from school  
          for serious offenses such as possessing a firearm, brandishing a  
          knife, causing serious physical injury, selling a controlled  
          substance or committing a sexual assault, are prohibited from  
          enrolling in any school other than a community school, community  
          day school, or juvenile court school.  (EC § 48915.2)

          The governing board of a school district that receives a request  
          for enrollment from a pupil who has been expelled from another  
          school district, for acts other than the most serious offenses,  
          must hold a hearing to determine whether the individual poses a  
          continuing danger to pupils or employees. If the board finds the  
          pupil does not pose a danger, the pupil must be permitted to  
          enroll if the pupil has established residence in the district or  








          AB 2276 (Bocanegra)
          Page 2


          enrolled pursuant to an interdistrict agreement.  (EC §  
          48915.1(a)(e))

          Existing law prohibits a pupil from being denied enrollment or  
          readmission to a public school solely on the basis that he or  
          she has had contact with the juvenile justice system, including  
          arrest, adjudication by a juvenile court, supervision by a  
          probation officer, detention in a juvenile facility, or  
          enrollment in a juvenile court school.  
          (EC § 48645.5)

          A school district governing board, upon voting to expel a pupil,  
          may suspend the enforcement of the expulsion order for up to one  
          calendar year and may, as a condition of the suspension of the  
          enforcement, assign the pupil to a school, class or program that  
          is deemed appropriate for the rehabilitation of the pupil. Upon  
          satisfactory completion of the rehabilitation assignment, the  
          governing board must reinstate the pupil in a school within the  
          district and may also order the expungement of any or all  
          records of the expulsion proceedings.  (EC § 48917)

          Proposed Law: This bill makes various changes to requirements  
          relative to the transfer of pupils from juvenile court schools  
          to district schools. Specifically, this bill:

             1)   "Strongly encourages" LEAs to enter into MOUs and create  
               joint policies, systems, including data sharing systems,  
               transition centers, and other joint structures that will  
               allow for the immediate transfer of educational records,  
               create uniform systems for calculating and awarding course  
               credit, and allow for the immediate enrollment of pupils  
               transferring from juvenile court schools. 

             2)   Requires that a COE and county probation department have  
               a joint transition planning policy that includes  
               collaboration with LEAs to improve communication regarding  
               dates of release and the educational needs of pupils who  
               have had contact with the juvenile justice system; to  
               coordinate immediate school placement and enrollment; and  
               to ensure that probation officers have the information they  
               need to support the return of pupils who are being  
               transferred from juvenile court schools to public schools.

             3)   Requires the SPI and the BSCC to convene a statewide  








          AB 2276 (Bocanegra)
          Page 3


               group with stakeholders from the community, advocacy  
               organizations, and education and probation department  
               leaders to develop a model and study existing successful  
               county programs and policies for the immediate transfer of  
               educational records, uniform systems for calculating and  
               awarding credits, transition planning, and the immediate  
               enrollment of pupils who are being transferred from  
               juvenile court schools.

             4)   Requires the statewide group to report its findings and  
               provide recommendations for state action to the Legislature  
               on or before January 1, 2016.

          Related Legislation: SB 1111 (Lara) amends the process for  
          referrals to a county community school and also establish the  
          right of a student to reenroll in his or her former school or  
          another school upon completion of the term of involuntary  
          transfer to a county community school. SB 1111 is pending in the  
          Assembly Appropriations Committee.
                
           SB 744 (Lara), introduced in 2013, was substantially similar to  
          SB 1111 and vetoed by the Governor with the following message:

              "This bill imposes new and rather specific requirements on  
              the way local schools handle disruptive students. 

              The recently enacted Local Control Funding Formula has  
              created a new regime of greater equity and increased  
              accountability at the local level. I'm putting my trust in  
              the skill and good faith of local educators to manage the  
              issues that are the subject of this bill in a caring and  
              responsible way."

          SB 1088 (Price) Ch. 381/2012 enacted a prohibition against  
          denying a pupil from being enrolled or readmitted to a public  
          school solely on the basis that he or she has had contact with  
          the juvenile justice system.

          Staff Comments: This bill places new requirements on state and  
          local agencies, relative to the transfer of pupils from juvenile  
          court schools to district schools. At the state level, it  
          requires the CDE and BSCC to convene a  statewide stakeholder  
          group including  individuals from  "the community", advocacy  
          organizations, and education and probation department leaders,  








          AB 2276 (Bocanegra)
          Page 4


          and tasks them with developing a model and studying existing  
          successful county programs and policies for the immediate  
          transfer of educational records, uniform systems for calculating  
          and awarding credits, transition planning, and the immediate  
          enrollment of pupils who are being transferred from juvenile  
          court schools. This is a significant undertaking, especially  
          with such a broad stakeholder group. It is likely that the CDE  
          and BSCC will require 1 PY each to staff this process throughout  
          the state, and prepare the report. 

          At the local level, this bill requires that, "as part of their  
          existing responsibilities for coordinating education and  
          services for youth in the juvenile justice system," the COE and  
          county probation department have a joint transition planning  
          policy that includes collaboration with "relevant local  
          educational agencies" to improve communication and coordination  
          of transfers from juvenile court schools. COEs and county  
          probation departments do have responsibilities to coordinate  
          around juvenile transfers, but it is unclear whether having  
          joint policies would be considered by the Commission on State  
          Mandates to be a higher level of service than what is required  
          in their existing responsibilities. At a minimum, the  
          requirements to have policies that also include communication  
          with relevant LEAs (however interpreted) will likely be deemed a  
          reimbursable state mandate. If every COE and county probation  
          department spent just 10 hours developing policies and  
          communicating them to appropriate staff, reimbursable costs  
          would exceed $100,000.

          This bill  also "strongly encourages" LEAs to enter into MOUs  
          and create joint policies, systems, including data sharing  
          systems, transition centers, and other joint structures to  
          create uniform systems for calculating and awarding course  
          credit, and allow for the immediate enrollment of pupils  
          transferring from juvenile court schools. This requirement does  
          not have the force of law, but it does create cost pressure on  
          LEAs to do extensive local work strongly encouraged by the  
          Legislature.

          Committee Amendments make the stakeholder group (convening and  
          recommendations) the responsibility of the SPI, in consultation  
          with the BSCC.










          AB 2276 (Bocanegra)
          Page 5