BILL ANALYSIS
AB 606
Page 1
Date of Hearing: January 18, 2006
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Judy Chu, Chair
AB 606 (Levine) - As Amended: January 4, 2006
Policy Committee: EducationVote:7-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill establishes the Safe Place to Learn Act (SPLA), which
requires school districts to establish and publicize an
antidiscrimination and antiharassment policy that prohibits
discrimination and harassment as specified under current law,
including, but not limited to, actual or perceived gender
identity and sexual orientation. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires school districts, during the normal course of
reprinting, to update all applicable school publications on
school safety, as specified, to include information on
bias-related discrimination and harassment as specified under
current law, including but not limited to, actual or perceived
gender identity and sexual orientation.
2)Requires school districts, during the normal course of
offering trainings and disseminating publications, to offer
effective and comprehensive trainings and disseminate
publications to inform teachers and school staff members of
the appropriate manner in which to identify and respond to
bias-related discrimination and harassment as specified under
current law, including but not limited to, actual or perceived
gender identity and sexual orientation.
3)Requires school districts to maintain documentation of all
complaints of discrimination and harassment. It also requires
the State Department of Education (SDE) to display information
on trainings, curricula, and other resources that address
bias-related discrimination and harassment, as specified under
current law, including, but not limited to, actual or
perceived gender identity and sexual orientation on the CA
Healthy Kids Resource Center Internet Web site.
AB 606
Page 2
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Minor absorbable General Fund (Proposition 98) mandated costs,
likely less than $50,000, to school districts to develop an
antidiscrimination and antiharassment policy, as specified.
2)General Fund (Proposition 98) mandated costs, likely in excess
of $1 million, to school districts to comply with the
requirements of this measure. This includes staff time to
update all applicable school safety publications and
plan/develop training programs for teachers and school staff,
as specified.
3)General Fund costs to the SDE, likely less than $40,000, to
display information on website, as specified.
SUMMARY CONTINUED
4)Authorizes the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to
use any means authorized by law to effect compliance with the
SPLA, including, but not limited to, withholding relevant
state funding to school districts, if he or she determines
that a district is in non-compliance. It further requires any
funds withheld by the SPI to be used to implement the CA
Student Safety and Violence Prevention Act of 2000 (SSVPA).
5)Deletes current law that specifies that nothing in the SSVPA
requires the inclusion of any curriculum, textbook,
presentation, or other material in any program or activity
conducted by an K-12 educational or postsecondary institution.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . AB 537 (Kuehl), Chapter 587, Statutes of 2000,
established the SSVPA, which prohibits harassment and other
forms of discrimination, including on the basis of actual and
perceived sexual orientation and gender, in educational
instructional services and programs. In Spring 2000,
Superintendent Delaine Eastin established a task force to
identify ways to implement Chapter 587. One of the
recommendations from the task force was to "ensure that all
school personnel are informed of the provisions of AB 537 and
that all district and site personnel are trained in the law's
AB 606
Page 3
requirements."
According to the author, the 2004 CA Healthy Kids Survey found
that 7.5% of California students reported being harassed on
the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation.
Furthermore, the author argues that "many teachers and
administrators have not been trained to prevent and respond to
illegal harassment and discrimination. Most students do not
know how to file a complaint. School districts are responding
to complaints in an inconsistent manner and many districts are
failing to address the issue entirely."
This bill, sponsored by Equality California, requires school
districts to develop an antidiscrimination and antiharassment
policy regarding actual or perceived sexual orientation. It
also requires school districts to offer comprehensive
materials and training to teachers and school staff regarding
discrimination based on sexual orientation, as specified.
2)Westminster Elementary School District (WESD) . In 2004, the
WESD school board took action to redefine its procedure for
accepting discrimination complaints on the basis of sex and
sexual orientation. Specifically, the district adopted a
policy that lead to a transgender student not being able to
file a discrimination and/or harassment complaint based on his
or her sex or sexual orientation. This action lead the SPI to
determine that WESD was in non-compliance with the Uniform
Compliant Process of the Education Code regarding
discrimination on the basis of sex and sexual orientation.
The SPI threatened to withhold state funds if the district did
not comply with California laws and regulations related to
discrimination on the basis of sex and sexual orientation.
In April 2004, the SPI sent a legal advisory to local
education agencies reiterating state laws and regulations
prohibiting the discrimination of students on the basis of sex
and sexual orientation.
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081