BILL ANALYSIS
AB 343
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 13, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
AB 343 (Saldana) - As Amended: April 29, 2009
Policy Committee: Education
Vote:10-0
Judiciary
10-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
Yes Reimbursable: Yes
SUMMARY
This bill establishes the Interstate Commission on Educational
Opportunities for Military Families (the commission) and
ratifies the Interstate Compact on Educational Opportunity for
Military Children (the compact) to remove barriers to
educational success imposed on children of military families due
to frequent moves and deployment of their parents. Pursuant to
federal law, the compact would become effective and binding when
at least 10 states ratify it and this requirement has been met.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Specifies the purposes of the compact as the following: (a) to
facilitate the timely enrollment and appropriate educational
placement of military children; (b) to provide uniform
collection and sharing of information between and among other
states, schools, and military families; and (c) to provide for
the promulgation and enforcement of administrative rules
implementing the provisions of the compact.
2)Requires the schools in the state that the pupil is coming
from to provide unofficial and official pupil records
(official records are required to be provided within 10 days
of a request from a receiving school). This measure requires
states to give 30 days from the date of enrollment for pupils
to obtain any immunization required by the receiving state, as
specified.
3)Requires pupils to continue their enrollment at the same or
next grade level (as appropriate) in the receiving state
AB 343
Page 2
(including kindergarten), regardless of age. This bill also
requires the receiving state to initially honor course and
program placement that the pupil had in the sending state,
including special education. Likewise, a student whose parent
is an active duty member is required to be granted additional
excused absences at the discretion of the local education
agency (LEA) to visit with his or her parent.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)GF costs, of approximately $61,000, for California's
contribution to the funding of the commission. There are a
little more than 61,000 military children in the state. In
October 2008, the Educational Opportunity for Military
Children Commissioners voted to adopt a $1 per military child
assessment for the state's participation in the commission.
2)GF administrative costs to the SPI, likely less than $50,000,
to develop procedures for the training of LEA employees in
implementing the compact. Currently, the State Department of
Education (SDE) employs a military liaison that works with the
Department of Defense and school districts to aid military
children's' transition to state's school system.
3)Potential increase in state reimbursable, mandated costs,
likely less than $150,000, to LEAs to implement requirements
of the compact related to the education of military pupils, as
specified.
SUMMARY CONTINUED
4)Requires states to accept specified assessments (i.e., exit
exam) in lieu of testing requirements for graduation in the
receiving state. This measure further requires LEAs to waive
specific graduation course requirements, if similar coursework
has been satisfactorily completed in another LEA or provide
reasonable justification for denial.
5)Requires each state that is a member of the compact, through
the establishment of a state council or existing body/board,
to provide for the coordination of compact requirements, as
specified. This bill further specifies the membership
composition of the state council and requires each member
state to appoint a military family education liaison to assist
military families and the state in implementing this compact.
AB 343
Page 3
6)Requires the commission to promulgate rules and specifies that
these rules have the force and effect of statutory law and are
binding in the compact states, as specified. This measure
further specifies the organization and duties of the
commission, including fiduciary responsibilities, as
specified.
7)Authorizes the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to
accept non-state funding to offset the costs of the annual
assessment of the commission, as specified. This measure also
authorizes the SPI to develop procedures for the training of
LEA employees in implementing the compact.
8)Requires the SPI, on or after July 1, 2012, to reconvene the
existing Military Children Task Force (MCTF) for the purposes
of reviewing and making recommendations regarding the compact,
as specified. This bill also requires the MCTF to submit a
final report of its findings and recommendation to the
legislature no later than December 1, 2013.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . Military families move on a fairly regular basis,
depending on their duties and assignments. This transience
creates educational disadvantages for the children of military
personnel. While the armed services has taken steps to ease
the transition for personnel and their families, the
logistical reality of moving creates challenges associated
with meeting various educational requirements for children.
The intent of the compact is to ensure that the children of
military families are afforded the same opportunities for
educational success as other children and are not penalized or
delayed in achieving their educational goals as they move.
According to the author, "There are over 63,000 school-age
military dependents in California. Unfortunately, military
families encounter significant school challenges when dealing
with enrollment, eligibility, placement, and graduation of
their children. 25% of the students lose their course credits
due to multiple school transfers from out-of-state and
out-of-country Department of Defense schools to California
schools."
AB 343
Page 4
2)AB 2049 (Saldana), Chapter 589, Statutes of 2009 established
the MCTF, a 15-member task force, to review the proposed
compact and issue a final report. According to a draft of a
preliminary report, the task force held three meetings from
October 2008 to February 2009 to hear from military personnel
and LEA employees regarding the impact of the compact. As a
result of these meetings, the report identifies three concerns
that are "more global in nature and are not related to
specific provisions of the compact." These three concerns
are: (a) state sovereignty; (b) application to only military
dependents; and (c) data requirements. The MCTF did not feel
that these issues warranted holding back ratification of the
compact and recommended that legislation be introduced to
ratify it.
3)Interstate compacts are contracts between two or more states
establishing agreements to address particular policy issues,
setting standards, or establishing cooperation on regional or
national matters. The issues addressed extend beyond the
boundaries of the state. Frequently, these agreements create
a new governmental agency, which is responsible for
administering or improving a shared resource such as a seaport
or public transportation infrastructure. For example, agencies
created by compacts that California is a participant in the
Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, the Pacific States Marine
Fisheries Commission, and the Education Commission of the
States.
According to information provided by the author, 14 states
have adopted the compact and therefore, it is operable because
more than 10 states have enacted it. If this measure were to
become law, the provisions would become operable on the
measure's effective date.
The author further reports that 34 states are engaged at some
point in the process of enacting or considering the compact.
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081