BILL ANALYSIS
AB 1007
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 22, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Julia Brownley, Chair
AB 1007 (Carter) - As Amended: April 15, 2009
SUBJECT : Governing boards: pupil members
SUMMARY : Amends current law governing the appointment of
non-voting pupil members to school district governing boards.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the governing board of a school district maintaining
one or more high schools to make the appointment of one or
more non-voting pupils to the board, that is currently
required to be made upon receipt of a pupil petition
requesting such an appointment, within thirty days of receipt
of that petition or at its next regularly scheduled meeting if
no meeting is held within those thirty days.
2)Authorizes, explicitly, the governing board of a school
district to create a student advisory board to assist any
pupil members of the governing board in their duties, and
allows the governing board to determine the structure and
composition of such a board.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes the submission of a petition requesting that the
governing board of a school, district maintaining one or more
high schools, appoint one or more non-voting pupils to the
board, and requires such petitions to contain the signatures
of either not less than 500 pupils enrolled in the district's
high schools or not less than 10 percent of the district's
high school enrollment, whichever is less.
2)Requires the governing board to appoint one or more pupil
members upon submission of a valid pupil petition requesting
such an appointment.
3)Requires that any pupil member of a district governing board
be entitled to the same mileage allowance as any other member,
but prohibits pupil members from receiving the statutorily
limited compensation for service on the board that may be paid
to other members.
AB 1007
Page 2
4)Creates no obligation on the state to reimburse districts
mandated to appoint one or more pupil members when presented
with a pupil petition, since this requirement was established
prior to 1976.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown; potentially creates a reimbursable
state-mandated local cost related to the proposed thirty day
deadline.
COMMENTS : Current law requires a school district governing board
to appoint one or more non-voting pupil members if its pupils
validly petition the board to do so; there is currently no
amount of time specified within which the board must make this
appointment. The permissive nature of the Education Code also
allows a governing board to make such appointments in the
absence of a petition should the board choose to do so. This
bill requires appointments, following submission of a pupil
petition, to be made within 30 days or at the next board meeting
if no board meeting is held within that 30 day period. This
bill also authorizes a school district governing board to
establish a student advisory board, structured and composed per
the board's specifications, to aid and advise any pupil members
of the board.
According to the author, "At present, students may submit a
petition to the Governing Board of a school district requesting
the addition of a Student Board Member to the Governing Board.
However, there exists no period of time in which the Governing
Board must respond, leaving an ambiguous area in the Education
Code." The author goes on to state the intent of this bill,
"?AB 1007 seeks to clarify existing law and provide a period of
time in which the Governing Board of a school district must
respond to a student-submitted petition."
There are likely benefits to having pupil members on school
district governing boards, in that those members would be better
able to represent and advise their governing boards from the
perspective of the nearly two million high school pupils in the
state. For this reason, nearly 50 percent of the governing
boards in districts maintaining a high school already appoint
one or more pupil members. In 2008 the California School Boards
Association (CSBA) conducted a survey of California's 420 school
districts with enrollment in any of grades 9-12; according to
CSBA, 62 district governing boards (44 percent), of the 141
AB 1007
Page 3
districts responding, had one or more pupil members.
It is unclear that there is a problem with school district
governing boards, either knowingly or inadvertently, delaying
action following the receipt of a pupil petition requesting that
the board appoint a non-voting pupil member. If there is no
problem, then this proposal to place a deadline on the
appointment of a pupil member may be solving a problem that does
not exist. Committee staff recommends that the Committee, while
hearing the bill, ask the author and sponsor if they have
evidence that such a problem exists.
The bill also proposes to authorize school district governing
boards to create a student advisory board to aid and advise
pupil board members; the advisory board would provide an even
broader student perspective, that could then be passed on to the
governing board through is pupil member(s). In addition, such
an activity would have an educational benefit for the students
participating on the student advisory board in the same manner
that other student activities, such as participation in student
council, benefit students and build a better understanding of
leadership and civic responsibility. It is not surprising that
the California Association of Student Councils is the sponsor of
this bill. It should also be noted that, while such a student
advisory board would be beneficial, the permissive nature of the
Education Code would currently allow governing boards to create
such an advisory board and to provide this type of activity to
the district's students; however, explicitly stating the
authority to provide such a beneficial activity may help to move
some governing boards in the direction of doing so.
Previous legislation: AB 1897 (Reyes), vetoed in 2004, would
have required the governing board of a school district to
appoint to its membership a preferential voting pupil member,
and also require school districts with more than one high school
to select a pupil member from a different high school each year
on a rotating basis. AB 3686 (Becerra), Chapter 141, Statutes
of 1992, authorizes a governing board to adopt a resolution
allowing the nonvoting or preferential voting member to make
motions to the board. AB 2226 (Bates), vetoed in 1991, would
have eliminated the student petition process necessary for a
student member to be appointed to the school board, and instead
required school boards to appoint one or more non-voting pupil
members. AB 2998 (O'Connell), Chapter 220, Statutes of 1990,
authorizes non-voting student members of local school boards to
AB 1007
Page 4
receive preferential voting rights (the right to make a formal
expression of opinion that is recorded in the minutes, but is
not included in the official vote of the board) upon submission
of a student petition, that may be the same petition used to
request student representation to the board.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Alliance for Education Solutions
California Association of Student Councils (sponsor)
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Gerald Shelton / ED. / (916) 319-2087