BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY
Senator Mark Leno, Chair A
2009-2010 Regular Session B
1
5
1
AB 1511 (De Leon) 1
As Amended April 29, 2009
Hearing date: July 7, 2009
Education Code
SM:mc
PROSECUTORS ON SCHOOL CAMPUSES
HISTORY
Source: Los Angeles City Attorney's Office
Prior Legislation: None
Support: Los Angeles Unified School District; Los Angeles School
Police Department
Opposition:American Civil Liberties Union
Assembly Floor Vote: Ayes 62 - Noes 1
KEY ISSUE
SHOULD THE GOVERNING BOARD OF A SCHOOL DISTRICT OR A COUNTY
SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS BE PERMITTED TO ENTER INTO A MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING (MOU) WITH A DISTRICT ATTORNEY OR PROSECUTING CITY
ATTORNEY HAVING FILING JURISDICTION OVER THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IN
ORDER TO FACILITATE THE PLACEMENT OF ONE OR MORE PROSECUTORS ON ONE
OR MORE SCHOOL DISTRICT CAMPUSES, AS SPECIFIED, IN ORDER TO PROMOTE
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageB
PUBLIC SAFETY?
PURPOSE
The purpose of this bill is to permit the governing board of a
school district or a county superintendent of schools to enter
into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with a district
attorney or prosecuting city attorney having filing jurisdiction
over the school district in order to facilitate the placement of
one or more prosecutors on one or more school district campus,
as specified, in order to promote public safety.
Existing law allows the governing board of any school district
may establish a security department under the supervision of a
chief of security or a police department under the supervision
of a chief of police, as designated by, and under the direction
of, the superintendent of the school district. In accordance
with existing law, the governing board may employ personnel to
ensure the safety of school district personnel and pupils and
the security of the real and personal property of the school
district. In addition, a school district may assign a school
police reserve officer who is deputized to a school site to
supplement the duties of school police personnel pursuant to
this section. It is the intention of the Legislature in
enacting this section that a school district police or security
department is supplementary to city and county law enforcement
agencies and is not vested with general police powers.
(Education Code 38000(a).)
Existing law requires every school police reserve officer, to
complete a course of training approved by the Commission on
Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) relating directly to
the role of school police reserve officers. The school police
reserve officer training course shall address guidelines and
procedures for reporting offenses to other law enforcement
agencies that deal with violence on campus and other school
related matters, as determined by the Commission on POST.
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageC
(Penal Code 832.2.)
Existing law requires any school police officer first employed
by a K-12 public school district or California community college
district after July 1, 1999, shall successfully complete a basic
course of training before exercising the powers of a peace
officer. A school police officer shall not be subject to this
subdivision while participating as a trainee in a supervised
field training program approved by the Commission on POST.
(Penal Code 832.3(f).)
Existing law mandates that the commission shall prepare a
specialized course of instruction for the training of school
peace officers, to meet the unique safety needs of a school
environment. This course is intended to supplement any other
training requirements. (Penal Code 832.3(g).)
This bill states the following:
The health, safety, and welfare of the people of
California depend upon the ability to provide a proper
education for our children. Unfortunately, children simply
cannot learn in an environment that is unsafe. Strong
partnerships between law enforcement, schools, and
communities are essential in ensuring that school campuses
remain safe havens that are conducive to learning and
achievement instead of serving as recruitment centers for
gangs and criminal activity. Therefore, the purpose of
this act is to enable local municipalities, local school
districts, and local law enforcement to form these strong
partnerships to better provide for the safety and security
of our children.
It is the criminal prosecutor's responsibility to ensure
that children feel safe in and around schools so that they
can focus on learning, and it is the educator's
responsibility to provide that learning. Although the
roles of schools and law enforcement agencies differ, the
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageD
Legislature finds that there are some significant areas of
commonality. First, both schools and law enforcement
agencies are responsible for the safety and well-being of
pupils. Second, schools represent the natural centers of
our communities. Working within the schools is a logical
extension of law enforcement's responsibility for public
safety in the broader community. Third, both schools and
law enforcement agencies can play an important role in
helping youth become productive, law-abiding residents.
With these complimentary roles in mind, it is declared that
the local prosecutor's office is in an ideal position to
work with the corresponding local school district to
implement strategies aimed at reversing conditions that
produce and perpetuate an unsafe school environment.
A successful partnership between prosecutor and school
district has already proven successful under the toughest
circumstances. Markham Middle School, located in the Watts
area of South Los Angeles, had long been plagued by crime
and gang violence. The area surrounding the Markham campus
was home to seven criminal street gangs, and the school was
widely considered to be among the most dangerous within the
Los Angeles Unified School District. In February 2007, the
Los Angeles City Attorney partnered with the Los Angeles
Unified School District to place a prosecutor on campus.
From the beginning, the city attorney's team understood
that school safety requires a broad-based effort by the
entire community, including educators, pupils, parents, law
enforcement agencies, businesses, and community-based
organizations. At the end of the first full academic year,
without any change to the teaching or the curriculum, the
city attorney, the Los Angeles Unified School District, the
Los Angeles Police Department, and the Los Angeles School
Police Department observed:
o Markham was significantly safer than at any
point in recent memory.
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageE
o Markham's pupil standardized test scores rose
for the first time in years, going from 519 to 542,
beating the academic performance index target set by
the State Department of Education by more than 55
percent.
o Markham's 8th grade graduation rate increased
14 percent from the year before, going from 66 percent
to 80 percent.
The Markham Middle School Safety Prosecutor Program
demonstrated that a renewed dedication to pupils in the
most underserved schools can create an environment where
crime decreases, test scores rise, and pupils once again
focus on learning. It is therefore declared that this
educator-prosecutor partnership is a hopeful model for
school safety reform, and its replication should be
encouraged in other jurisdictions.
This bill would permit the governing board of a school district
or a county superintendent of schools to enter into a memorandum
of understanding (MOU) with a district attorney or prosecuting
city attorney having filing jurisdiction over the school
district in order to facilitate the placement of one or more
prosecutors on one or more school district campuses in order to
promote public safety. Participation shall be at the option of
each agency. A school district, district attorney, or
prosecuting city attorney shall not be required by the other
party to enter into the MOU.
This bill provides that the two agencies shall work together to
develop the terms and conditions of the MOU. The MOU shall
incorporate the conditions described in this section, and
provisions deemed by the agencies as reasonably necessary to
fulfill the purpose of school safety and to ensure compliance
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageF
with the MOU and this section. The MOU shall include, but is
not limited to, the following provisions:
The time period for the agencies' participation in the
school safety program and the procedures for the placement
of one or more prosecutors directly onto one or more
campuses under the jurisdiction of the school district.
The scope of work to be given to the prosecutor and how
the prosecutor is to work with the administration of the
specific school.
A procedure for funding the school safety program that
includes, but is not limited to, declarations that the
agencies have adequate funds available to provide for the
costs that arise from placing a prosecutor on a school
campus.
Performance measures to evaluate the effectiveness of
the school safety program, including, but not limited to,
annual progress reports.
A statement that the primary purpose of the partnership
is to promote pupil safety and that the prosecutor shall
attempt, whenever possible, to prevent problems before they
escalate.
This bill defines "Agency" as a governing board of a school
district, a county superintendent of schools, a district
attorney, or a prosecuting city attorney.
This bill defines "School safety program" means the placement of
one or more prosecutors on one or more local school district
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageG
campuses in order to promote public safety.
This bill states that nothing in its provisions prohibits a
governing board of a school district or a county superintendent
of schools from adopting an alternative model of collaboration.
RECEIVERSHIP/OVERCROWDING CRISIS AGGRAVATION
California continues to face a severe prison overcrowding
crisis. The Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR)
currently has about 170,000 inmates under its jurisdiction. Due
to a lack of traditional housing space available, the department
houses roughly 15,000 inmates in gyms and dayrooms.
California's prison population has increased by 125% (an average
of 4% annually) over the past 20 years, growing from 76,000
inmates to 171,000 inmates, far outpacing the state's population
growth rate for the age cohort with the highest risk of
incarceration.<1>
In December of 2006 plaintiffs in two federal lawsuits against
CDCR sought a court-ordered limit on the prison population
pursuant to the federal Prison Litigation Reform Act. On
February 9, 2009, the three-judge federal court panel issued a
tentative ruling that included the following conclusions with
respect to overcrowding:
No party contests that California's prisons are
overcrowded, however measured, and whether considered
in comparison to prisons in other states or jails
within this state. There are simply too many
prisoners for the existing capacity. The Governor,
----------------------
<1> "Between 1987 and 2007, California's population of ages 15
through 44 - the age cohort with the highest risk for
incarceration - grew by an average of less than 1% annually,
which is a pace much slower than the growth in prison
admissions." (2009-2010 Budget Analysis Series, Judicial and
Criminal Justice, Legislative Analyst's Office (January 30,
2009).)
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageH
the principal defendant, declared a state of emergency
in 2006 because of the "severe overcrowding" in
California's prisons, which has caused "substantial
risk to the health and safety of the men and women who
work inside these prisons and the inmates housed in
them." . . . A state appellate court upheld the
Governor's proclamation, holding that the evidence
supported the existence of conditions of "extreme
peril to the safety of persons and property."
(citation omitted) The Governor's declaration of the
state of emergency remains in effect to this day.
. . . the evidence is compelling that there is no
relief other than a prisoner release order that will
remedy the unconstitutional prison conditions.
. . .
Although the evidence may be less than perfectly
clear, it appears to the Court that in order to
alleviate the constitutional violations California's
inmate population must be reduced to at most 120% to
145% of design capacity, with some institutions or
clinical programs at or below 100%. We caution the
parties, however, that these are not firm figures and
that the Court reserves the right - until its final
ruling - to determine that a higher or lower figure is
appropriate in general or in particular types of
facilities.
. . .
Under the PLRA, any prisoner release order that we
issue will be narrowly drawn, extend no further than
necessary to correct the violation of constitutional
rights, and be the least intrusive means necessary to
correct the violation of those rights. For this
reason, it is our present intention to adopt an order
requiring the State to develop a plan to reduce the
prison population to 120% or 145% of the prison's
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageI
design capacity (or somewhere in between) within a
period of two or three years.<2>
The final outcome of the panel's tentative decision, as well as
any appeal that may be in response to the panel's final
decision, is unknown at the time of this writing.
This bill does not appear to aggravate the prison overcrowding
crisis outlined above.
COMMENTS
1. Need for This Bill
According to the author:
AB 1511 will encourage and enable local school
districts and local prosecutors to form strong
school-based partnerships to secure a school campus,
and ensure that learning, not fearing for one's
safety, is priority on campus. Proven models
established in the Los Angeles Unified School District
provide us with an opportunity to assist statewide
students and schools improve their safety and academic
success.
2. Prosecutors on Campus
According to the analysis of the Senate Education Committee,
"This bill authorizes an action that can already be undertaken
under existing law." The bill's uncodified statements describe
a collaboration in Los Angeles between the City Attorney's
office and the Los Angeles Unified School District involving the
Markham Middle School, located in the Watts area of South Los
---------------------------
<2> Three Judge Court Tentative Ruling, Coleman v.
Schwarzenegger, Plata v. Schwarzenegger, in the United States
District Courts for the Eastern District of California and the
Northern District of California United States District Court
composed of three judges pursuant to Section 2284, Title 28
United States Code (Feb. 9, 2009).
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageJ
Angeles. This would appear to demonstrate that such
collaborative efforts between agencies of local government are
currently permissible without the need for a state law
authorizing them.
While it seems clear that these agencies could enter into
collaborative efforts of this sort. Currently, this bill does
dictate that certain provisions would need to be included in
"The MOU." Those provisions are:
The time period for the agencies' participation in the
school safety program and the procedures for the placement
of one or more prosecutors directly onto one or more
campuses under the jurisdiction of the school district.
The scope of work to be given to the prosecutor and how
the prosecutor is to work with the administration of the
specific school.
A procedure for funding the school safety program that
includes, but is not limited to, declarations that the
agencies have adequate funds available to provide for the
costs that arise from placing a prosecutor on a school
campus.
Performance measures to evaluate the effectiveness of
the school safety program, including, but not limited to,
annual progress reports.
A statement that the primary purpose of the partnership
is to promote pupil safety and that the prosecutor shall
attempt, whenever possible, to prevent problems before they
escalate.
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageK
This bill is entirely permissive and states that "Participation
shall be at the option of each agency." It is not clear from
this language whether such local agencies would be able to enter
a different MOU without these required provisions or whether
this bill, by authorizing this MOU, is intended to preclude
local agencies from entering an MOU on this subject that does
not contain these specific provisions.
WOULD THIS BILL HAVE ANY PRACTICAL OR LEGAL EFFECT?
DOES THIS BILL REQUIRE LOCAL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES TO INCLUDE
SPECIFIC TERMS IN ANY MOU OF THIS SORT?
IF SO, ARE THE TERMS OF ANY SUCH MOU SOMETHING THAT SHOULD BE
LEFT TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO DETERMINE?
The Assembly Public Safety Committee analysis of AB 1511 states:
This bill indicates that it is the "prosecutor's
responsibility to ensure that children feel safe in and around
schools so that they can focus on learning." Is that really
what attorneys are trained to do? What makes a deputy
district attorney or city attorney more qualified to enhance
school safety? These attorneys are not trained in the same
manner as peace officers. Peace officers placed on school
campuses receive special training to deal with the specialized
problems faced in such environments. No such training is
being given to these attorneys. Peace officers are trained
and hired to ensure the safety of all; prosecutors are trained
and hired to prosecute crimes after those crimes have
happened. There is little nexus between an attorney being
present on campus and the prevention of crime.
Moreover, in a time where district attorney's offices and city
attorney offices are facing layoffs, staff shortages, and
budget constraints, it makes little sense to send an attorney
unqualified in the dealings with children, let alone campus
safety or violence, away from prosecuting crimes, which
increase during times of financial crisis.
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageL
WOULD THE PRESENCE OF PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS ON SCHOOL CAMPUSES
ENHANCE SCHOOL SAFETY?
3. Argument in Support
(More)
The Los Angeles School Police Department states:
I understand that AB 1511 declares that local
municipalities, local school districts and local
prosecutors should be encouraged and enabled to form
strong school-based partnerships to better provide for
the safety and security of our children while at
school. The bill would enable these partnerships by
creating minimum baseline standards for District
Attorneys or prosecuting City Attorneys and local
school districts to enter into Memoranda of
Understanding for the operation of a "School Safety
Prosecutor" program.
The Los Angeles Unified School District has benefited
tremendously by partnering with the Los Angeles City
Attorney's Office on school safety efforts in and
around LAUSD schools. Our partnership began in 2007 at
Markham Middle School and our work resulted in a
significantly safer campus a year later. Our successes
included a 55% increase in API test scores and 14%
increase in graduation rates.
On the heels of our successful collaboration at
Markham Middle School, Superintendent Ramon Cortines
asked the City Attorney to expand the School Safety
Prosecutor program to other schools within the
District. In 2008, City Attorney Delgadillo created
the new School Safety Division within the City
Attorney's Office and expanded school safety efforts
to nine new LAUSD middle schools throughout Los
Angeles.
Our collaboration with the City Attorney's Office has
demonstrated that a renewed dedication to the safety
of students and schools can create an environment
where crime decreases, test scores rise, and students
focus on learning. As such, I fully support your
efforts to encourage and enable school districts in
(More)
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageN
California to form strong school-based partnerships
and to adopt similar School Safety Prosecutor
programs.
4. Argument in Opposition
The American Civil Liberties Union states:
While we agree that school safety is an important
issue, we believe that this bill unnecessarily
promotes the idea of criminalizing youth. School
resource officers - full fledged law enforcement
officers - currently regularly patrol school campuses
throughout the state. And children of color and
students with disabilities are disproportionately
represented among those students arrested at
school.<3> This bill adds yet another layer of law
enforcement officers to the schools getting further
and further away from a school mediation and
prevention model and moving toward a law enforcement
model. Imagine working in an office or factory that
----------------------
<3> American Civil Liberties Union, Hard Lessons: School
Resource Officer Programs and School-Based Arrests in Three
Connecticut Towns (Nov. 2008), at 35-43, available at
http://www.aclu.org/racialjustice/edu/37767 pub20081117.html
(finding that in one town, African American and Hispanic
students accounted for 24 percent of the student body, but 63
percent of school-based arrests, and that students of color who
commit certain common infractions are more likely to be arrested
at school than are white students who commit the very same
infractions); see also Judith A. Browne, Advancement Project,
Derailed: The Schoolhouse to Jailhouse Track 18-19 (2003)
(documenting racial disparities in school-based arrests in
select jurisdictions in Florida). See also, Arresting
Development: Pinellas County (Advancement Project) Spring 2006,
at 21, 23, available at
http://www.advancementproject.org/reports/ArstdDvpm_1.pdf
(noting that 13 of the 17 arrests of third grade students at
Pinellas County occurred at schools solely for disabled
students).
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageO
had not only police regularly patrolling the halls but
also prosecutors from the local district attorney's
office also made visits to the workplace.
Rather than further escalating the use of a criminal
justice model in schools, we believe that positive
behavior supports and progressive discipline policies
are preferable. Arresting a child at school should
only be used as a last resort. Studies show that
being arrested has detrimental psychological effects
on children; nearly doubles the odds of dropping out
of school, and if coupled with a court appearance,
nearly quadruples the odds of dropout; impacts future
employment prospects; lowers standardized test scores;
and increases the likelihood of future interaction
with the criminal justice system.<4> Improper
school-based arrests also impact the larger community.
Classmates who witness a child being arrested for a
minor infraction may develop negative views or
distrust of law enforcement.
In addition, it may be inappropriate for prosecutors
to be fostering relationships with students when they
may end up on the other side of a courtroom from them.
It may make it more difficult for public defenders to
represent them, and also possibly raises some
----------------------
<4> See Gary Sweeten, Who Will Graduate? Disruption of High
School Education by Arrest and Court Involvement, Justice
Quarterly, Vol. 23, Number 4, at 478 (December 2006); Jeff
Grogger, Arrests, Persistent Youth Joblessness, and Black/White
Employment Differentials, Review of Economic & Statistics, vol.
74, February 1992, at 105; Education on Lockdown: The
Schoolhouse to Jailhouse Track (Advancement Project) March 24,
2005, at 15, available at
http://www.advancementproject.org/reports/FINALEOLrep.pdf , n.
18, pg. 12. See also Terence P. Thornberry, The Causes and
Correlated Studies: Findings and Policy Implications,
http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/203555/jj2.html , showing that
juvenile arrest increases likelihood of future delinquent
behavior and incarceration as adult.
AB 1511 (De Leon)
PageP
professional responsibility concerns.
Finally, this bill seems unnecessary because Los
Angeles moved forward with a program to site
prosecutors on a school campus without legislative
authority. And, it is our understanding that the Los
Angeles program is fairly nuanced and not something
that is easily replicated statewide.
***************