BILL ANALYSIS
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 1841|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
Third Reading
Bill No: AB 1841
Author: Buchanan (D)
Amended: 6/3/10 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE : 6-0, 6/16/10
AYES: Romero, Huff, Emmerson, Hancock, Liu, Price
NO VOTE RECORDED: Alquist, Simitian, Wyland
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE : 4-0, 6/22/10
AYES: Corbett, Harman, Hancock, Leno
NO VOTE RECORDED: Walters
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 71-0, 4/12/10 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Special education: parental consent
SOURCE : Superintendent of Public Instruction
DIGEST : This bill conforms state law to federal law by
specifically prohibiting schools from initiating due
process procedures against a parent of a student with
special needs if the parent revokes consent for special
education.
ANALYSIS :
Current Federal Law and Regulations
The federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
CONTINUED
AB 1841
Page
2
(IDEA) requires that all children with disabilities be
provided a free appropriate public education in the least
restrictive environment, and sets forth the
responsibilities of states and local education agencies.
The IDEA was reauthorized in 2004 and its implementing
federal regulations became effective in October 2006.
Clarifying amendments to the regulations were subsequently
adopted in December 2008.
The revised federal regulations provide that "consent"
means that:
1. The parent has been fully informed of all information
relevant to the activity for which consent is sought, in
his or her native language, or through another mode of
communication.
2. The parent understands and agrees in writing to the
carrying out of the activity and the consent describes
that activity and lists the records (if any) that will
be released and to whom.
3. The parent understands that the granting of consent is
voluntary on the part of the parent and may be revoked
at any time. If a parent revokes consent in writing
after the child is initially provided special education
and related services, the public agency is not required
to amend the child's education records to remove any
references to the child's receipt of special education
and related services because of the revocation of
consent.
The federal regulations also require that parental
revocation of consent for the continued provision of
special education and related services to a child must be
made in writing and that upon revocation of consent, a
public agency:
1. May not continue to provide special education and
related services but must provide prior written notice
before ceasing the provision of special education and
related services.
2. May not use procedural safeguards, including mediation
CONTINUED
AB 1841
Page
3
or due process, in order to obtain agreement or a ruling
that the services may be provided to the child.
3. Will not be considered to be in violation of the
requirement to make a free appropriate public education
available to the child because of the failure to provide
the child with further special education and related
services.
4. Is not required to convene an individualized education
program (IEP) team meeting or develop an IEP for the
child for further provision of special education and
related services.
Current State Law
1. Requires a local education agency (LEA) to seek to
obtain informed consent from the parent of a child prior
to the provision of special education or related
services.
2. Prohibits LEAs from providing special education or
related services to a child if the parent fails to
respond or refuses to consent to the initiation of
special education or related services.
3. Prohibits LEAs from filing a due process complaint
against a parent who fails to respond or refuses to
consent to the initiation of special education and
related services.
4. Applies both of the following if the parent refuses
initial consent or fails to respond to a request to
provide consent:
A. The LEA shall not be considered to be in
violation of the requirement to make free
appropriate public education available to the child
for failure to provide special education and
related services for which the LEA requests
consent.
B. The LEA shall not be required to convene an IEP
team meeting or develop an IEP for the child.
CONTINUED
AB 1841
Page
4
5. Requires LEAs to file a request for due process if the
parent of a child with special needs refuses all
services in the IEP after having consented to those
services in the past.
6. Essentially mirrors federal regulations with respect to
parental consent but is silent regarding the amendment
of education records if parental consent is revoked.
This bill conforms state law to federal law by prohibiting
schools from initiating due process procedures against a
parent of a student with special needs if the parent
revokes consent for special education. Specifically, this
bill:
1. Deletes the requirement that a LEA file a request for
due process if a parent of a child with special needs
revokes consent for all services in the IEP after having
consented to those services in the past.
2. Prohibits a public agency from doing the following if a
parent of a child with special needs submits a written
revocation of his or her consent at any time subsequent
to the initial provision of special education and
related services to the child:
A. Continue to provide special education and
related services to the child, but is required to
provide prior written notice to the child's parent
before ceasing the provision of special education
and related services.
B. Use procedural safeguards, including mediation
and due process complaint procedures, to obtain
agreement or a ruling that the services may be
provided to the child.
3. Deems a public agency to be in compliance with the
requirement to make a free appropriate public education
available to a child if the agency ceases to provide the
child with further special education and related
services.
CONTINUED
AB 1841
Page
5
4. Specifies that a public agency is not required to
convene an IEP team meeting or develop an IEP for the
child for further provision of special education.
5. Specifies that a public agency is not required to amend
the education records of a child to remove any reference
to the child's receipt of special education and services
if the child's parent submits a written revocation of
consent after the initial provision of special education
and related services to the child.
Prior Legislation
AB 1663 (Evans), Chapter 454, Statutes of 2007, makes
various revisions to state special education statutes to
bring them into conformity with federal changes enacted
through the 2004 reauthorization of IDEA and its
implementing federal regulations. Passed the Senate Floor
with a vote of 40-0 on September 11, 2007.
AB 685 (Karnette), Chapter 56, Statutes of 2007, makes
technical changes to several provisions of the Education
Code and the Government Code regarding individuals with
exceptional needs and special education to conform to
updated federal regulations. Passed the Senate Floor with
a vote of 38-0 on June 21, 2007.
AB 1662 (Lieber), Chapter 653, Statutes of 2005, makes
changes to state special education statutes to bring them
into conformity with federal changes enacted through the
2004 reauthorization of the IDEA. Passed the Senate Floor
with a vote of 38-0 on September 8, 2005.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/23/10)
Superintendent of Public Instruction (source)
Association of California School Administrators
California Association of Joint Powers Authorities
California School Boards Association
California Teachers Association
Developmental Disabilities Area Board 10
CONTINUED
AB 1841
Page
6
Disability Rights California
Los Angeles County Office of Education
San Francisco Unified School District
Special Education Local Plan Area Administrators
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author's office,
"as a condition of receiving more than $1.2 billion in
federal grant funds under the IDEA, California is required
to comply with these new regulations. If the state's
Education Code is not brought into compliance, the state
could jeopardize its IDEA grant eligibility. If California
is found noncompliant, the US Department of Education could
sanction the California Department of Education, and reduce
or withhold federal funds the state receives for special
education services."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR :
AYES: Adams, Ammiano, Arambula, Beall, Bill Berryhill, Tom
Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block, Blumenfield, Bradford,
Brownley, Buchanan, Caballero, Charles Calderon, Carter,
Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre, De Leon,
DeVore, Emmerson, Eng, Feuer, Fletcher, Fong, Fuentes,
Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani, Garrick, Gilmore,
Hagman, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill, Huber, Huffman,
Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Lieu, Logue, Bonnie Lowenthal,
Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava, Nestande, Niello,
Nielsen, V. Manuel Perez, Portantino, Ruskin, Salas,
Saldana, Silva, Skinner, Solorio, Audra Strickland,
Swanson, Torres, Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada, John A.
Perez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Anderson, Bass, Evans, Hall, Harkey,
Norby, Smyth, Torlakson, Vacancy
PQ:do 6/30/10 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED