BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2034
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 21, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 2034 (Knight) - As Amended: April 6, 2010
Policy Committee: Education
Vote:7-1
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill authorizes a school district, county office of
education (COE), or a charter school to request a local law
enforcement agency conduct an automated records check of a
prospective nonteaching volunteer aide (NTVA) to determine
whether the aide has been convicted of any sex, controlled
substance, or violent/serious offense as defined under current
statute. Specifically, this bill:
1)Prohibits a person from serving as an NTVA, if he or she (as
an employee of a school district, COE, or charter school)
would be prohibited from employment due to conviction of a sex
offense or a violent or serious felony as specified under
existing law.
2)Requires COEs and charter schools to comply with automated
records check for NTVAs, including coaching. This measure
also requires charter schools to comply with automated records
check statute for employees, as specified.
FISCAL EFFECT
1)Minor absorbable costs to school districts, COEs, and charter
schools that choose to conduct an automated records check of
NTVAs, as specified. Current law authorizes school districts
to conduct a check for sex offenses. In most cases, the NTVA
pays all or part of the automated records check fee. It costs
approximately $32 to the Department of Justice (DOJ), and $19
to the Federal Bureau of Investigations to cover the costs of
fingerprinting and the background check.
AB 2034
Page 2
2)Potential one-time GF/98 cost pressure to charter schools,
likely less than $100,000, to develop initial systems to
ensure employees and paid volunteers serving in a coaching
capacity comply with automated record checks. In most cases,
individuals pay all or part of the automated records check
fee, as referenced above. According to a May 2006 decision by
the Commission on State Mandates (CSM), charter schools are
not eligible to claim mandate reimbursements. In denying
charter schools' mandate claims, the CSM repeatedly cites the
fact that charter schools are "voluntarily" created.
COMMENTS
1)Purpose . Current law authorizes any person (except if he or
she is a registered sex offender) to supervise pupils during
breakfast, lunch or other nutrition period, or to serve as an
NVTA. Statute also specified that individuals in this
capacity are required to be under the immediate supervision
and direction of certificated personnel of the school district
to perform non-instructional work, as specified.
Existing law also authorizes school districts to conduct an
automated records check of NVTAs to determine whether the
individual has been convicted of a sex offense. Current
statute does not explicitly authorize this check of NVTAs for
other offenses, including controlled substances and other
felonies, as specified. According to the author, "Local
school districts have reported instances where parents of
students offer to volunteer in the classroom, on field trips
and/or for other district activities. However, when a district
has run their fingerprints, per normal procedure, the DOJ
report comes back showing convictions for offenses that would
prohibit the district, under current law, from employing them,
but does not prohibit them from volunteering."
2)Under existing law , DOJ makes criminal history information
available to the Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC) and
employing school districts upon the submission of fingerprint
information at the time of hire.
AB 1025 (Conway), Chapter 379, Statutes of 2009, authorizes
the CTC to issue an Activity Supervisor Clearance Certificate
to non-credentialed individuals, in a paid volunteer capacity,
to supervise or coach a pupil activity program, as specified.
AB 2034
Page 3
3)Technical amendment . This bill requires charter schools and
COEs to comply with automated records check for NTVAs. The
words "charter schools" are missing from page 4, line 2. The
committee recommends a technical amendment to insert this
language.
4)Opposition . Public Advocates and the American Civil Liberties
Union (ACLU) argue there are sufficient protections in current
law to protect children from dangerous volunteers and
therefore, this bill is unnecessary. The ACLU states: "Unlike
school employees or teachers, any adult volunteer working with
children must be closely supervised, regardless of whether
that individual has had any prior contact with the criminal
justice system. The Education Code clearly states this point.
Thus any suggestion that school volunteer background check
provisions must be modified to conform to other standards
should take into account this close supervision and
direction."
Public Advocates also argues that individuals may have a prior
conviction for a drug offense several years ago and under this
bill, they would not be allowed to volunteer at their child's
school. Public Advocates states this bill "will have a
disproportionate impact on low-income communities and
communities of color. These students are struggling the most
to meet state academic standards, and parent and community
involvement in their schools plays a critical role in school
and student improvement. Closing the gap in achievement
between students of color and in poverty and white, more
affluent students requires the involvement of parents and
community members. Yet, the very parents, grandparents and
family members who have the best opportunity to assist the
school to assist their children will be denied their rights to
parent involvement."
5)Related legislation . AB 1698 (Conway), pending in the
Assembly Rules Committee, makes minor changes to statute
regarding the Activity Supervisor Clearance Certificate for
non-credentialed individuals.
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081
AB 2034
Page 4