BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2370
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 2370 (Hernandez)
As Amended May 11, 2010
Majority vote
EDUCATION 6-3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Brownley, Ammiano, | | |
| |Arambula, Carter, Eng, | | |
| |Torlakson | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Nestande, Miller, Norby | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires a school district of choice (DOC) to give
priority for admission to English learners, pupils with
exceptional needs, and pupils who qualify for free and reduced
price meals, and establishes a priority lottery for students
identified in this bill. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires a DOC to ensure that a pupil who transfers into the
district pursuant to this article is enrolled in a school with
a higher Academic Performance Index (API) score than the
school in which the pupil was previously enrolled.
2)Makes a finding and declaration that the fiscal
responsibilities of the county superintendent of schools
relative to making a determination that a district's fiscal
stability may be compromised as a result of students
transferring out of the district are related to the current
oversight responsibilities of the county superintendent
pursuant to current law.
EXISTING FEDERAL LAW establishes the National School Lunch
Program and School Breakfast Program for a student whose
household meets federally established income level eligibility
or a child who is a member of a family receiving benefits under
the Food Stamp Program, Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations, or Temporary Assistance to Needy Families Program.
(Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act)
AB 2370
Page 2
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes districts to become DOCs. A DOC is not required to
admit pupils but it is required to select those pupils that it
does elect to admit through a random process that does not
choose pupils based upon academic or athletic talent. Either
the district of residence (DOR) or DOC may prevent a transfer
under this law if the transfer would exacerbate racial
segregation. (Education Code Section 48300)
2)Requires that if the number of transfer applications exceeds
the number of transfers under the DOC program, the governing
board must conduct a random drawing held in public at a
regularly scheduled meeting of the governing board.
(Education Code Section 48301)
3)Prohibits a DOC from rejecting a transfer of a pupil based
upon a determination by the governing board of that school
district that the additional cost of educating the pupil would
exceed the amount of additional state aid received as a result
of the transfer. A school district may reject the transfer of
a pupil if the transfer of that pupil would require the
district to create a new program to serve that pupil, except
that a DOC shall not reject the transfer of a special needs
pupil, including an individual with exceptional needs and an
English learner. (Education Code Section 48303)
4)Requires a DOC to give priority for attendance to siblings of
children already in attendance in that district, and
authorizes a DOC to give priority for attendance to children
of military personnel. (Education Code Section 48306)
5)Specifies that DORs that have a negative budget certification,
as determined by the county office of education, may limit the
number of pupils transferring out in that fiscal year. DORs
may limit the number of pupils who transfer out of the
district if the county superintendent of schools determines
that the district will not meet the standards and criteria for
fiscal stability due to such transfers, as specified; and,
specifies that students who have already been accepted to
transfer to a DOC before a DOR takes action to limit the
number of transfers, shall be permitted to attend the DOC, as
specified. (Education Code Section 48307)
AB 2370
Page 3
FISCAL EFFECT : This bill is keyed non-fiscal.
COMMENTS : California law provides that a student may attend a
DOC without obtaining an interdistrict transfer. Unlike the
main interdistrict transfer law, the DOC law does not require an
agreement between the DOR and the receiving district in order
for the receiving DOC to admit interdistrict transfers. Some
educational advocates have credited the DOC program with
expanding parental choice by removing geographical restrictions,
thereby expanding educational opportunities for children.
Others, however, maintain that the DOC program limits
educational opportunities and choice for students, as some
districts employ selective processes and recruitment. Anecdotal
evidence suggests that some DOCs recruit higher performing
students, while neglecting those who require additional academic
assistance. Additionally, a lack of data on the DOC program has
raised questions of the demographic makeup and academic profile
of the populations that the program serves. This bill requires
DOCs to grant priority to English learners, students who qualify
for free and reduced price meals, and students with exceptional
needs through conducting a priority lottery for these students.
This bill also requires a DOC to ensure that child who transfers
into the district attends a school with a higher API score than
that of the school attended in the DOR.
Limiting transfers: Under the DOC program, current law provides
that the DOR has little say in the transfer process, except
districts with 50,000 or less average daily attendance (ADA) may
limit the maximum number of transfers each year to 3% of their
ADA and may limit transfers for the duration of the program to
10% of their ADA. Districts with more than 50,000 pupils in
attendance may limit transfers to no more than 1% of their ADA.
A DOR may also prevent a transfer under this law if the transfer
would have a negative impact on a court-ordered or voluntary
desegregation plan or the racial and ethnic balance of the
district. Furthermore, current law specifies that DORs may
limit the number of pupils transferring out of the district if
the county superintendent of schools determines that the
district will not meet the criteria for fiscal stability due to
those transfers. This bill includes intent language to
reinforce that this responsibility falls within existing
responsibilities of a county superintendent pursuant to existing
law.
AB 2370
Page 4
Priority admission: Under current law, DOCs must utilize a
random selection process in its application process if the
number of transfer requests exceeds the number of available
transfer spaces. The current DOC program also provides that a
district may not reject the transfer of a student with
exceptional needs or an English learner under any circumstances.
However, educators in the field have noted that the DOC program
has failed to adequately serve these high need students. This
bill provides a pathway to create a more inclusive DOC program
by requiring DOCs to prioritize English learners, exceptional
needs students, and pupils who qualify for free or reduced price
meals.
Current law requires that siblings of students currently
enrolled be granted priority in a DOC admission process.
Granting priority to English learners, exceptional needs pupils,
and students who qualify for free and reduced price meals may
significantly increase the pool of students granted priority
depending on various geographical and other factors. This bill
will require a DOC to conduct a priority lottery that includes
English learners, students with exceptional needs, and those who
qualify for free and reduced price meals should there be more
applications from priority populations than available spaces.
Any priority lottery shall be conducted outside of the random
selection process for the general population. Staff notes that
those students from the general population may be disadvantaged
by this process if the number of priority students meets or
exceeds the numbers of available transfer spaces.
API score requirement: The authors of SB 680 (Romero), Chapter
198, Statutes of 2009 expressed intent to provide access to high
quality academic programs for socio-economically disadvantaged
students through the DOC program. This bill also reinforces and
prioritizes this goal by requiring that a student attends a
school in a DOC with an API score higher than that of their
school in their DOR. However, there are a number of additional
factors that may impact the quality of education and influence a
family's decision to participate in the DOC program including,
but not limited to, access to stronger academic curriculum,
programs for English learners or students with exceptional
needs, unique extracurricular or specialty programs, specialized
curriculum, or after school care. This raises the question as
to whether an API score is a broad enough factor to determine a
AB 2370
Page 5
child's attendance at a particular school under the DOC program,
especially if the API score of the desired school of attendance
is equal to or moderately less than that of the DOR. As this
bill moves forward, the author may wish to consider whether to
provide flexibility for students to attend a school in a DOC
that offers a specialized program without regard to that
school's academic performance, as indicated by the API score.
Author's statement: "AB 2370 would address the deficiency in
current law by guaranteeing priority for attendance to the most
vulnerable students and students with special needs. Expanding
priority to this group of pupils will also prevent 'cherry
picking' its students-enrolling top/high achieving students
while avoiding those who score historically lower and cost more
to educate."
Analysis Prepared by : Pilar Whitaker and Marisol Avina / ED.
/ (916) 319-2087
FN: 0004299