BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                  AB 2444|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  AB 2444
          Author:   Furutani (D)
          Amended:  5/11/10 in Assembly
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE  : 6-0, 06/23/10
          AYES: Huff, Alquist, Emmerson, Liu, Price, Simitian
          NO VOTE RECORDED: Romero, Hancock, Wyland

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  : 75-0, 05/13/10 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT  :    School districts:  interdistrict attendance

           SOURCE  :     Author


           DIGEST  :    This bill provides that a pupil who has been  
          granted an interdistrict transfer does not have to reapply  
          for that transfer, and authorizes a school district of  
          residence to rescind existing transfer permits if it  
          receives a qualified or negative fiscal certification.

           ANALYSIS  :    

           Existing Law

           1.Authorizes two or more school districts to enter into an  
            agreement, for a term not to exceed five school years,  
            for the interdistrict transfer of pupils who are  
            residents of the districts.  This process allows a parent  
            to request a permit to attend a school district that is a  
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               AB 2444
                                                                Page  
          2

            party to the agreement, and provides for an appeal  
            process if either of the districts denies the transfer  
            request.  

          2.Requires the agreement to stipulate the terms and  
            conditions under which interdistrict attendance is  
            permitted or denied.

          3.Provides that it is the responsibility of the district of  
            attendance (receiving school district) to stipulate the  
            terms and conditions under which the permit may be  
            revoked.

          4.Requires the supervisor of attendance of the district of  
            residence to issue an individual permit verifying the  
            district's approval, pursuant to policies of the  
            governing board and terms of the transfer agreement, for  
            the transfer and for the applicable period of time.  A  
            permit is valid upon concurring endorsement by the  
            receiving school district.

          5.Establishes a process whereby a parent may appeal to the  
            county board of education the decision of either district  
            that fails to approve the transfer request, or fails to  
            enter into an agreement.

          In contrast, the District of Choice (DOC) option does not  
          require the agreement of the district of residence before a  
          pupil may transfer (it does require a district to choose to  
          be designated as a district of choice in order to enroll  
          these transfer pupils).  A district of residence (DOR) that  
          has a negative fiscal certification may limit the number of  
          pupils who transfer out of that district into a district of  
          choice.

          This bill provides that a pupil who has been granted an  
          interdistrict transfer does not have to reapply for that  
          transfer, and authorizes a school DOR to rescind existing  
          transfer permits if it receives a qualified or negative  
          fiscal certification.  Specifically, this bill:

          1.Provides that, once a pupil is enrolled in a school  
            pursuant to an interdistrict transfer, the pupil shall  
            not have to reapply for an interdistrict transfer.

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               AB 2444
                                                                Page  
          3


          2.Requires the governing board of the school district of  
            enrollment to allow the pupil to continue to attend the  
            school in which he or she is enrolled.

          3.Authorizes a DOR to rescind existing transfer permits for  
            the subsequent school year if it is determined to not  
            meet the standards and criteria for fiscal stability and  
            it receives a qualified or negative certification in that  
            fiscal year.

          4.Prohibits a school district of residence from rescinding  
            existing transfer permits for pupils entering grades 11  
            or 12 in the subsequent school year.

           Comments

           Studies of the effect of educational instability on student  
          learning have revealed a number of adverse impacts on  
          students.  Research has demonstrated that instability is  
          associated with lower student achievement regardless of the  
          quality of a school's instructional programs.  This bill  
          seeks to enhance student stability by providing that a  
          student granted an interdistrict transfer will not be  
          required to apply for an interdistrict transfer until the  
          completion of his or her tenure at a single school.  A  
          district must, accordingly, allow the continued enrollment  
          of a student at a school district should the student be  
          granted an interdistrict transfer.  This bill does not  
          alter the interdistrict transfer application process or the  
          current authorities under which a transfer may be granted.
           
          Will this tie the hands of the receiving district  ?  This  
          bill requires a receiving school district to allow a pupil  
          who has been granted an interdistrict transfer permit to  
          continue to attend the school in which he or she is  
          enrolled without having to reapply for the permit.  Current  
          law requires the transfer agreement to stipulate the terms  
          and conditions under which interdistrict attendance may be  
          permitted or denied, and provides that it is the  
          responsibility of the district of attendance (receiving  
          school district) to stipulate the terms and conditions  
          under which the permit may be revoked.  Therefore, this  
          bill prohibits a receiving district from denying or  

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               AB 2444
                                                                Page  
          4

          revoking a transfer permit for reasons other than those  
          stipulated in the agreement between two or more school  
          districts.  

           Background

           There are a number of options for students who wish to  
          transfer to a school outside of the district of residence  
          in addition to the interdistrict transfer process.  Under  
          the DOC program, students may transfer to a DOC, and are  
          not required to reapply and may not be sent back to their  
          DOR under any circumstances.  However, there is only a  
          small pool of DOCs across the state and, thus, this option  
          may not be accessible to a significant number of  
          California's students.  Students are also entitled to  
          transfer to a higher performing school under the No Child  
          Left Behind Act of 2001, though this entitlement is limited  
          to students in schools designated as Title 1 under federal  
          law who fail to make Adequate Yearly Progress for two  
          consecutive years.  Lastly, California law also authorizes  
          an open enrollment option for students enrolled only in the  
          1,000 lowest performing schools.  Due to various  
          limitations on these various transfer processes, the  
          interdistrict transfer process is the most viable and  
          accessible for most of California's students.  Factors that  
          may influence a family's decision to apply for an  
          interdistrict transfer include, but are not limited to,  
          divorce, loss of job, or other financial factors that force  
          students to relocate to schools outside of their DOR.  Many  
          parents may also seek educational opportunities for their  
          children outside of their DOR in order to access  
          specialized curriculum, strong academic or extracurricular  
          programs, or due to greater geographical convenience for  
          the student or family members.  Under such circumstances,  
          many families seek interdistrict transfers.

          In the 2009-10 school year, the Los Angeles Unified School  
          District (LAUSD) granted interdistrict transfers to over  
          1,2000 students.  However, LAUSD - facing a $640 million  
          budget deficit - later retracted approximately 80 percent  
          of these interdistrict transfers.  This bill allows  
          districts that choose to enter into interdistrict transfer  
          agreements to rescind interdistrict transfers in the event  
          that a district is designated as having a negative or  

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               AB 2444
                                                                Page  
          5

          qualified budget certification.  Today, there are 12  
          districts on the negative certification list and 114  
          districts with a qualified certification status.  The  
          latter includes several of the state's larger districts,  
          including the largest, LAUSD.

           Prior Legislation  .  AB 1465 (Richardson), 2007-08 Session,  
          would have required the Compton Unified School District and  
          the Los Angeles Unified School District to abide by their  
          interdistrict transfer agreement, specifically with regards  
          to the provision that a transfer shall not be required to  
          resubmit a new application annually in order to remain  
          enrolled in the school district.  AB 1465 was vetoed by the  
          Governor, whose message read:

            "This bill merely reiterates in statute that the  
            Compton Unified School District (CUSD) and the Los  
            Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) must abide by  
            the terms of their existing mutually adopted agreement,  
            including the provision that pupils shall not be  
            required to annually resubmit a new transfer  
            application.  Therefore, this bill is unnecessary."  
           
           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  No    
          Local:  No

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  6/24/10)

          Association of California School Administrators (if  
          amended)
          City of Lakewood

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    According to the author's office,  
          "In many school districts, transfers granted via an  
          interdistrict transfer authorization are limited to one  
          year.  Parents and students are forced to go through the  
          transfer process every year, even if the student already  
          ahs been granted the transfer for previous years.  This  
          limitation creates uncertainty and instability for students  
          and parents.  The requirement to reapply annually for the  
          interdistrict transfer produces situations where students  
          are uprooted - from their established relationships with  
          their teachers and counselors, from their extracurricular  
          activities such as sports and student organizations, or  

                                                           CONTINUED





                                                               AB 2444
                                                                Page  
          6

          from educational curriculums such as the International  
          Baccalaureate program or magnet programs that are only  
          offered at select schools."


           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  : 
          AYES:  Adams, Ammiano, Anderson, Arambula, Bass, Beall,  
            Bill Berryhill, Tom Berryhill, Blakeslee, Block,  
            Blumenfield, Bradford, Brownley, Charles Calderon,  
            Carter, Chesbro, Conway, Cook, Coto, Davis, De La Torre,  
            De Leon, DeVore, Emmerson, Eng, Evans, Feuer, Fletcher,  
            Fong, Fuentes, Fuller, Furutani, Gaines, Galgiani,  
            Garrick, Gilmore, Hall, Harkey, Hayashi, Hernandez, Hill,  
            Huber, Huffman, Jeffries, Jones, Knight, Lieu, Logue,  
            Bonnie Lowenthal, Ma, Mendoza, Miller, Monning, Nava,  
            Nestande, Niello, Nielsen, Norby, V. Manuel Perez,  
            Portantino, Ruskin, Salas, Saldana, Silva, Smyth,  
            Solorio, Audra Strickland, Swanson, Torlakson, Torres,  
            Torrico, Tran, Villines, Yamada, John A. Perez
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Buchanan, Caballero, Hagman, Skinner,  
            Vacancy


          CPM:cm  6/24/10   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****

















                                                           CONTINUED