BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2028
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 16, 2012
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Felipe Fuentes, Chair
AB 2028 (Knight) - As Amended: May 1, 2012
Policy Committee: Education
Vote:7-2
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill makes the following changes to the dismissal process
for permanent certificated employees:
1)Repeals the requirement that dismissal or suspension notices
not be given between May 15 and September 15 in any year.
2)Repeals the requirement that no testimony be given or
introduced at a certificated employee's dismissal or
suspension hearing relating to matters that occurred more than
four years before to the date of the filing notice, as
specified.
FISCAL EFFECT
GF/98 cost pressure, likely between $130,000 and $250,000, to
school districts to maintain and store records beyond four years
for potential use in dismissal or suspension hearings. In
2010-11, there were 286,969 teachers in California.
COMMENTS
1)Background . Existing law prohibits the dismissal of a
permanent certificated employee, except for specified causes,
including immoral or unprofessional conduct, unsatisfactory
performance, evident unfitness for service, conviction of a
felony or any crime involving moral turpitude, knowing
membership by the employee in the Communist party, and
alcoholism or other drug abuse that makes the employee unfit
to instruct or associate with children.
AB 2028
Page 2
Current law authorizes the immediate suspension of a permanent
employee for specified conduct, including immoral conduct,
conviction of a felony or any crime involving moral turpitude,
incompetency due to mental disability, willful refusal to
perform regular assignments without reasonable cause,
advocating or teaching communism, or knowing membership in the
Communist Party.
Statute further prohibits that notice of dismissal or
suspension be given between May 15 and September 15. The
notice is required to be in writing and served upon the
employee personally or by United States registered mail, as
specified.
Existing law authorizes the employee to request a hearing
regarding his or her dismissal or suspension. Statute further
requires the hearing to take place within 60 days of the date
of the employee's demand for the hearing.
Current law also prohibits introducing testimony or evidence
relating to matters that occurred more than four years prior
to the date of the filing of the notice. Evidence of records
regularly kept by the governing board may be introduced, but
no decision relating to the dismissal or suspension of any
employee shall be made based on charges or evidence of any
nature relating to matters occurring more than four years
prior to the filing of the notice.
2)Purpose . In February 2012, a teacher, Mark Berndt, at
Miramonte Elementary School in Los Angeles Unified School
District (LAUSD) was accused of sexual misconduct with several
students over a multi-year period. The severity of these
allegations and the period of time over which Mr. Berndt
allegedly committed these acts has caused LAUSD and other
school districts to review district and state policies related
to teacher dismissal.
The author cites the situation in LAUSD as exposing "the fact
that teacher dismissals, even the dismissals of those under
police investigation for lewd acts against their students,
cost over $300,000 and take an incredible amount of time.
Community leaders throughout LAUSD, including Mayor Antonio
Villaraigosa, have asked for law changes to the teacher
dismissal laws to reduce the time it takes and the cost of
dismissing teachers who violate the public trust."
AB 2028
Page 3
This bill makes specified changes to the dismissal process for
certificated employees.
3)Opposition . The California Teachers Association (CTA) argues
this bill is unnecessary because current law establishes a
multi-step process to protect schoolchildren while at the same
time ensuring due process rights for employees. Furthermore,
CTA contends this bill will not resolve the system errors that
occurred within LAUSD with regard to the situation at
Miramonte Elementary School and as such, there is not a reason
to erode due process rights for teachers based on one
incident.
Specifically, CTA makes the following arguments as to why it
is opposed to this bill:
"The purpose of prohibition against issuing a 30 day notice
�of intent to dismiss or suspend] between May 15 and September
15 is to ensure a teacher on summer break does not
inadvertently forfeit his or her right to a hearing by not
receiving the notice promptly and not having adequate time to
prepare a response. In eliminating this blackout period, AB
2028 does not recognize that under �current law] district have
always been able to initiate proceedings related to immoral
conduct."
"While this change �i.e., repealing the prohibition against
using matters that occurred four years prior to the dismissal
or suspension hearing] could enable employers to establish a
pattern of behavior that could be relevant to their case,
would it be fair to include an incident that occurred five or
six years previously, if there were no other incidents in the
intervening time? In reality, administrative law judges
already have the necessary authority to reach back and use the
evidence they may find pertinent to the issues at hand."
4)Related legislation .
a) SB 1059 (Huff) contains the provisions of this bill and
makes other changes to existing law related to the
dismissal of permanent certificated employees. This bill
failed in the Senate Education Committee in April 2012.
b) SB 1530 (Padilla), pending in the Senate Appropriations
AB 2028
Page 4
Committee, contains the provisions of this bill and makes
other changes to the dismissal procedures of permanent
certificated employees, as specified.
Analysis Prepared by : Kimberly Rodriguez / APPR. / (916)
319-2081