BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �




                   Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
                           Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair

                                          SB 268 (Wright)
          
          Hearing Date: 05/02/2011        Amended: 04/06/2011
          Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-HernandezPolicy Vote: Education 7-3
          
















































          _________________________________________________________________
          ____
          BILL SUMMARY: SB 268 specifies the scope of review by a county 
          board of education (CBE) when an appeal of interdistrict pupil 
          attendance occurs, and requires that a hearing be held within 30 
          calendar days after the appeal is filed, as specified.
          _________________________________________________________________
          ____
                            Fiscal Impact (in thousands)

           Major Provisions         2011-12      2012-13       2013-14     Fund
          
          Mandatory hearings         Potentially substantial reimbursable 
          mandate        General
          _________________________________________________________________
          ____
          STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral to the 
          Suspense File. 

          

          Existing law authorizes the governing boards of 2 or more school 
          districts to enter into an agreement for the interdistrict 
          attendance of pupils who are residents of the school districts. 
          If either school district fails to approve the interdistrict 
          attendance of a pupil, or in the case of the failure or refusal 
          of the school districts to enter into an agreement, existing law 
          authorizes the person having legal custody of the pupil to 
          appeal to the county board of education in accordance with a 
          prescribed procedure. 



          While existing law places requirements on any hearings that a 
          county board of education might hold as part of its appeals 
          process (e.g. notifying the pupil's legal guardian of a 
          hearing), it does not require that a county board of education 
          hold a hearing as part of its discretionary process. This bill 
          would require a county board of education to conduct a hearing 
          within 30 days of the filing of an appeal of an interdistrict 
          transfer denial. Requiring a county board of education to hold 
          specified hearings would create a new state reimbursable 
          mandate, potentially forcing the state to reimburse all hearing 
          costs for interdistrict transfer appeals, even if a county board 
          of education was already holding hearings (which most county 
          boards do) as part of its local process. 








          > (>)
          Page 3



          This bill also specifies that an appeal review by a county board 
          of education be limited to the following questions: 1) Whether 
          the district acted in accordance with an interdistrict 
          attendance agreement, where applicable; 2) Whether the district 
          followed the district's policy on interdistrict attendance; 3) 
          Whether the district provided the parent or guardian with an 
          opportunity to provide information relevant to the interdistrict 
          attendance request; and 4) Whether there is relevant and 
          material evidence that was not considered by the district. 
          Limiting the appeal review to consideration for these factors 
          would likely result in minor, if any, local costs to implement 
          the procedure.

          Staff recommends that this bill be amended to remove the mandate 
          on county boards of education to hold appeals hearings, and 
          instead impose the review restrictions only on districts that 
          choose to hold hearings, consistent with other restrictions on 
          hearings currently in statute.