BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
SB 477 (Wright)
Hearing Date: 05/16/2011 Amended: 04/26/2011
Consultant: Jacqueline Wong-HernandezPolicy Vote: Education 7-2
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: SB 477 would require school districts to establish
a policy specifying the time period for notifying a parent when
a pupil is initially classified at a truant.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
Mandate: Notification policy Likely minor costs, if the
activity is claimed General*
in mandate costs
and deemed reimbursable
*Counts toward the Proposition 98 minimum funding guarantee
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS:
Under existing law, a pupil is declared to be a truant when
absent without a valid excuse for three days in a school year,
or absent without a valid excuse three times for more than 30
minutes at a time, or any combination of days and minutes
totaling three instances. Upon classification as a truant,
school districts are currently mandated to notify the parent or
guardians of specified options and consequences related to that
status, including that the pupil is truant, that the parent or
guardian is obligated to compel the attendance of the pupil,
that the pupil may be subject to prosecution, and that
alternative educational programs are available to the pupil.
In recent years, the existing mandate for truancy notification
has resulted in approximately $15.9 million in annual
SB 477 (Wright)
Page 1
reimbursements. As a result, AB 1610 (Committee on Budget, Ch.
724, 2010) limited the state costs for the existing truancy
notification mandate, by requiring school districts to provide
the truancy notification using the most cost-effective method
possible rather than requiring the notice be sent by mail.
The current statute does not specify when the notification must
be provided to the parent. This bill would simply require that
each school district establish a policy specifying the time
period for notifying the parent or guardian of a pupil upon the
pupil's initial classification as a truant. This bill does not
specify what the timeframe should be, only that districts have a
policy with a timeframe.
This new mandate is unlikely to expand the reimbursement level
of the existing truancy notification mandate. The state
currently reimburses districts for doing the actual work of
notifying parents and guardians, in accordance with state law.
This bill requires that a district have a policy specifying the
time frame for activities it is currently completing. School
districts likely already have some sort of policy, since some
sort of policy guides the activities and timeframes for which
they are claiming reimbursement. Districts are free to make that
timeframe lengthy enough that no activities need to be changed,
and setting a timeframe for performing an existing duty should
not require additional staff training. It would be very
difficult for a district to prove that establishing a policy
from which the reimbursable work is generated constitutes a new
duty or higher level of service than is currently required.