BILL ANALYSIS �
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 1235|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: SB 1235
Author: Steinberg (D), et al.
Amended: 5/14/12
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE : 7-2, 4/11/12
AYES: Lowenthal, Alquist, Hancock, Liu, Price, Simitian,
Vargas
NOES: Blakeslee, Huff
NO VOTE RECORDED: Runner, Vacancy
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE : 5-2, 5/24/12
AYES: Kehoe, Alquist, Lieu, Price, Steinberg
NOES: Walters, Dutton
SUBJECT : Pupil suspension
SOURCE : Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California
Public Counsel Law Center
DIGEST : This bill declares the Legislatures intent to
encourage the use of alternatives to pupil suspension, and
requires schools that have suspended more than 25 percent
of the school's enrollment or 25 percent of the population
of any numerically significant subgroup, as defined in this
bill, in the prior school year to implement, for at least
three years, at least one specified strategies to reduce
the suspension rate or disproportionality. This bill
requires a school at which one of the strategies is
implemented to report on the rate of reduction in the
CONTINUED
SB 1235
Page
2
school's suspensions and the strategy used to address the
matter.
ANALYSIS : Existing law prohibits a pupil from being
suspended or recommended for expulsion unless the principal
of the school determines that the pupil has committed
certain acts, and gives schools the discretion to take
action for most offenses.
Discretion to suspend . Schools may suspend a pupil for
violating any number of acts, some of which include:
1. Attempting to cause or threatening to cause physical
injury to another person. (Expulsion must be
recommended for causing serious physical injury.)
2. Being under the influence of a controlled substance.
(Expulsion must be recommended for possession or the
sale of controlled substances.)
3. Caused or attempted to cause damage to school property.
4. Possessed or used tobacco.
5. Committed an obscene act or engaged in habitual
profanity or vulgarity.
6. Possessed, offered, arranged or negotiated to sell drug
paraphernalia.
7. Engaged in, or attempted to engage in, hazing.
8. Engaged in an act of bullying.
Pupils may be suspended for a first offense if the school
principal determines that the pupil's presence causes a
danger to persons or property or threatens to disrupt the
instructional process or the pupil committed certain acts.
Subjective decision to suspend or expel . Schools may also
suspend a student for disrupting school activities or
otherwise willfully defying the valid authority of
supervisor, teachers, administrators, school officials, or
SB 1235
Page
3
other school personnel engaged in the performance of their
duties.
School may expel pupils for various offenses, including
disruption and defiance, upon finding either of the
following:
1. Other means of correction are not feasible or have
repeatedly failed to bring about proper conduct.
2. Due to the nature of the violation, the presence of the
pupil causes a continuing danger to the physical safety
of the pupil or others.
Mandatory suspension . School principals are required to
immediately suspend, and recommend expulsion of, a pupil
who has committed any of the following acts at school or a
school activity off school grounds:
1. Possessing, selling, or furnishing a firearm. (This is
consistent with the federal Gun-Free Schools Act.)
2. Brandishing a knife at another person.
3. Unlawfully selling a controlled substance.
4. Committing or attempting to commit a sexual assault.
5. Possession of an explosive.
Prior to suspension . Existing law states that suspension
shall be imposed only when other means of correction fail
to bring about proper conduct.
Suspension by the principal must be preceded by an informal
conference between the principal, pupil and whenever
practicable, the teacher, supervisor or school employee who
referred the pupil to the principal. School principals may
suspend a pupil without first holding an informal
conference with the pupil if an emergency situation exists.
A school employee is required to make a reasonable effort
to contact the pupil's parents at the time of suspension;
however, whenever a pupil is suspended from school (as
opposed to suspension from a class) the parent must be
SB 1235
Page
4
notified in writing.
Decision to suspend . The governing board of a school
district is required, unless a request has been made to the
contrary, to hold closed sessions if the board is
considering suspending or taking other disciplinary action
(other than expulsion) if a public hearing would lead to
the release of confidential information. School districts
are required to notify, in writing, the pupil and the
pupil's parent of the intent to call and hold a closed
session.
Alternatives to out-of-school suspension . School district
superintendents and school principals are authorized to use
discretion to provide alternatives to suspension or
expulsion, including counseling and an anger management
program.
School principals are authorized to assign a suspended
pupil to a supervised suspension classroom for the entire
period of suspension if the pupil poses no imminent danger
or threat to the campus, pupils, or staff, or if an action
to expel the pupil has not been initiated.
Existing states that schools should consider implementing
at least one of the following if the number of pupils
suspended during the prior school year exceeded 30 percent
of the school's enrollment:
1. A supervised suspension program.
2. A progressive discipline approach during the school day
on campus (as an alternative to off-campus suspension),
using any of the following activities:
A. Conferences between the school staff, parents
and pupils.
B. Referral to the school counselor, psychologist,
child welfare attendance personnel, or other school
support service staff.
C. Detention.
SB 1235
Page
5
D. Study teams, guidance teams, resource panel
teams, or other assessment-related teams.
Teachers may suspend pupils from class for the day and the
following day. If the pupil is to remain on campus during
that suspension, the pupil must be under appropriate
supervision. Teachers must ask the parent to attend a
parent-teacher conference regarding the suspension. Pupils
are prohibited from returning to the class from which he or
she was suspended, during the period of the suspension,
without the concurrence of the teacher and principal.
Schools are authorized to require a pupil to perform
community service as part of or instead of suspension or
expulsion for most offenses.
Missed assignments . The teacher of any class from which a
pupil is suspended is authorized to require the pupil to
complete any assignments and tests missed during the
suspension.
Number of days of suspension . The number of days that a
pupil may be suspended from school is capped at five
consecutive schooldays.
With some exception, the total number of days for which a
pupil may be suspended is capped at 20 schooldays per
school year, unless the pupil enrolls in or is transferred
to another regular school, an opportunity school or a
continuation school, in which case the cap is 30 schooldays
per school year. School districts are authorized to count
suspensions that occur while a pupil is enrolled in another
school district toward the maximum numbers of days for
which a pupil may be suspended in any school year.
Pupils with exceptional needs . Schools are authorized to
suspend or expel an individual with exceptional needs in
accordance with federal law. If a pupil with an
individualized education program (IEP) exhibits behavior
problems, the IEP team must make a determination if the
behavior is a manifestation of the disability and whether
the strategies in the IEP are effective to address the
behavior. If it is determined that the IEP is ineffective,
a functional analysis assessment must be conducted, and
SB 1235
Page
6
typically the IEP is then amended to include a behavior
intervention plan.
This bill declares the Legislature's intent to encourage
the use of alternatives to pupil suspension, and requires
schools that have suspended more than 25 percent of the
school's enrollment or 25 percent of the population of any
numerically significant subgroup, as defined in this bill,
in the prior school year to implement, for at least three
years, at least one specified strategies to reduce the
suspension rate or disproportionality. This bill requires
a school at which one of the strategies is implemented to
report on the rate of reduction in the school's suspensions
and the strategy used to address the matter.
Background
Los Angeles Unified School District . On October 11, 2011,
it was announced that the Los Angeles Unified School
District (LAUSD) entered into a voluntary agreement with
the federal Department of Education's Office of Civil
Rights. Under the agreement, LAUSD will revamp its entire
program for English learners and accelerate its efforts
focused on closing the achievement and opportunity gap for
African-American pupils. As part of the agreement, LAUSD
is to take steps to report disparate discipline rates, and
eliminate inequitable and disproportionate discipline
practices.
Capacity . Implementation of schoolwide strategies could
include research and consideration of which strategy to
implement, staff training, school counselors and
psychologists, staff to supervise pupils who serve
in-school suspension, and classrooms to house pupils who
serve in-school suspensions. This bill imposes mandated
costs and could have the effect of pressuring schools to
limit suspensions rather than being subject to this bill
and addressing their suspension rates. Options could be
considered that put parameters on suspensions for
subjective acts, require missed assignments and tests to be
completed, improve schools' access to information about
best practices currently used in schools, and reporting on
the use and success of in-school alternatives to
out-of-school suspensions.
SB 1235
Page
7
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes
Local: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee:
Mandate: Potentially significant reimbursable state
mandate, to the extent that certain schools have to
create and implement new disciplinary processes required
by this bill.
Average Daily Attendance (ADA): This bill will likely
result in decreased suspensions state-wide, which will
increase student attendance and related state ADA
payments to schools.
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/25/12)
Fight Crime: Invest in Kids California (co-source)
Public Counsel Law Center (co-source)
American Civil Liberties Union of CA
California Association for Parent-Child Advocacy
California Association for Bilingual Education
California Correctional Peace Officers Association
California School Health Centers Association
California State PTA
Californians for Justice Education Fund
Californians Together
Cal-TASH
Center for Juvenile Law and Policy
Children's Defense Fund CA
Children Now
Coleman Advocates for Children and Youth
Community Asset Development Redefining Education
Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund
Disability Rights California
Disability Rights Legal Center
Education Trust-West
Gay-Straight Alliance network
Hispanas Organized for Political Equality
Kids in Common
Labor/Community Strategy Center
Legal Advocates for Children and Youth
Legal Services for Children
SB 1235
Page
8
Life Span Institute, University of Kansas
Los Angeles Unified School District Trustees Monica Garcia
and Nury Martinez
Los Angeles Unified School District
MALDEF
National Center for Youth Law
New America Foundation
Oakland Unified School District
Office of Restorative Justice of the Archdiocese of Los
Angeles
PICO California
Policy Link
Portland State University, Graduate School of Education
Restorative Schools Vision Project
Youth and Education Law Project (Stanford Law School)
Youth Justice Coalition
Youth Law Center
OPPOSITION : (Verified 5/25/12)
California School Board Association
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author,
"California recorded 750,000 suspensions in 2009-10. Each
of those suspensions represents instructional time and
educational opportunity lost. California has a higher rate
of suspension than most other states - 7.5 percent of all
students. The way schools implement state policy on
suspension has a disproportionate impact on students of
color. Schools generally have discretion over the grounds
for suspension, and commonly remove students from class or
school grounds for non-violent offenses such as disrupting
class or defiance of authority. More than two decades of
research has confirmed that out-of-school suspensions do
not improve student behavior and, in fact, often exacerbate
it. The disproportionate use of suspension is a
significant contributor to California's high dropout rates,
which are highest among students of color. Addressing
problem behaviors proactively with research-based supports
and interventions in school and with parents is proven to
improve student behavior, school safety and school
success."
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The opposition argues, the
SB 1235
Page
9
costs for implementing the schoolwide strategies called for
in this legislation would include the research and
consideration by each district and school site as to what
strategy to implement; training of administrators, teachers
and other school staff; increased staffing of school
counselors and psychologists, possibly credentialed
teachers to supervise the pupils who are in an in-school
suspension program; and then there is the need for space to
house the programs.
PQ:do 5/25/12 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****