BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 1851
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 7, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Joan Buchanan, Chair
AB 1851 (Bradford) - As Introduced: February 19, 2014
SUBJECT : School attendance: interdistrict attendance.
SUMMARY : Deletes the sunset date which authorizes county
boards of education (COEs), with countywide average daily
attendance (ADA) greater than 180,000, to determine whether a
pupil who has filed an interdistrict appeal should be permitted
to attend in the district in which the pupil desires to attend,
within 40 school days; and, declares Legislative Intent that
school districts and county boards of education make best
efforts to process interdistrict attendance appeals in an
expeditious fashion.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Authorizes the governing boards of two or more school
districts to enter into an agreement for the interdistrict
attendance of pupils who are residents of the districts;
specifies if either district fails to approve the
interdistrict attendance of a pupil, or in the case of the
failure or refusal of the districts to enter into an
agreement, the person having legal custody of the pupil may
appeal to the county board of education; requires the county
board of education to determine, within 30 calendar days,
whether the pupil should be permitted to attend in the
district in which the pupil desires; and, specifies that the
county board of education in a class 1 or class 2 county
shall, within 40 schooldays after the appeal is filed,
determine whether the pupil should be permitted to attend in
the district in which the pupil desires to attend and the
applicable period of time. Specifies, in the event that
compliance by the county board within the time requirement for
determining whether the pupil should be permitted to attend in
the district in which the pupil desires to attend is
impractical, the county board or the county superintendent of
schools, for good cause, may extend the time period for up to
an additional five school days. (Education Code 46601)
2)Defines "Class 1 county" to mean a county with 1994/95
countywide ADA of more than 500,000; and, defines "Class 2
AB 1851
Page 2
county" to mean a county with 1994/95 countywide ADA of at
least 180,000 but less than 500,000. (Education Code 48919.5)
FISCAL EFFECT : This bill is keyed non-fiscal.
COMMENTS : This bill deletes the sunset date for the
authorization for counties with ADA greater than 180,000 to
decide interdistrict transfer appeal requests within 40 school
days. This deadline was extended in 2011, from 30 calendar days
to 40 school days for large counties.
Class 1 and Class 2 Counties : The following counties are
considered class one or class two counties and would qualify for
the timeline extension: Alameda, Fresno, Los Angeles, Orange,
Riverside, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Joaquin,
and Santa Clara. It is unclear whether any of these counties
have experienced the same type of increase in appeals that LACOE
has experienced.
According to the author, "AB 1851 would repeal the sunset in
Education Code Section 46601(b)(1) which increased the timeline
for county boards of education in class 1 and class 2 counties
to determine, on appeal, whether a pupil should be permitted to
attend school in the district in which the pupil desires. The
Los Angeles County Office of Education (LACOE) handles more
transfer appeals than any other county in the state. In 2010-11
schoolyear, LACOE processed 554 interdistrict attendance appeals
(147 appeals were processed in 2006-07). The dramatic increase
seems to coincide with the 2009 expansion of the District of
Choice program. Due to the increase in the number of
interdistrict appeals heard by LACOE, it had become an
increasing challenge to meet the existing statutory timelines
established under Education Code Section 46601(b)(1). Also, at
the time, due to the budget climate, school districts became
reluctant to release students due to the potential loss of
attendance-based state funding."
Further, the author states, "In 2011, prior to AB 1085's
passage, existing law authorized the governing boards of two or
more school districts to enter into an agreement for the
interdistrict attendance of pupils who are residents of the
district. If either district fails to approve the interdistrict
attendance of a pupil, or in the case of the failure or refusal
of the districts to enter into an agreement, the person having
legal custody of the pupil may appeal to the county board of
AB 1851
Page 3
education; and, requires the county board of education to
determine, within 30 calendar days (20 schooldays), whether the
pupil should be permitted to attend in the district in which the
pupil desires (Education Code Section 46601). The prior timeline
that county boards of education, in class one or class two
counties (counties with more than 180,000 countywide Average
Daily Attendance), must follow in making interdistrict transfer
appeal rulings, was 30 calendar days."
Number of interdistrict appeal cases LACOE has process since
2006-07
-----------------------------------------------------------
| |2006-2|2007-|2008-2|2009-2|2010-2|2011-|2012-|2013-|
| | 007 |2008 | 009 | 010 | 011 | | | |
| | | | | | |2012 |2013 |2014 |
|-------+------+-----+------+------+------+-----+-----+-----|
|Process| 147 | 198 | 199 | 481 | 554 | 696 |1109 | 837 |
|ed | | | | | | | | |
|-------+------+-----+------+------+------+-----+-----+-----|
|Heard | 19 | 36 | 22 | 112 | 276 | 197 | 83 |93 |
|by | | | | | | | | |
|Board | | | | | | | | |
|-------+------+-----+------+------+------+-----+-----+-----|
|% | 87% | 82% | 89% | 77% | 50% | 61% | 88% |80% |
|Resolved| | | | | | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------
(Source: Los Angeles County Office of Education)
Need for 40 school days : LACOE has stated that due to their
increased interdistrict appeal workload, that they are unable to
resolve the cases within the previous 30 calendar day timeline.
In 2011, this deadline was extended to 40 school days. The data
below shows that in 2012-2013 approximately 1% of cases resolved
by LACOE staff prior to board action, were resolved during the
extended 40 school day deadline. Of those cases that were heard
and decided by the board, approximately 37% of cases were
resolved during the extended 40 school day deadline. In the
partial year data from 2013-2014, nearly 55% of cases heard and
decided by the board were decided during the extended 40 school
day deadline and 3% of cases resolved by staff were resolved
during the extended 40 school day deadline.
AB 1851
Page 4
Number of cases resolved by the LACOE board or staff and length
of resolution
----------------------------------------------------------------
| |2012-2013|2013-2014*|
| | | |
|-------------------------------------------+---------+----------|
|Total number of interdistrict transfers |1109 |837 |
|requested | | |
|-------------------------------------------+---------+----------|
|Total number of appeals resolved prior to |1026 |744 |
|Board action | | |
|-------------------------------------------+---------+----------|
| Total number of appeals |1015 |723 |
|resolved prior to Board | | |
| action within 30 calendar days | | |
|-------------------------------------------+---------+----------|
| Total number of appeals |11 |21 |
|resolved prior to Board | | |
| action within 40 schooldays | | |
|-------------------------------------------+---------+----------|
|Total number of appeals resolved by Board |83 |93 |
|action | | |
|-------------------------------------------+---------+----------|
| Total number of appeals |52 |42 |
|resolved by Board action | | |
| within 30 calendar days | | |
|-------------------------------------------+---------+----------|
| Total number of appeals |31 |51 |
|resolved by Board action | | |
| within 40 schooldays | | |
----------------------------------------------------------------
(Source: Los Angeles County Office of Education) *Data as of
4/21/14, as appeals are still coming in during current school
year.
According to LACOE, the following are reasons why cases were
resolved during the extended 40 school day deadline instead of
the original 30 calendar day deadline:
1) LACOE Board Meetings are scheduled the first three
Tuesdays of the month. Whenever there are months with five
Tuesdays, there is a two-week gap where no appeals can be
AB 1851
Page 5
heard by the Board, contributing to the delay.
2) Postponement requested by the Board per Education Code
46601.
3) Postponement requested by the Board due to an overload
of other agenda items.
Sunset Dates : Most sunset dates are repealed after an
evaluation shows that the program is demonstrating the desired
results. LACOE has provided two years of data. The committee
should consider whether there is enough information available to
determine whether the time has come to delete the sunset date or
whether the sunset date should be extended. When AB 1085 (Davis)
was brought forward in 2011, LACOE did not provide a rationale
for the deadline extension beyond the overall increase in number
of appeals. At that time it was unclear whether 40 days was the
right amount of time to allow for such an appeal process. It
may still be unclear whether the extension to 40 school days is
the appropriate deadline, due to limited data from only one
county. The committee should note that COEs already have the
ability to move the deadline back by 5 school days "for good
cause," when a COE cannot meet the deadline.
In determining the appropriate deadline, the committee should
consider the impact to students and their families when transfer
appeal decisions are not made in a timely manner. Delays impact
both student learning and family decisions.
Committee Amendment : Staff recommends the bill be amended to
extend the sunset date to July 1, 2018, instead of deleting the
sunset date. The intent of this amendment is to allow COEs time
to adjust procedures or adjust staffing to meet the 30 calendar
day timeline in the future.
Previous Legislation : AB 1085 (Davis), Chapter 87, Statutes of
2011, authorizes county boards of education, with countywide
average daily attendance (ADA) greater than 180,000, to
determine whether a pupil who has filed an interdistrict appeal
should be permitted to attend in the district in which the pupil
desires to attend, within 40 school days; and, specifies that it
is the intent of the Legislature that school districts and
county boards of education make best efforts to process
interdistrict attendance appeals in an expeditious fashion.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
AB 1851
Page 6
Support
Los Angeles County Office of Education
Fresno County Office of Education
Orange County Department of Education
San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools
San Diego County Office of Education
Santa Clara County Office of Education
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Chelsea Kelley / ED. / (916) 319-2087