BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Dede Alpert, Chair
1999-2000 Regular Session
BILL NO: AB 1738
AUTHOR: Washington
AMENDED: May 26, 2000
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: August 9, 2000
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Scott P. Plotkin
SUMMARY
This bill, in addition to other provisions, extends the
Carl Washington School Safety and Violence Prevention Act
to include grades kindergarten to 7.
BACKGROUND
1999 Legislative Activity
Two major school safety acts were approved by the
Legislature in 1999. They are summarized below.
The Carl Washington School Safety and Violence Prevention
Act
In 1999, AB 1113 (Florez; Chapter 51, Statutes of 1999), a
trailer bill to the 1999
Budget Act, established the School Safety Violence
Protection Act (SSVPA) for
grades 8 to 12 , inclusive. An appropriation of $100
million was provided in the
1999 Budget Act to fund the program.
AB 658 (Washington; Chapter 645, Statutes of 1999),
subsequently
renamed the SSVPA to the "Carl Washington School Safety and
Violence
Protection Act" (CWSSVPA), authorized county offices of
education to participate
in the CWSSVPA, and appropriated $1 million for county
offices to participate.
The funds appropriated for the CWSSVPA are allocated by the
AB 1738
Page 2
State
Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to school
districts on the basis of
enrollment, and requires a minimum allocation of $5,000 for
each schoolsite, or a
minimum of $10,000 for each school district, whichever is
greater. The funds are
required to be used for one or more of the following:
1) Providing schools with personnel, including but not
limited to, licensed or certificated school
counselors, school social workers, school nurses, and
school psychologists, who are trained in conflict
resolution. Requires any law enforcement personnel
hired pursuant to this act to be a trained and sworn
peace officer.
2) Providing effective and accessible on-campus
communication devices and other school infrastructure
needs.
3) Establishing an in-service training program for school
staff to learn to identify at-risk students, to
communicate effectively with those students, and to
refer those students to appropriate counseling.
4) Establishing cooperative arrangements with local law
enforcement agencies for appropriate school-community
relationships.
5) For any other purpose that the school or school
district determines would contribute to providing safe
schools and preventing violence among students.
SB 334 (Alpert) - The School Safety and Violence Protection
Act
Also, in 1999 the Legislature enacted and the Governor
approved SB 334 (Alpert; Chapter 996, Statutes of 1999),
the "No More Victims' Violence Prevention and School Safety
2000 Strategy." Contained within SB 334 were numerous
provisions relative to school safety and juvenile justice.
The school safety provisions, known as the "School Safety
Violence Protection Act," contained the following elements:
1) School safety plans.
AB 1738
Page 3
a) Requires all schools, including new schools,
to have school safety plans.
b) Requires existing plans to be reviewed every
year.
c) Requires that the status of such plans, and
their key elements, be included in the annual
school accountability report card distributed to
parents.
d) Deletes the sunset clauses on various
provisions of the school safety plan law.
2) Requires coordination and cooperation by the
Superintendent of Public Instruction and the Attorney
General of existing school safety and violence
protection programs.
a) Interagency School Safety Demonstration Act
of 1985.
b) School Safety Plans Act.
c) School Community Policing Act.
3) Expands the school safety and violence protection
elements of support for which schools and school
districts may apply.
a) Provision of counselors and other support
services.
b) Effective and accessible communication
devices.
c) In-service programs for all school staff.
d) Cooperative relationships with local law
enforcement.
e) Any other proposal that schools and school
districts design to meet the goals and objectives
of current law in providing safe schools and
violence prevention among children and youth.
AB 1738
Page 4
4) Requires an evaluation of programs established and
funded pursuant to the Act, with annual reports to the
Legislature.
5) Requires the Superintendent to establish appropriate
rules and regulations to implement the Act.
6) Appropriated $5 million to fund competitive grants
appropriated under the Act for grades kindergarten
through 7, inclusive.
Although Governor Davis signed SB 334, he line item-vetoed
the $5 million appropriation, so that the
Act was not implemented, thus providing no 1999-2000
fiscal year funding for school safety programs for
kindergarten and grades 1 to 7, inclusive.
Further Legislative Action in 2000.
The Governor's Budget for 2000-01 proposed an additional
$72 million in funds for the Carl Washington Act, to be
allocated to grades 8 to 12. The final 2000 Budget Act
approved by the Legislature augmented the $72 million with
an additional $61 million, to be distributed to all grades.
In addition, the education trailer bill, SB 1667 (Alpert),
amended the Carl Washington Act to extend the provisions of
the program to include all grades, not just grades 8 to 12.
However, the Governor line-item vetoed the $61 million
augmentation, and signed SB 1667. The $72 million
appropriation contains a provision that limits its
allocation to grades 8 to 12, even though SB 1667 expanded
the program to all grades.
ANALYSIS
This bill extends the Carl Washington School Safety and
Violence Prevention Act (CWSSVPA) to include grades
kindergarten to 7. In addition, this bill:
1) Authorizes school districts receiving funds pursuant
to CWSSVPA to use the funds to establish
youth-to-youth peer programs at schoolsites,
including, but not limited to, peer mediation, peer
helpers, conflict managers, peer education, and peer
AB 1738
Page 5
tutoring.
2) Authorizes any school district that chooses not to
participate individually in CWSSVPA, or if funding
available through CWSSVPA would be insufficient, to
form a consortium with other school districts to
participate in CWSSVPA. Provides that such
consortiums are subject to the provisions of CWSSVPA
to the same extent as an individual school district.
3) Requires that the portion of funds that a school
district would have received, if the school district
chooses not to participate either individually or as
part of a consortium, be distributed on a pro rata
basis to participating school districts.
4) Adds intent language that schools receiving funds
pursuant to the CWSSVPA reduce the ratio of students
to credentialed student services personnel, including,
but not limited to, school counselors, school
psychologists, school social workers, and school
nurses.
5) Adds intent language that schools receiving funds
pursuant to CWSSVPA promote and increase student
participation in peer programs.
6) Provides that these provisions are subject to funds
being appropriated therefor.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Why were two major laws enacted in 1999 ? During the
course of the 1999 Session, the consideration of
school safety issues were pursued on two parallel
tracks; SB 334 (Alpert) and several other related
bills were being considered in the regular legislative
process, being heard and modified in policy and
appropriations committees, with final approval on the
floor of each House. At the same time, school safety
legislation was being considered with an appropriation
in the 1999 Budget Act and the approval of AB 1113
(Florez) by the Budget Conference Committee.
2) What is the difference between SB 334 and AB 1113 ?
The parallel process described above resulted in two
AB 1738
Page 6
bills being enacted by the Legislature and the
Governor on the same topic, but with different
results. Although both bills emphasized local
flexibility in deciding how to spend the money, the
key differences are:
a) Funding and grade level applicability . AB
1113 (Florez), along with its $100 million
appropriation in the 1999 Budget Act, provided
for eligibility for grades 8 to 12, inclusive.
Both provisions were approved by the Governor.
SB 334 originally provided for $50 million for all
grades. However, after the enactment of AB 1113
and the Budget Act, SB 334 was amended to cover
grades kindergarten through 7, and the
appropriation was reduced to $5 million.
However, in signing SB 334, the Governor
line-item vetoed the entire $5 million, citing
the $100 million appropriation in the Budget Act
for school safety (even though none of that was
available for grades K-7).
b) Allocation of funds . AB 1113 and the 1999
Budget Act distributed the $100 million on an
enrollment basis, with a minimum allocation of
$5,000 for each schoolsite, or a minimum of
$10,000 for each school district, whichever is
greater. This resulted in approximately $40 per
student being allocated to eligible schools.
SB 334 envisioned a competitive grant program, to
insure that the funds were directed to the
schools and school districts most in need.
As noted in the Background section of this Analysis,
the 2000 Budget Act contains an additional $72
million for grades 8 to 12, after an augmentation
of $61 million for all grades was line-item
vetoed.
c) Partnerships . While AB 1113 was a
straight-forward funding program, SB 334 was
intended to promote partnerships at the state and
local level, utilizing the resources and
investment in existing programs - some of which
AB 1738
Page 7
are jointly administered by the State
Superintendent of Public Instruction and the
Attorney General.
d) Accountability and evaluation . AB 1113 had
no provision for reports to be generated on how
the money was spent, or to involve local
constituencies in any consultative process on
using the money. In fact, some complaints have
been received about interested parties either not
being involved in the allocation process at the
local level, or unhappy with the final decision.
SB 334 envisioned utilizing existing school safety
plans (which are developed and annually reviewed
in a broad, consultative process) as the basis
for the use of the available funds - and provides
for an annual evaluation of the funding program.
3) Other legislation and the 2000 Budget Act . On March
29, 2000 the Committee considered and passed SB 1580
(Alpert), which modifies the School Safety Violence
Protection Act, and appropriates $100 million to
implement its provisions. SB 1580 is now pending in
the Assembly, and the author had not intended to
pursue the bill since the 2000 Budget Act and
accompanying trailer bill (SB 1667 - Alpert) only
appropriated additional funds for allocation pursuant
to the Carl Washington Act.
4) Now what ? With the arrival of AB 1738 before the
Committee, several policy and funding dilemmas present
themselves.
a) Since SB 1667 (Alpert), the education
trailer bill, has already been approved (Chapter
71, Statutes of 2000) to expand the Carl
Washington program to all grades, should those
provisions be deleted from this bill?
b) Since this Committee has previously approved
SB 1580 (Alpert), should the "accountability"
provisions of the bill (if not the funding model)
be incorporated into this bill?
c) Should this or another bill be amended to
AB 1738
Page 8
augment the 2000 Budget Act to provide funding to
all grades, as was intended by the Legislature in
enacting the Budget Act and SB 1667, the
education trailer bill, notwithstanding the
Governor's line-item veto of the budgetary
augmentation?
SUPPORT
Alum Rock Union Elementary School District
American Federation of State, County and Municipal
Employees, AFL-CIO
California Association for Counseling and Development
California School Nurses Organization
California State PTA
Numerous individual letters
OPPOSITION
None received