SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular Session
SB 322 (Leno) - Charter schools: pupils: suspension and expulsion: admissions:
departures.
Version: May 13, 2015
Urgency: No
Hearing Date: May 18, 2015
Policy Vote: ED. 7 - 2
Mandate: Yes
Consultant: Jillian Kissee
This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.
Bill Summary: This bill: (1) adds admission preferences in the event a random drawing
for attendance is necessary; (2) establishes conditions for additional attendance
preferences on an individual charter school basis; (3) establishes provisions for which
charter schools must comply regarding pupil suspension and expulsion; and (4) requires
a charter school, upon a student’s expulsion or departure, to report the reason within 10
days. This bill also requires each school district to draft and implement a policy to
annually collect data about teacher turnover at each of its schools, and at each charter
school it authorizes.
Fiscal Impact:
 This bill results in unknown, potentially significant, costs to charter authorizers likely
to be in the low millions. These costs include: (1) charter authorizers to review and
approve amended charters to conform to procedures and to provide oversight of
these requirements, and (2) for districts to create and implement a policy to annually
collect data about teacher turnover. Costs to charter authorizers for oversight
activities and to school districts for data tracking would likely be considered a
reimbursable state mandate. Costs imposed on charter schools would not be
reimbursable.
Background:
Charter Schools
Under existing law, the Charter Schools Act of 1992 provides for the establishment of
charter schools in California for the purpose, among other things, to improve student
learning and expand learning experiences for pupils who are identified as academically
low achieving. A charter school may be authorized by a school district, a county board
of education, or the State Board of Education, as specified. Some charter schools are
new while others are conversions from existing schools. Except where specifically
noted otherwise, California law exempts charter schools from many of the statutes and
regulations that apply to schools and school districts. The legislative intent of the
Charter Schools Act was to provide opportunities for teachers, parents, pupils, and
community members to establish and maintain schools that operate independently from
a school district structure that would afford parents and pupils with expanded
educational choices, offer new professional opportunities for teachers to be responsible
for the learning program at the school site, and create competition within the public
school system to stimulate continual improvements in all public schools.
Current law requires that charter schools: 1) are nonsectarian in their programs,
SB 322 (Leno)
Page 2 of 5
admission policies, employment practices, and all other operations; 2) not charge
tuition; and 3) not discriminate against any pupil on the basis of the characteristics, as
specified. Admission to a charter school may not be determined according to the place
of residence of the pupil, or of his or her parent or legal guardian, within the state,
except that an existing public school converting to a charter school must adopt and
maintain a policy giving admissions preference to pupils who reside within the former
attendance area of that public school. (Education Code § 47605, et. seq.)
Parents, teachers, or community members may initiate a charter petition, which is
typically presented to and approved by a local school district governing board. The law
also allows, under certain circumstances, for county boards of education and the State
Board of Education to authorize charter schools. The specific goals for a charter school
are detailed in the agreement (charter) between the authorizing entity and the charter
developer. The charter petition is also required to include a description of the
educational program of the school and several other policies and procedures relating to
employees, pupils, and finances. Current law establishes procedures for the renewal of
charter schools, not to exceed five years.
If a pupil is expelled or leaves the charter school without graduating or completing the
school year for any reason, the charter school is required to notify the superintendent of
the school district of the pupil’s last known address within 30 days, and shall upon
request provide that school district with a copy of the cumulative record of the pupil,
including a transcript of grades or report card, and health information. This provision
applies only to pupils subject to compulsory full-time education.
Proposed Law: This bill:
1. Adds the intent of the Legislature to do all of the following:
A. Ensure equal access to interested pupils at charter schools and prohibit
practices that discourage enrollment or disproportionately push out
segments of already enrolled students.
B. Ensure that charter school discipline policies are fair and transparent.
C. Ensure that a pupil’s constitutional right to due process is protected at
charter schools.
D. Consistent with Section 5 of Article IX of the California Constitution,
ensure that charter schools operate within the system of common schools
by remaining“…free, nonsectarian and open to all students…,” as stated in
Wilson v. State Board of Education (1999) 75 Cal.App.4th 1125, 1137-38
E. Gather data on student and teacher turnover in charter schools.
2. Modifies the required components of a petition for the establishment of a charter
school, specifically, the comprehensive descriptions of admission policies and
procedures by which students are suspended or expelled, to be consistent with
items 3, 4, 5, and 6 below.
SB 322 (Leno)
Page 3 of 5
3. Adds siblings of students currently attending the charter school and children of
employees at the charter school as preferences for attending a charter school in
the event a public random drawing is necessary in determining the admission of
students to the school and provides for other preferences to be established on an
individual charter school basis, as outlined below.
A. Preferences on a charter school basis must abide by the following
requirements:
i. Each type of preference must be approved by the charter school at
a public hearing;
ii. They are consistent with federal law and the California Constitution;
iii. They must ensure access for students with disabilities,
academically low-achieving students, English learners, and lowincome students, as specified; and
iv. They must not require mandatory parental volunteer hours as a
criterion for admission or continued enrollment.
4. Requires charter school suspension and expulsion procedures to meet the
following requirement:
A. The constitutional due process requirement of providing notice and an
opportunity to be heard before restricting a student’s entitlement to public
education.
5. For expulsions, procedures must ensure the following:
A. The student is entitled to a formal hearing to determine if the student is to
be expelled.
B. At the hearing, the student has, or the student’s parents or guardian have,
a right to appear in person or to be represented, as specified.
C. At least 10 days before the proposed hearing date, the student is provided
written notice of the hearing date to include information as specified.
D. If it is determined that the student is to be expelled, the person or persons
that made the determination must issue a written decision identifying the
basis of the decision, as specified.
E. A record of the hearing is made so that a written transcription of the
proceedings can be made.
6. Provides that unless a charter school has adopted procedures for the expulsion
of students that are consistent with those set forth in this bill and follows those
procedures, a student’s departure from the charter school is not to be considered
SB 322 (Leno)
Page 4 of 5
as an expulsion pursuant to existing law.
7. Reduces the timeline (from 30 days to 10 days) in which a charter school is
currently required to notify the school district if a student is expelled or leaves the
charter school, and also requires the charter school to also include in the copy of
the cumulative report of the student to be provided to the school district, the
reason for the student’s departure.
8. Authorizes a charter school to encourage parental involvement but requires the
charter school to notify the parents and guardians of applicant students and
currently enrolled students that parental involvement is not a requirement for
acceptance to, or continued enrollment at, the charter school.
9. Requires each school district to draft and implement a policy to annually collect
data about teacher turnover at each of its schools, and at each charter school it
authorizes.
Related Legislation: AB 1034 (Gatto, 2011) proposed to require charter schools to
report specified pupil data and make changes to statutes governing charter school
admission practices. AB 1034 was vetoed by Governor Brown with the following veto
message:
Charter schools are established to encourage the widest possible range of
innovation and creativity. Their governing charters reflect the ideas and
aspirations of those willing to undertake this profoundly difficult challenge. It is
critical that they have the flexibility to set admission criteria and parent
involvement practices that are consistent with the school's mission.
Staff Comments: This bill likely results in costs in the following areas:
Charter Schools: Current law requires charter petitions to contain reasonably
comprehensive descriptions of various items including admissions requirements and
suspension and expulsion procedures. This bill requires these procedures to be
consistent with changes in admissions preferences and requirements for suspension
and expulsion included in this bill. Additional costs for charters to conform to these
requirements such as: developing new policies, staff training on requirements,
amending charters, and implementing new policies, would have to be absorbed locally
since charters are ineligible to claim reimbursement of costs resulting from state
mandates. They do receive a share of the K-12 mandate block grant funding, but the
funding does not address additional costs resulting from this bill.
Charter Authorizer Oversight Activities: State level costs could be incurred as a result
of material revisions to charters so that they conform to the admissions, suspension,
and expulsion procedures included this bill. Material revisions to charters are governed
by the standards and criteria that apply to new petitions. Existing law provides that
renewals and material revisions of charters include a reasonably comprehensive
description of any new requirement of charter school enacted into law after the charter
was originally granted or last renewed. Assuming that the bill’s requirements constitute
material revisions to charters, this would increase costs to the charter authorizer to
review and conduct a public hearing on the provisions of the charter. Assuming these
SB 322 (Leno)
Page 5 of 5
activities would increase workload to the authorizer by 10 hours for each charter school
at a standard staffing rate of $50 per hour, including benefits, costs could be in the
hundreds of thousands statewide and could be reimbursable under state mandate law.
Oversight of compliance to these procedures may marginally increase oversight
workload of the charter authorizer since they are already required to provide oversight in
these categories. Additional costs for charter authorizers to provide oversight would
add to costs for existing charter oversight reimbursable state mandates.
Track Teacher Turnover: This bill requires each school district to draft and implement a
policy to annually collect data about teacher turnover at each of its schools, including
each charter school it authorizes. This provision could be determined to be a
reimbursable state mandate by the Commission on State Mandates. One-time costs
would be incurred to develop the plan and ongoing costs would be to annually collect
data. Assuming developing the plan and collecting required data would take the school
district 20 hours to 40 hours at a rate of $50 per hour, including benefits, costs could be
$1 million to $2 million to school districts.
-- END --