Public schools: parent empowerment: school intervention.
Summary
Existing law requires a local educational agency to implement one of several specified interventions for a school not identified as a persistently lowest-achieving school that, after one full school year, fails to meet specified criteria and has a specified percentage of parents and legal guardians of pupils sign a petition requesting the local educational agency to implement at least one of 5 specified interventions. Existing law requires a local educational agency to implement the intervention option requested by the petition unless the agency makes a specified finding in a regularly scheduled public hearing. Existing law limits the number of schools subject to a petition pursuant to these provisions to 75. This bill would require interventions to be implemented also for a school that is identified as persistently lowest-achieving but does not receive specified school improvement grant funding. The bill would require a governing board of a local educational agency to allow parents and legal guardians to provide testimony at the regularly scheduled public hearing. To the extent these provisions would impose additional duties on local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The bill would prohibit more than one parent or legal guardian per pupil from signing a petition, and would require the petition, and, if the petition includes a specific charter school operator, a summary of the charter petition, to meet specified language requirements. The bill would require, if the petition includes a specific charter school operator, that the charter petition include specified elements. The bill would require that, if paid signature gatherers are being used, the petition include a statement indicating that some signature gatherers may be paid. The bill would require all parties involved in the signature gathering process to adhere to specified school procedures. The bill would require the State Department of Education to provide specified information on its Internet Web site, in easy to understand terms, regarding the petition process, the 5 intervention options that parents and legal guardians may request, a sample petition that meets specified requirements, and an up-to-date list of schools that have implemented an intervention pursuant to these provisions. The bill also would make clarifying changes to, and provide definitions for, those intervention petition provisions. The bill would require the schoolsite council at each school that is eligible for a petition to be submitted pursuant to these provisions to provide, at its next scheduled meeting, or a meeting within 90 days, whichever is sooner, information regarding the petition process, including the intervention options available and the process for submitting a petition. By imposing new duties on school districts, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Bill status
vetoed
4 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2011
Committee Review
Sep 2011
Assembly Passage
May 2011
Senate Passage
Sep 2011
Vetoed
Oct 2011
Introduced Jan 27, 2011
Vetoed Oct 8, 2011
Floor votes · Senate Sep 8, 2011 · Assembly May 31, 2011
How they voted
22–11
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 35
Sep 8, 2011
D
Democratic23
95% Yea
R
Republican12
91% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
31
Key actions
8
Committee
9
Amendments
4
Oct 8, 2011
Vetoed
Vetoed by Governor.
lower
Sep 9, 2011
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 53. Noes 26. Page 3232.).
lower
Sep 9, 2011
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
lower
Sep 8, 2011
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (22-11-2)
senate
Aug 29, 2011
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 6. Noes 3.) (August 25).
upper
Aug 15, 2011
Committee
In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.
upper
Jul 11, 2011
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 3.) (July 6).
upper
Jun 8, 2011
Committee
Referred to Com. on ED.
upper
May 31, 2011
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (46-25-1)
assembly
May 27, 2011
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 12. Noes 5.) (May 27).
lower
May 12, 2011
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
May 10, 2011
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 3.) (May 4).
lower
Apr 28, 2011
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Mar 22, 2011
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Mar 21, 2011
Committee
Referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Jan 28, 2011
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee February 27.
lower
1 primary · 1 co-sponsor
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 203
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 203. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline