Intradistrict and interdistrict transfers: low-performing pupils.
Summary
Existing law authorizes the governing boards of 2 or more school districts to enter into an agreement, for a term not to exceed 5 school years, for the interdistrict attendance of pupils who are residents of the school districts. Existing law requires a school district of residence to approve an intradistrict transfer request for a victim of an act of bullying, as provided. If there is no available school for an intradistrict transfer, existing law authorizes a victim of an act of bullying to apply for an interdistrict transfer and prohibits a school district of residence from prohibiting that transfer if the school district of proposed enrollment approves the application for transfer. This bill would require a school district of residence to also approve an intradistrict transfer request for a low-performing pupil, as defined, of that school district if the school of attendance has been identified for comprehensive support and improvement or identified as low performing pursuant to specified federal laws, as provided. If there is no available school for an intradistrict transfer, the bill would authorize a low-performing pupil of a school district, if the school of attendance has been identified for comprehensive support and improvement or identified as low performing pursuant to specified federal laws, to apply for an interdistrict transfer and would prohibit the school district of residence from prohibiting that transfer if the school district of proposed enrollment approves the application for transfer. The bill would prohibit a school district of proposed enrollment from approving those transfer requests if the requested school has been identified for comprehensive support and improvement or identified as low performing pursuant to specified federal laws. By requiring school districts to approve intradistrict transfers for certain pupils, the 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 the statutory provisions noted above.
Bill status
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Jan 2023
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Jan 13, 2023
Last action Feb 1, 2024
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
11
Key actions
4
Committee
6
Amendments
2
Feb 1, 2024
Lower · Passed
From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
lower
May 18, 2023
Lower · Passed
In committee: Held under submission.
lower
Apr 26, 2023
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Mar 28, 2023
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Mar 27, 2023
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 23, 2023
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 0.) (March 22).
lower
Jan 26, 2023
Committee
Referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Jan 14, 2023
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee February 13.
lower
1 primary · 8 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 237
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 237. 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