This measure would recognize the month of March 2025 as the 40th anniversary of the California Supreme Court decision in ARC v. Department of Developmental Services and celebrate the Legislature's 1969 passage of the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act.
Maddy summaryCalifornia's Senate passed Senate Resolution 34 (SR 34), declaring April 6-12, 2025, as National Library Week. The resolution encourages all California residents to visit their local libraries during this week to celebrate libraries' roles in providing free access to resources, supporting community engagement, and fostering lifelong learning. It has no binding policy effect and does not create new requirements or affect specific groups.
This measure would designate February 2025 as Montessori Month, and would urge all Californians to take note of that month and to participate fittingly in its observance.
Maddy summaryCalifornia's Senate Concurrent Resolution 20 designates February 2025 as Peripartum Cardiomyopathy (PPCM) Awareness Month. This symbolic resolution raises public and medical awareness about PPCM, a rare heart condition affecting pregnant or postpartum people that can cause fatigue, swelling, and heart failure if undiagnosed. It does not create new laws or policies, but aims to highlight symptoms (like sudden shortness of breath or rapid weight gain) and risk factors (such as advanced maternal age or pregnancy complications). The resolution was unanimously adopted by the California Legislature in March 2025 and filed with the Secretary of State. It directly affects the public and healthcare providers by promoting education about a condition that contributes to pregnancy-related deaths.
Maddy summarySenate Resolution 28 designates March 19, 2025, as California Agriculture Day and March 18, 2025, as National Agriculture Day. The resolution formally recognizes the agricultural industry's vital contributions to California's economy, food supply, and community - highlighting its status as the nation's top agricultural producer and global exporter of key commodities like almonds, dairy, and produce. This ceremonial resolution does not create new laws, impose obligations, or alter policies; it serves solely as a symbolic tribute to farmers, ranchers, and farmworkers. The resolution was unanimously adopted by the California Senate on March 13, 2025.
Maddy summarySenate Resolution 15 designates February 2025 as "2-1-1 Month" and February 11, 2025 as "2-1-1 Day" to recognize and promote California's 2-1-1 information and referral service. The resolution does not create new laws or funding but formally encourages public awareness of the free, confidential service that connects residents to community, health, housing, disaster, and other support resources. It acknowledges 2-1-1's role in handling over 2 million annual referrals and supporting emergency response, but the resolution itself has no binding effect on service operations or funding. The measure was unanimously adopted by the Senate on February 27, 2025.
Maddy summaryThis Senate Resolution (SR 16) designates December 29 as "President Jimmy Carter Day" in California to honor his humanitarian legacy, particularly his 35-year partnership with Habitat for Humanity building affordable housing. It commemorates his work with the Carter Work Project, which helped construct over 4,400 homes globally and inspired volunteerism. The resolution has no legal effect or policy changes - it is a ceremonial recognition of Carter's contributions to housing and community service. It was unanimously adopted by the California Senate on February 20, 2025.
Maddy summarySCR 10 is a California state resolution recognizing January 2025 as National Human Trafficking Awareness Month. It does not create new laws or policies but serves as a symbolic gesture to raise public awareness about human trafficking - a crime involving exploitation through force, fraud, or coercion. The resolution highlights the severity of trafficking through statistics on global and California victim numbers but does not directly affect any specific groups or alter legal frameworks. This non-binding measure aligns with broader efforts to combat trafficking through education and community engagement.
Maddy summarySenate Resolution 11 designates January 2025 as Cervical Cancer Awareness Month in California. It encourages the State Department of Public Health, the State Department of Health Care Services, and all Californians to promote cervical cancer prevention, screening, and education through activities during that month. The resolution specifically urges efforts to raise awareness about HPV (the leading cause of cervical cancer), the importance of regular screenings, and prevention measures for at-risk communities. It does not create new laws or funding but serves as a symbolic recognition to support existing public health outreach.
(1) Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to accept pupils from other school districts by adopting a resolution to become a school district of choice, in accordance with various programmatic and procedural requirements and limitations, including, among other requirements and limitations, that the school district of choice accept all pupils who apply to transfer until the school district of choice is at maximum capacity, and that pupils are selected through an unbiased process, as specified. Existing law prohibits school districts of choice from targeting their communications to individual parents or residential neighborhoods on the basis of a pupil's or pupils' actual or perceived academic skill or other personal characteristics. This bill would expand that prohibition to also prohibit school districts of choice from targeting their communications to individual parents or residential neighborhoods on the basis of a pupil's or pupils' actual or perceived proficiency in English, family income, or their disability, gender, gender identity, gender expression, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, or any other characteristic that is contained in the definition of a hate crime, as defined. (2) Existing law requires the governing board of each local educational agency to either provide for an audit of the books and accounts of the local educational agency, including an audit of income and expenditures by source of funds, or make arrangements with the county superintendent of schools having jurisdiction over the local educational agency to provide for that auditing. Existing law requires that audit to include compliance with the above-described provisions. This bill would require the audit to instead include compliance with all provisions of the district of choice program. (3) Existing law authorizes a school district of choice to reject the transfer of a pupil if the transfer of that pupil would require the school district to create a new program to serve that pupil, except that a school district of choice is prohibited from rejecting the transfer of a special needs pupil, including an individual with exceptional needs, as defined, and an English learner. This bill would expand that prohibition to further prohibit a school district of choice from rejecting the transfer of a pupil who is a foster youth, as defined, or a homeless child or youth, as defined. (4) Existing law requires school districts of choice to give first priority for attendance to siblings of children already in attendance in the school district, and requires school districts of choice to give second priority for attendance to pupils eligible for free or reduced-price meals. This bill would require school districts of choice to also give second priority for attendance to pupils who are foster youth or homeless children or youth. (5) Existing law authorizes school districts of residence with an average daily attendance greater than 50,000 to limit the number of pupils transferring out each year to 1% of its current year estimated average daily attendance. Existing law authorizes school districts of residence with an average daily attendance of 50,000 or less to limit the number of pupils transferring out to 3% of its current year estimated average daily attendance, and to limit the maximum number of pupils transferring out for the duration of the school district of choice program to 10% of the average daily attendance for that period. Existing law authorizes a school district of residence that has a negative status on the most recent budget certification completed by the county superintendent of schools in any fiscal year, regardless of its average daily attendance, to limit the number of pupils who transfer out of the district in that fiscal year. This bill would require the 1%, 3%, and 10% transfer caps to be based off the average daily attendance as reported as of the first principal apportionment of the prior fiscal year instead of its current year estimated average daily attendance. The bill would authorize a school district of residence with either a qualified or negative status, instead of only those with a negative status, on the most recent budget certification completed by the county superintendent of schools in any fiscal year, regardless of its average daily attendance, to limit the number of pupils who transfer out of the district in that fiscal year. The bill would require a county office of education, upon request of a school district of residence to determine the percentage of pupils transferring out of the school district of residence for the duration of the program, and would require the county office of education to request data from the school district of choice regarding the number of pupils transferring into the school district of choice. By imposing additional duties on county offices of education, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. If the school district of choice does not provide the number of pupils transferring into the school district of choice to the county office of education within 30 days, the bill would prohibit the school district of choice from accepting new pupil transfers pursuant to the school district of choice program until the school district of choice complies with the county office of education data request. (6) Existing law prescribes an application process for the school district of choice program that includes specified deadlines and requires, among other things, that the governing board of the school district of choice include in a written notification to the parent that the number of pupils applying to transfer exceeded the capacity of the school district of choice and that the pupil was not selected during the random drawing. This bill would revise and recast those provisions by, among other things, (A) requiring the written notification to specify whether the number of pupils applying to transfer exceeded the capacity of the school district of choice or the specific school or program to which the pupil applied, (B) requiring the school district of choice, on or before January 15, to notify the school district of residence of the number and names of the pupils who are requesting transfers, and (C) requiring the school district of residence, on or before February 15, to notify the school district of choice of the total number and names of the pupils requesting transfers in excess of the above-described caps, as specified. (7) Existing law establishes a public school financing system that requires state funding for county superintendents of schools, school districts, and charter schools to be calculated pursuant to a local control funding formula, as specified. Existing law requires the local control funding formula, in part, to be based on average daily attendance, as specified. If an audit identifies a school district of choice as having accepted pupils from a school district of residence after the school district of residence has provided the notice that it has reached one of the above-described caps, this bill would require the auditor to determine the average daily attendance generated by each pupil in excess of the applicable cap whose transfer originated from the school district of residence subsequent to the notice, disaggregated by local control funding formula grade span, to calculate the portion of the school district of choice's local control funding formula apportionment attributable to that average daily attendance, and to report that amount to the Superintendent of Public Instruction, and would require the Superintendent, notwithstanding any other law, to reduce the school district of choice's local control funding formula apportionment each year by the amount calculated and reported by the auditor. (8) Existing law requires each school district of choice to keep an accounting of all requests made for transfers pursuant to a school district of choice program and records of all disposition of those requests, which are required to include, among other things, the number of pupils transferred out of the school district of choice pursuant to the program, the number of pupils transferred into the school district of choice pursuant to the program, and the race, ethnicity, gender, self-reported socioeconomic status, eligibility for free or reduced-price meals, and the school district of residence of each of those pupils. This bill would add a pupil's foster youth status and homeless child or youth status to that required accounting. (9) Existing law requires the Legislative Analyst's Office to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the school district of choice program and prepare recommendations regarding the program. Existing law requires the evaluation and recommendations to be submitted to the appropriate education policy committees of the Legislature and to the Department of Finance by September 30, 2026. This bill would repeal those requirements. (10) Existing law makes the school district of choice program inoperative as of July 1, 2028, and repeals its provisions as of January 1, 2029. This bill would repeal those sunset provisions, thereby extending the school district of choice program indefinitely. (11) This bill also would make other nonsubstantive changes. (12) 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.
