California 2009-2010 Regular Session Status: To Executive

SB 680 — School attendance: interdistrict transfers.

Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 198, Statutes of 2009.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. ✓
    Passed Senate
  4. ✓
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

(1) Existing law requires each person between the ages of 6 and 18 years, who is not otherwise exempt, to attend the public full-time day school in the school district in which his or her parent or guardian is a resident. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to accept interdistrict transfers by adopting a resolution to become a school district of choice, as defined, and authorizes the governing board to ensure, by resolution, that pupils accepted for transfer are selected through a random, unbiased process that prohibits an evaluation of whether or not the pupil should be enrolled based upon his or her academic or athletic performance. This bill would require any communication made by a participating school district to parents or guardians to be factually accurate and not target individual parents or guardians or residential neighborhoods on the basis of specified personal characteristics of pupils. The bill would require a school district of choice, at its expense, to ensure that the auditor who conducts the annual financial audit of the district, as specified, reviews compliance with the requirements for a random, unbiased selection process and appropriate communications at the same time that he or she is conducting the annual audit, and would require the district to notify the auditor regarding this compliance review prior to the commencement of the annual audit. (2) Existing law authorizes a school district of choice to reject the transfer of a pupil if the transfer requires the district to create a new program to serve that pupil. This bill would prohibit a school district of choice from rejecting the transfer of a special needs pupil, including an individual with exceptional needs or an English learner. (3) Existing law authorizes a school district of choice to give priority to children of military personnel if the school district elected to accept transfer pupils by a resolution adopted prior to April 1, 2005. This bill would delete the condition that requires a school board to have adopted the resolution prior to that date. (4) Existing law authorizes a school district of residence, as defined, to limit the number of pupils who transfer out each year by a certain percentage, and also authorizes a school district with an average daily attendance of less than 50,000 to limit the maximum number of pupils transferring out for the duration of the program to 10% of the average daily attendance for that period. This bill would authorize a school district of residence to limit transfers if it has a negative or qualified status on the most recent budget certification, or to limit the number of pupils to a number identified by the county superintendent of schools, as specified, if the county superintendent determines that the district will not meet the standards and criteria for fiscal stability in a specified statutory provision for the subsequent fiscal year due to the impact of additional pupil transfers in that fiscal year. The bill, notwithstanding any other provision regarding interdistrict transfers, would permit a pupil attending a school district of choice or a pupil who received a notice of eligibility to enroll in a school district of choice, including a pupil selected by means of a random selection process conducted on or before June 30, 2009, to attend the school district of choice. (5) Existing law requires each school district that elects to become a school district of choice to keep an accounting of all requests made for alternative attendance, as specified, and to report this information to the Superintendent of Public Instruction. Existing law requires the Superintendent annually to make this information available to the Governor, the Legislature, and the public on or before April 1. This bill would add specified categories to the required accounting of requests for transfers. The bill would require each school district of choice to also report the specified information to the Department of Finance. The bill would delete the requirement that the Superintendent annually make the information provided by school districts available to the Governor, the Legislature, and the public on or before April 1, and instead require the Department of Finance to make the information available upon request to the Legislative Analyst. The bill would require the Legislative Analyst annually to make specified information regarding interdistrict transfers available to the Governor and the appropriate fiscal and policy committees of the Legislature. (6) Commencing August 24, 2007, existing law prohibits the governing board of a school district from electing to become a school district of choice. This bill would delete that prohibition. (7) Existing law makes the provisions governing interdistrict transfers inoperative on July 1, 2009, and repeals them on January 1, 2010. This bill would extend those inoperative and repeal dates to July 1, 2016, and January 1, 2017, respectively. (8) The bill would require the Legislative Analyst to conduct, after consulting with appropriate legislative staff, a comprehensive evaluation of the interdistrict transfer program, make recommendations regarding the extension of the program, incorporate in that evaluation the data annually made available by the Department of Finance, and complete and submit the evaluation and the recommendations to the appropriate education policy committees of the Legislature and the Governor by November 1, 2014. (9) The bill would also make conforming changes.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 198, Statutes of 2009.

  2. Approved by Governor.

  3. Enrolled. To Governor at 1 p.m.

  4. Senate concurs in Assembly amendments. (Ayes 38. Noes 0. Page 2272.) To enrollment.

  5. In Senate. To unfinished business.

  6. Read third time. Passed. To Senate.

  7. Assembly Rule 69(d) suspended.

  8. Read third time. Amended. (Page 2888.) To third reading.

  9. Read second time. To third reading.

  10. Read second time. Amended. To second reading.

  11. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 9. Noes 3.)

  12. Set, first hearing. Failed passage in committee. Reconsideration granted.

  13. Joint Rule 62(a) file notice suspended. (Page 2313.)

  14. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  15. (Heard in committee on June 17.)

  16. From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 6. Noes 1.)

  17. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on ED.

  18. To Com. on ED.

  19. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  20. Read third time. Urgency clause adopted. Passed. (Ayes 37. Noes 0. Page 545.) To Assembly.

  21. Read second time. To third reading.

  22. From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 9. Noes 0. Page 496.)

  23. Set for hearing April 15.

  24. To Com. on ED.

  25. Read first time.

  26. From print. May be acted upon on or after March 30.

  27. Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Alquist · Cosponsor
  • Buchanan · Cosponsor
  • Hagman · Cosponsor
  • Huff · Cosponsor
  • Romero · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 4 co-sponsors · 117 not signed on · 2 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Romero

Co-sponsors (4)

  • Alquist
  • Buchanan
  • Hagman
  • Huff

Not signed on (117)

117 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 117 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Unfinished Business SB680 Romero

Passed 38 Yea · 0 Nay · 3 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 35003
Democratic 2000
Republican 1000
Total 38003
% of votes cast 93%0%0%7%
How each member voted (41)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Cogdill — Yea
Hancock — Not Voting
Huff — Yea
Leno — Yea
McLeod — Not Voting
Oropeza — Yea
Lowenthal — Yea
Runner — Yea
Negrete — Not Voting
Alquist — Yea
Ashburn — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Ducheny — Yea
Dutton — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Romero — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Wiggins — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Aanestad — Yea
Benoit — Yea
Harman — Yea
Hollingsworth — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Liu — Yea
Maldonado — Yea
Price — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wright — Yea
Correa — Yea
Cox — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Yea
Florez — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

SB 680 Romero Senate Third Reading By TORRICO

Passed 52 Yea · 15 Nay · 24 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 4714024
Democratic 2100
Republican 3000
Total 5215024
% of votes cast 57%16%0%26%
How each member voted (91)
Member Party Vote
Anderson — Yea
Bill — Yea
Tom — Yea
Evans — Not Voting
Feuer — Nay
Charles — Yea
Fuller — Not Voting
Galgiani — Nay
De — Yea
La — Yea
Torre — Yea
Garrick — Yea
Yamada — Nay
Fletcher — Yea
Fong — Yea
Salas — Yea
Audra — Yea
Carter — Nay
Hagman — Yea
Hall — Nay
Chesbro — Not Voting
Conway — Yea
Hayashi — Nay
Hernandez — Nay
Huber — Yea
De — Not Voting
Leon — Not Voting
Huffman — Yea
Bass — Yea
Blakeslee — Yea
Cook — Yea
Coto — Nay
Davis — Not Voting
Duvall — Yea
Knight — Yea
Krekorian — Yea
Logue — Yea
Mendoza — Nay
Miller — Yea
Nava — Nay
Ruskin — Yea
Silva — Yea
Smyth — Yea
Swanson — Nay
Torlakson — Nay
Torrico — Yea
Tran — Yea
Bonnie — Not Voting
Lowenthal — Not Voting
V. — Not Voting
Manuel — Not Voting
Perez — Not Voting
John — Not Voting
A. — Not Voting
Perez — Not Voting
Portantino — Not Voting
Saldana — Not Voting
Monning — Not Voting
Skinner — Not Voting
Adams — Yea
Ammiano — Not Voting
Beall — Not Voting
Block — Yea
Blumenfield — Yea
Brownley — Not Voting
Buchanan — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Hill — Yea
Jeffries — Yea
Lieu — Yea
Ma — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Torres — Nay
Villines — Yea
Emmerson — Yea
Eng — Not Voting
DeVore — Not Voting
Fuentes — Nay
Furutani — Not Voting
Gilmore — Yea
Beth Gaines — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Bill Berryhill — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Nay
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 12 Yea · 3 Nay · 6 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 10306
Democratic 1000
Republican 1000
Total 12306
% of votes cast 57%14%0%29%
How each member voted (21)
Member Party Vote
Hall — Not Voting
Charles — Yea
De — Yea
Leon — Yea
Audra — Yea
Fuentes — Nay
John — Not Voting
A. — Not Voting
Perez — Not Voting
Duvall — Yea
Harkey — Yea
Skinner — Not Voting
Ammiano — Nay
Miller — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Torlakson — Nay
Coto — Yea
Davis — Not Voting
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Set first hearing. Failed passage. Reconsideration granted.

Passed 21 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 19000
Democratic 1000
Republican 1000
Total 21000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (21)
Member Party Vote
Hall — Yea
Fuentes — Yea
Charles — Yea
Harkey — Yea
De — Yea
Leon — Yea
John — Yea
A. — Yea
Perez — Yea
Audra — Yea
Duvall — Yea
Miller — Yea
Skinner — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Torlakson — Yea
Ammiano — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Coto — Yea
Davis — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Failed 6 Yea · 15 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 51400
Republican 1000
Democratic 0100
Total 61500
% of votes cast 29%71%0%0%
How each member voted (21)
Member Party Vote
Hall — Nay
Duvall — Yea
Fuentes — Nay
Harkey — Yea
Audra — Yea
Charles — Nay
De — Nay
Leon — Nay
John — Nay
A. — Nay
Perez — Nay
Ammiano — Nay
Nielsen — Yea
Skinner — Nay
Miller — Yea
Solorio — Nay
Torlakson — Nay
Coto — Nay
Davis — Nay
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Nay
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.

Passed 6 Yea · 1 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 1000
Unaffiliated 5104
Total 6104
% of votes cast 55%9%0%36%
How each member voted (11)
Member Party Vote
Carter — Not Voting
Miller — Yea
Nestande — Yea
Torlakson — Not Voting
Ammiano — Nay
Brownley — Not Voting
Buchanan — Yea
Solorio — Yea
Eng — Not Voting
Garrick — Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Senate 3rd Reading SB680 Romero Urgency Clause

Passed 38 Yea · 0 Nay · 2 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 35001
Democratic 2001
Republican 1000
Total 38002
% of votes cast 95%0%0%5%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Yee — Yea
Cedillo — Yea
Cogdill — Yea
Corbett — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Harman — Yea
Hollingsworth — Yea
Huff — Yea
Wyland — Not Voting
Negrete — Yea
Runner — Yea
Ducheny — Yea
Kehoe — Yea
Leno — Yea
McLeod — Yea
Oropeza — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Ashburn — Yea
Benoit — Yea
Dutton — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Romero — Yea
Steinberg — Yea
Walters — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Wright — Yea
Aanestad — Yea
Liu — Yea
Maldonado — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Wiggins — Yea
Correa — Yea
Cox — Yea
DeSaulnier — Yea
Denham — Yea
Florez — Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Not Voting
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass.

Passed 9 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 8000
Democratic 1000
Total 9000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
Hancock — Yea
Huff — Yea
Alquist — Yea
Liu — Yea
Simitian — Yea
Maldonado — Yea
Romero — Yea
Wyland — Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

education
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 680 do?
(1) Existing law requires each person between the ages of 6 and 18 years, who is not otherwise exempt, to attend the public full-time day school in the school district in which his or her parent or guardian is a resident. Existing law authorizes the governing board of a school district to accept interdistrict transfers by adopting a resolution to become a school district of choice, as defined, and authorizes the governing board to ensure, by resolution, that pupils accepted for transfer are selected through a random, unbiased process that prohibits an evaluation of whether or not the pupil should be enrolled based upon his or her academic or athletic performance. This bill would require any communication made by a participating school district to parents or guardians to be factually accurate and not target individual parents or guardians or residential neighborhoods on the basis of specified personal characteristics of pupils. The bill would require a school district of choice, at its expense, to ensure that the auditor who conducts the annual financial audit of the district, as specified, reviews compliance with the requirements for a random, unbiased selection process and appropriate communications at the same time that he or she is conducting the annual audit, and would require the district to notify the auditor regarding this compliance review prior to the commencement of the annual audit. (2) Existing law authorizes a school district of choice to reject the transfer of a pupil if the transfer requires the district to create a new program to serve that pupil. This bill would prohibit a school district of choice from rejecting the transfer of a special needs pupil, including an individual with exceptional needs or an English learner. (3) Existing law authorizes a school district of choice to give priority to children of military personnel if the school district elected to accept transfer pupils by a resolution adopted prior to April 1, 2005. This bill would delete the condition that requires a school board to have adopted the resolution prior to that date. (4) Existing law authorizes a school district of residence, as defined, to limit the number of pupils who transfer out each year by a certain percentage, and also authorizes a school district with an average daily attendance of less than 50,000 to limit the maximum number of pupils transferring out for the duration of the program to 10% of the average daily attendance for that period. This bill would authorize a school district of residence to limit transfers if it has a negative or qualified status on the most recent budget certification, or to limit the number of pupils to a number identified by the county superintendent of schools, as specified, if the county superintendent determines that the district will not meet the standards and criteria for fiscal stability in a specified statutory provision for the subsequent fiscal year due to the impact of additional pupil transfers in that fiscal year. The bill, notwithstanding any other provision regarding interdistrict transfers, would permit a pupil attending a school district of choice or a pupil who received a notice of eligibility to enroll in a school district of choice, including a pupil selected by means of a random selection process conducted on or before June 30, 2009, to attend the school district of choice. (5) Existing law requires each school district that elects to become a school district of choice to keep an accounting of all requests made for alternative attendance, as specified, and to report this information to the Superintendent of Public Instruction. Existing law requires the Superintendent annually to make this information available to the Governor, the Legislature, and the public on or before April 1. This bill would add specified categories to the required accounting of requests for transfers. The bill would require each school district of choice to also report the specified information to the Department of Finance. The bill would delete the requirement that the Superintendent annually make the information provided by school districts available to the Governor, the Legislature, and the public on or before April 1, and instead require the Department of Finance to make the information available upon request to the Legislative Analyst. The bill would require the Legislative Analyst annually to make specified information regarding interdistrict transfers available to the Governor and the appropriate fiscal and policy committees of the Legislature. (6) Commencing August 24, 2007, existing law prohibits the governing board of a school district from electing to become a school district of choice. This bill would delete that prohibition. (7) Existing law makes the provisions governing interdistrict transfers inoperative on July 1, 2009, and repeals them on January 1, 2010. This bill would extend those inoperative and repeal dates to July 1, 2016, and January 1, 2017, respectively. (8) The bill would require the Legislative Analyst to conduct, after consulting with appropriate legislative staff, a comprehensive evaluation of the interdistrict transfer program, make recommendations regarding the extension of the program, incorporate in that evaluation the data annually made available by the Department of Finance, and complete and submit the evaluation and the recommendations to the appropriate education policy committees of the Legislature and the Governor by November 1, 2014. (9) The bill would also make conforming changes.
Who sponsors SB 680?
SB 680 is sponsored by Alquist, Buchanan, Hagman, Huff, and Romero.
What is the current status of SB 680?
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “To Executive” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track SB 680?
Track SB 680 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 680

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 680

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →