California 2017-2018 Regular Session Status: In Committee 1 D cosponsors

AB 950 — Charter schools.

Last action — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

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

This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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

Existing law, the Charter Schools Act of 1992, authorizes a charter school petitioner, if the governing board of a school district denies a petition for the establishment of a charter school, to submit the petition to the county board of education, and, if the county board of education denies the petition, to then submit the petition to the State Board of Education. A charter school that is granted its charter through an appeal to the state board is required to submit a petition for renewal of the charter to the governing board of the school district that initially denied the charter. This bill would instead authorize the petitioner to submit a petition for renewal to either the governing board of the school district that initially denied the charter or directly to the state board. Existing law authorizes a county board of education to approve a petition for a countywide charter if the county board of education finds, among other things, that the pupil population cannot be served as well by a charter school that operates in only one school district and only if it is reasonably satisfied that the charter school has reasonable justification for why the charter school could not be established by petition to a school district. This bill would delete those requirements. The bill would require a charter school petition to demonstrate that the charter school will provide a high-quality education program and that it will seek to share best and promising practices of the charter school with other traditional and charter public schools that have low academic performance. The bill would authorize a charter school petitioner, if a county board of education denies or revokes a petition, to submit the petition directly to the state board. To the extent the bill imposes additional duties on county boards of education, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the state board, as a condition of approving a petition for the operation of a charter school, to find that the charter school will provide instructional services of statewide benefit that cannot be provided by the operation of the charter school in only one school district or county. The bill would delete the requirement that the statewide benefit cannot be provided by a charter school operating in only one school district or county and would instead require, as part of the determination of the statewide benefit, to ensure that the charter school has described the manner in which the charter school will seek to share best and promising practices with other traditional and charter public schools with low academic performance, and would authorize the state board to establish other criteria or conditions to define a statewide benefit. 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 Text

What changed in the latest version

1 added · 1 removed

1 line(s) added, 1 removed.

→
Previous
Latest
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill TextBill Information PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites | Version:
Bill Number Bill Keyword Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites Bill Information >> Bill Search >> Text Bill Text PDF2 Bill PDF |Add To My Favorites | Version:
⬇ Download PDF
View plain text versions (2)

Action History

  1. From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.

  2. Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.

  3. Coauthors revised.

  4. In committee: Held under submission.

  5. In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.

  6. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 4. Noes 1.) (April 26). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  7. Referred to Com. on ED.

  8. From printer. May be heard in committee March 19.

  9. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (1)

  • Weber

Not signed on (120)

120 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 120 →

"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

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 AB 950 do?
Existing law, the Charter Schools Act of 1992, authorizes a charter school petitioner, if the governing board of a school district denies a petition for the establishment of a charter school, to submit the petition to the county board of education, and, if the county board of education denies the petition, to then submit the petition to the State Board of Education. A charter school that is granted its charter through an appeal to the state board is required to submit a petition for renewal of the charter to the governing board of the school district that initially denied the charter. This bill would instead authorize the petitioner to submit a petition for renewal to either the governing board of the school district that initially denied the charter or directly to the state board. Existing law authorizes a county board of education to approve a petition for a countywide charter if the county board of education finds, among other things, that the pupil population cannot be served as well by a charter school that operates in only one school district and only if it is reasonably satisfied that the charter school has reasonable justification for why the charter school could not be established by petition to a school district. This bill would delete those requirements. The bill would require a charter school petition to demonstrate that the charter school will provide a high-quality education program and that it will seek to share best and promising practices of the charter school with other traditional and charter public schools that have low academic performance. The bill would authorize a charter school petitioner, if a county board of education denies or revokes a petition, to submit the petition directly to the state board. To the extent the bill imposes additional duties on county boards of education, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law requires the state board, as a condition of approving a petition for the operation of a charter school, to find that the charter school will provide instructional services of statewide benefit that cannot be provided by the operation of the charter school in only one school district or county. The bill would delete the requirement that the statewide benefit cannot be provided by a charter school operating in only one school district or county and would instead require, as part of the determination of the statewide benefit, to ensure that the charter school has described the manner in which the charter school will seek to share best and promising practices with other traditional and charter public schools with low academic performance, and would authorize the state board to establish other criteria or conditions to define a statewide benefit. 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.
Who sponsors AB 950?
AB 950 is sponsored by Weber and Rubio, Blanca E. (Democratic).
What is the current status of AB 950?
This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” 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 AB 950?
Track AB 950 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 950

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 AB 950

Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →