California 2015-2016 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate

SB 322 — Charter schools: pupils: suspension and expulsion: admissions.

Last action — Motion to reconsider made by Assembly Member O‘Donnell.

Track this bill free

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

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

This bill died with 2015-2016 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis.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) The Charter Schools Act of 1992 (the act) permits teachers and parents to petition the governing board of a school district to approve a charter school to operate independently from the existing school district structure as a method of accomplishing, among other things, improved pupil learning. The act prohibits the governing board of a school district from denying a petition for the establishment of a charter school unless the governing board of the school district finds that the petition does not contain specified information, including, among other information, the procedures by which pupils can be suspended or expelled. Existing law enumerates the acts for which a pupil may be suspended or expelled from a traditional public school and sets forth procedures a school district is required to follow in suspending or expelling a pupil. Existing law requires the governing board of a school district to refer a pupil who has been expelled from school to a program of study that meets certain conditions, including that the program not be provided at a comprehensive middle, junior, or senior high school, or at any elementary school. This bill would require the charter school suspension and expulsion procedures described in the charter petition to meet certain minimum requirements, including, among other things, meeting the constitutional due process requirement of providing notice and an opportunity to be heard, various procedural requirements, identifying a list of acts for which a pupil enrolled in the charter school may be suspended or expelled, and identifying the maximum length of time for which a pupil may be suspended. The bill also would require a charter school to ensure no loss of instructional days for a pupil pending final determination of the expulsion hearing by providing the pupil access to educational programming, and, upon a final determination to expel a pupil, to ensure the pupil is provided access to educational programing until the charter school has confirmed the pupil has been provided a suitable educational placement. To the extent this bill would impose additional duties on charter schools, it would constitute a state-mandated local program. The bill also would authorize a pupil to appeal his or her expulsion to the applicable county board of education. To the extent this would impose additional duties on county board of education officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) The act requires, if the number of pupils who wish to attend a charter school exceeds its capacity, preference to be extended to pupils currently attending the charter school and to pupils who reside in the school district, and authorizes other preferences as permitted by the chartering authority on an individual school basis and only if consistent with the law. This bill would instead authorize other preferences permitted by the chartering authority on an individual charter school basis only if certain conditions are met, including, among other conditions, that each type of preference is approved by the charter school at a public hearing, and that no preference requires mandatory parental volunteer hours as criterion for admission or continued enrollment. The bill also would authorize a charter school to encourage parental involvement, but would require the charter school to notify the parents and guardians of applicant pupils and currently enrolled pupils that parental involvement is not a requirement for acceptance to, or continued enrollment at, the charter school. (3) This bill would state the intent of the Legislature in enacting its provisions, and would make other nonsubstantive changes. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 47605 of the Education Code proposed by SB 739 that would become operative if this bill and SB 739 are both enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) 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 Text

Action History

  1. Motion to reconsider made by Assembly Member O‘Donnell.

  2. Read third time. Refused passage. (Ayes 31. Noes 34. Page 6492.)

  3. Ordered to third reading.

  4. Read third time and amended.

  5. Read second time. Ordered to third reading.

  6. Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.

  7. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 14. Noes 6.) (August 11).

  8. June 29 set for second hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  9. August 19 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.

  10. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  11. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (July 15). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  12. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on ED.

  13. July 1 hearing postponed by committee.

  14. Referred to Com. on ED.

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

  16. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 24. Noes 15. Page 1260.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  17. Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.

  18. From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 5. Noes 2. Page 1151.) (May 28).

  19. Set for hearing May 28.

  20. May 18 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  21. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  22. Set for hearing May 18.

  23. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  24. From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 2. Page 722.) (April 22).

  25. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on ED.

  26. Set for hearing April 22.

  27. Referred to Com. on ED.

  28. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 26.

  29. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

  • Leno · Primary

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 12 voted No

Sponsors (1)

  • Leno

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"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

SB 322 Leno Senate Third Reading By O'DONNELL

Failed 31 Yea · 34 Nay · 15 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 2828014
Democratic 3101
Republican 0500
Total 3134015
% of votes cast 39%43%0%19%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Achadjian — Nay
Alejo — Yea
Baker — Nay
Bloom — Not Voting
Brough — Nay
Brown — Not Voting
Kim — Nay
Linder — Nay
Maienschein — Nay
Mathis — Nay
Nazarian — Not Voting
Rendon — Yea
Santiago — Not Voting
Wagner — Nay
Weber — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Cooper — Not Voting
Gray — Not Voting
Burke — Not Voting
Daly — Not Voting
Salas — Yea
Frazier — Yea
Lopez — Yea
Gatto — Nay
Atkins — Yea
Gordon — Yea
Harper — Nay
Campos — Nay
Holden — Not Voting
Jones-Sawyer — Yea
Chang — Nay
Levine — Nay
Bonilla — Not Voting
Low — Yea
Mayes — Nay
McCarty — Yea
Bigelow — Nay
Chau — Yea
Chiu — Yea
Chu — Yea
Chávez — Nay
Cooley — Not Voting
Dababneh — Not Voting
Dodd — Yea
Medina — Yea
Melendez — Nay
Mullin — Yea
O'Donnell — Yea
Obernolte — Nay
Olsen — Nay
Quirk — Yea
Ridley-Thomas — Nay
Rodriguez — Yea
Steinorth — Nay
Thurmond — Yea
Ting — Yea
Waldron — Nay
Wilk — Nay
Williams — Nay
Wood — Yea
Gomez — Not Voting
Hadley — Nay
Beth Gaines — Nay
Cristina Garcia — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Not Voting
Jim Patterson — Nay
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Mark Stone — Yea
Roger Hernández — Yea
Travis Allen — Nay
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Nay
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Not Voting
Dahle, Megan Republican Nay
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Grove, Shannon Republican Nay
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay
Lackey, Tom Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended.

Passed 14 Yea · 6 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 12400
Democratic 2000
Republican 0200
Total 14600
% of votes cast 70%30%0%0%
How each member voted (20)
Member Party Vote
Bigelow — Nay
Bloom — Yea
Eggman — Yea
Chang — Nay
Bonilla — Yea
Daly — Yea
Holden — Yea
McCarty — Yea
Obernolte — Nay
Quirk — Yea
Santiago — Yea
Wagner — Nay
Weber — Yea
Wood — Yea
Eduardo Garcia — Yea
Lorena Gonzalez — Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Gallagher, James Republican Nay
Jones, Brian W. Republican Nay

Official roll call →

3rd Reading

Passed 24 Yea · 15 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 221401
Democratic 2100
Total 241501
% of votes cast 60%38%0%3%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Nay
Block — Yea
Hancock — Yea
Hill — Yea
Leno — Yea
Liu — Yea
Pan — Yea
Pavley — Yea
Galgiani — Not Voting
Glazer — Nay
Fuller — Nay
Huff — Nay
Morrell — Nay
Vidak — Nay
Hall — Yea
Hernandez — Yea
Hertzberg — Yea
Cannella — Nay
Allen — Yea
Mitchell — Yea
De León — Yea
Hueso — Yea
Runner — Nay
Anderson — Nay
Beall — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Mendoza — Yea
Monning — Yea
Moorlach — Nay
Nielsen — Nay
Roth — Yea
Wieckowski — Yea
Wolk — Yea
Beth Gaines — Nay
Bill Berryhill — Nay
Mark Stone — Nay
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Nay

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended

Passed 5 Yea · 2 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 5200
Total 5200
% of votes cast 71%29%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Bates — Nay
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Leyva — Yea
Nielsen — Nay
Beall — Yea
Mendoza — Yea

Official roll call →

Placed on suspense file

Passed 7 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Unaffiliated 7000
Total 7000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (7)
Member Party Vote
Leyva — Yea
Nielsen — Yea
Hill — Yea
Lara — Yea
Bates — Yea
Beall — Yea
Mendoza — 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 322 do?
(1) The Charter Schools Act of 1992 (the act) permits teachers and parents to petition the governing board of a school district to approve a charter school to operate independently from the existing school district structure as a method of accomplishing, among other things, improved pupil learning. The act prohibits the governing board of a school district from denying a petition for the establishment of a charter school unless the governing board of the school district finds that the petition does not contain specified information, including, among other information, the procedures by which pupils can be suspended or expelled. Existing law enumerates the acts for which a pupil may be suspended or expelled from a traditional public school and sets forth procedures a school district is required to follow in suspending or expelling a pupil. Existing law requires the governing board of a school district to refer a pupil who has been expelled from school to a program of study that meets certain conditions, including that the program not be provided at a comprehensive middle, junior, or senior high school, or at any elementary school. This bill would require the charter school suspension and expulsion procedures described in the charter petition to meet certain minimum requirements, including, among other things, meeting the constitutional due process requirement of providing notice and an opportunity to be heard, various procedural requirements, identifying a list of acts for which a pupil enrolled in the charter school may be suspended or expelled, and identifying the maximum length of time for which a pupil may be suspended. The bill also would require a charter school to ensure no loss of instructional days for a pupil pending final determination of the expulsion hearing by providing the pupil access to educational programming, and, upon a final determination to expel a pupil, to ensure the pupil is provided access to educational programing until the charter school has confirmed the pupil has been provided a suitable educational placement. To the extent this bill would impose additional duties on charter schools, it would constitute a state-mandated local program. The bill also would authorize a pupil to appeal his or her expulsion to the applicable county board of education. To the extent this would impose additional duties on county board of education officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) The act requires, if the number of pupils who wish to attend a charter school exceeds its capacity, preference to be extended to pupils currently attending the charter school and to pupils who reside in the school district, and authorizes other preferences as permitted by the chartering authority on an individual school basis and only if consistent with the law. This bill would instead authorize other preferences permitted by the chartering authority on an individual charter school basis only if certain conditions are met, including, among other conditions, that each type of preference is approved by the charter school at a public hearing, and that no preference requires mandatory parental volunteer hours as criterion for admission or continued enrollment. The bill also would authorize a charter school to encourage parental involvement, but would require the charter school to notify the parents and guardians of applicant pupils and currently enrolled pupils that parental involvement is not a requirement for acceptance to, or continued enrollment at, the charter school. (3) This bill would state the intent of the Legislature in enacting its provisions, and would make other nonsubstantive changes. (4) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 47605 of the Education Code proposed by SB 739 that would become operative if this bill and SB 739 are both enacted and this bill is enacted last. (5) 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.
Who sponsors SB 322?
SB 322 is sponsored by Leno.
What is the current status of SB 322?
This bill died with 2015-2016 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” 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 322?
Track SB 322 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 322

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 322

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

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

Track this bill →