School districts of choice.
Summary
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. Existing law authorizes a school district of choice to reject the transfer of a pupil if the transfer of that pupil would require the 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, and an English learner. Existing law requires a school district of choice to give priority for attendance to siblings of children already in attendance in that district and authorizes the district to give priority for attendance to children of military personnel. Existing law authorizes a school district of residence to limit the number of pupils transferring out each year, as specified. This bill would require a school district of choice to give priority to English learners, pupils who are individuals with exceptional needs, and pupils who are eligible for free and reduced price meals. The bill would make a legislative finding and declaration related to the fiscal responsibilities of the county superintendent of schools in implementing the limitation on the transfers out of a school district of residence. The bill would require a school district of choice to ensure that a pupil who transfers into the district is enrolled in a school with a higher Academic Performance Index score than the school in which the pupil was previously enrolled.
Bill status
failed
3 of 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2010
Committee Review
Jun 2010
Assembly Passage
Jun 2010
Senate Passage
Governor
Introduced Feb 19, 2010
Last action Nov 30, 2010
Floor votes · Assembly Jun 1, 2010
How they voted
33–26
Passed · 2 other
Total votes 61
Jun 1, 2010
D
Democratic37
89% Yea
R
Republican24
100% Nay
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
18
Key actions
4
Committee
6
Amendments
4
Jun 10, 2010
Committee
Referred to Com. on ED.
upper
Jun 1, 2010
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (33-26-2)
assembly
May 11, 2010
Lower · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
lower
May 10, 2010
Introduced
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 6. Noes 3.) (May 5).
lower
Apr 13, 2010
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Apr 12, 2010
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on ED. Read second time and amended.
lower
Apr 7, 2010
Lower · Passed
In committee: Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
lower
Mar 15, 2010
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Mar 11, 2010
Introduced
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on ED. Read second time and amended.
lower
Mar 11, 2010
Committee
Referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Feb 21, 2010
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 23.
lower
Feb 19, 2010
Introduced
Introduced. To print.
lower
1 primary · 6 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 2370
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 2370. 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