Julian D. Crocker
County Superintendent of Schools

GOVERNOR'S ACTION ON TWO EDUCATION BILLS

The final act of a legislative session takes place in the Governor's office. This is when the Governor reviews the hundreds of bills that have been passed by the state legislature and are awaiting the Governor's signature or veto. For the 2011 legislative session, October 9th was the last day for the Governor to either sign or veto bills. I will review two bills presented to the Governor that impact schools in our county and the action he took on each one.

SB 461(Blakeslee). Governor Brown signed this bill into law that will take effect on January 1, 2012. The bill was authored by Senator Sam Blakeslee, who represents our county. This bill changes the GED (General Education Diploma) testing age from age 18 to 17 for students in drop out prevention programs in the state and was introduced primarily to address a problem that existed at our local Grizzly Youth Academy. The Academy is a drop out prevention program that combines a strong educational element with a residential aspect that focuses on leadership skills and building self-respect. Some Grizzly graduates successfully complete the Academy but still lack sufficient credits to earn a high school diploma. One option for these students is to take the GED exam and, if successful, receive their diploma. However, most of the Grizzly students complete the Academy several months prior to their 18th birthday and often return to a home environment that is not supportive of education, thus losing the momentum gained at the Academy.

With this new law, a student can take the GED exam immediately after completing the Academy and that allows that student to take their next educational or career step. I appreciate Senator's Blakeslee's effort in getting this bill through the legislature and eventually securing the Governor's signature. When the Governor was Mayor of Oakland, he had personal experience with the Oakland Military Institute, a program similar to Grizzly, and he knows its value.

AB 165 (Lara). Governor Brown vetoed this bill that addressed the issue of charging fees to students attending the state's public schools. The California State Constitution is very clear that the state's public schools are to be free. Subsequent court rulings have reinforced this requirement including participation in extra-curricular activities such as marching band or athletics. The state supreme court has held that most extra-curricular activities are so closely connected with the educational program of a school that they are also covered by the prohibition against fees.

The Governor felt that the current guidelines are clear and this bill imposed unnecessary requirements on school districts in a time of restricted resources without more evidence of widespread abuse.

Are there any fees that are legal for schools to charge? Yes, there are a few charges that schools can assess. These include fees for riding district provided bus transportation from home to school and return. Students pay for food purchased as part of the school lunch or breakfast program. There are provisions for reduced price meals for students living in families below certain income levels set by the federal government. Fees can also be charged for lost or damaged textbooks or for materials that goes into projects (i.e. art or design) that students actually take home.

However, with the substantial reduction in state funding for local schools over the past three years, many school districts have attempted to raise local revenue by expanding the areas for charging fees to students. There have been examples of schools in the state suggesting a "contribution" for participation in extracurricular activities and fees for the use of workbooks, science lab materials or physical education uniforms. In all of these examples, schools have made it clear that the contribution is not a requirement for participation or enrollment. Often, particularly with athletics, there are scholarships provided for students who cannot afford the contribution.

The expansion of the use of fees has raised the concern of violating the free public school provision in the State Constitution. Once a district starts to expand its use of student fees to supplement its revenue, it can expect legal challenges from those who want to keep a clear separation between what has been traditionally allowed and what is often being proposed.