S.B. 167 Reintegration for Disciplined Students: transcript

Yeah, we have two amendments online. We're gonna move the second one. Okay. And I'm happy to speak to that. Gimme just one second. I am pulling up my notes on the bill. Um, the purpose of this, uh, bill is, uh, an ongoing effort to try and better secure our campuses, uh, at least our, our school and high school campuses. Um, and try and improve, uh, safety. In talking with CCJJ and talking with, uh, education LEAs trying to figure out the best way to deal with reintegration plans, um, we came up with Senate Bill 1 67, uh, to make it so that there's better communication, uh, require school incidents to be included in the student record sharing. Uh, that then is shared between schools. It reduces the number of days a student record is required to be sent to a new school after a request has been made. It goes from, in the second Amendment, it goes from 30 days down to down to five. Uh, allow a school board to deny enrollment if to a student if they have a safe school violation. And it encourages school administrators to check the data gateway for safe school violation, reintegration, or threat assessment before enrolling a student. As opposed to what is happening now, which is they're enrolling, and then receiving the report within 30 days of that enrollment that may then notify that this student is unsafe to have in a classroom. And those, or have a security plan related to that, uh, to that student. So in working with, uh, CCJJ, which in, uh, and the Juvenile Justice Oversight Committees as well as LEAs, it's recommended that we make these changes. And, uh, with that, Mr. Chairman, I'm happy to yield, uh, the time and answer any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I know Senator Owens has a bill similar to this, that, um, would create a policy that would, um, uh, tell other districts that a student was integrating that had a difficulty in another district. Would this bill help hinder? Would it work in conjunction or you don't see them affecting each other at all?

I don't know Senator Owens's bill yet. I'll go back and review it and assure you that we'll make sure that they work together, that they not be necessarily competitive. And, and if not, I'm happy to take this subject matter from this bill and just put it in Senator Owens. Bill that I don't need to run one more bill. But the, the concept here is, Uh, Just is for security, so it's not really brand of ownership. So, but I'll make sure they work together. Senator.

Thank you. I'm looking at line 11 that says integration plans, requirements for students have committed serious offenses. And that's basically what his bill is, so, yeah.

Well, you've got the mic. Um, amendment two. Sure. Second amendment. I would like to de delete and title and bo body 1 67 reintegration of disciplined students. Wait A sec. Sorry. Just as amended. Oh, As amended. Oh, I'm sorry. Amendment two. We just need to move Amendment two. Oh, I'd like to move amendment two. I'm sorry. It's getting late. Thank

That concludes my presentation.

Pamela Vickery. I am the Chair of the Juvenile Justice Oversight Committee. And we just wanted to say thank you to Senator McKay. He reached out to CCJJ and JJC as he indicated for feedback on this. And a lot of the things that are in this bill, we really feel like will help the juvenile justice oversight going forward. To provide training expertise to the people actually implementing these things. There's a lot of confusion around it, and so we're very appreciative of the collaboration. Thank you.

Susan Edwards. Excuse me. And, uh, I'm with Canyon School District. Um, we just wanted to, uh, like Mrs. Victory, we just wanted to talk about, uh, the collaboration of this bill. Senator McKay reached out not just to juvenile justice, but to LEAs as well, and brought us to the table. And it has been actually one of the better experiences in my time up here, collaborating on a bill to, um, help the whole. And we learned a lot, uh, from the other, uh, experiences and the other expertise in the room, and then hopefully contributed some. But we just wanted to say thank you for allowing us to work on this bill. And this should be a huge help to us, is we have to integrate students, um, back and forth between districts to really encourage us to communicate in a timely manner. And we wanna say thank you.

I would like that to make a motion that we recommend SB 1 67 reintegration of discipline students to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation As amended. As amended. Okay. The motions on the table, uh, to recommend SB 1 67 as amended to the full body of the Senate.

Yeah. Thank you very much. I appreciate the questions and appreciate the interest. Um, this, uh, it was interesting how these issues came about. Uh, and also, you know, working with, and, and talking with Senator Escamilla, uh, she's worked in this space and Senator Cullimore on this issue as well. It's been very valuable and eye-opening to see that, uh, it, it is hard to have this communication, but giving our LEAs the option and the courts the ability to work together and make sure that we're, um, you know, that we're really collaborating to make sure that we're not putting students that are in the classroom at risk, uh, with, uh, with other, uh, with potential offenders. So, uh, with that, um, also make a motion somehow that we get cameras that don't show how much dark hair or gray hair I have. Okay. These cameras seem to highlight the gray as opposed, opposed to the dark. So if we could do something about that, that'd be great. Thank you very much. Thanks.

Uh, I'd like to just add, you should see the bald spot from, just kidding. I don't wanna look. I'm afraid to look. Wave.

Okay. Thank you. Senate Bill 1 67 is a work product of a working group we had over the summer, uh, and we were working on reintegration plans for that purpose. I've decided, uh, to give my work group committee members an opportunity to present the bill. Uh, as soon as they're done signing in, That'd be great. Please make sure you, uh, tell us your name, who you represent, if any, please sign in. Thank you. And, uh, uh, as you're probably well aware, we do have a full committee, so we do wanna hear from you. But, uh, please be brief in your remarks.

Uh, Susan Edwards with Canyon School District.

Good afternoon. Michael Anderson, associate Superintendent for Jordan School District.

Um, first, uh, we want to, to thank the senator for working with us on this and for putting the group together that worked on this. It was, um, probably one of the more positive, uh, experiences and collaborations that I've had in 17 years up here. So I really appreciate, um, this group and the work that they did on this bill. So the, the issue, um, that we are looking at is when we get a student, students have become extremely mobile. Um, in particularly some students that have problems in one district or one school, they become extremely mobile. And while we love to have students come in, sometimes we don't know when those students have had behavior or, um, like in the bill language that was defined last year of forcible felonies. So this helps to clarify both how to identify that and how to transfer and receive their records in a timely manner. So when we get a request, a student wants to enroll before we enroll them, that their record catches up with them so that we will see that. Um, and that's very, very important coming between schools is so that you know who you're enrolling and, you know, if there's any situations. And, uh, the center has assured that that is written in here in two or three different ways. There is now going to be, um, a flag worked out. And we should say that part of the committee, uh, was made up of prosecutors and, um, defense attorneys, juvenile defense attorneys, and our juvenile justice folks. Uh, there was a, a wide breadth of people that worked on this, which was extremely beneficial because we don't necessarily know the legal side, but we know the implementation, implementation side on the school end. And then, um, and, and it was just very useful to hear that there's been some discussion with, um, uh, DCFS and with kids in care and with the, uh, court and the, uh, detention side. So we really appreciate those discussions, and it helped us get to a point to where there will be a notification in the state system that says, Hey, before you integrate this student, you need to look at, you need to look a little deeper. And then we've worked out the transfer of records, both electronically or the old fashioned way, um, and sending their actual file. So that's in here. And then also a timeliness that tells us to be able to get the records sent. Used to be 30 days. And quite honestly, a lot of times it never caught up to the student, um, before they were in school. Now it says you have to get this record transferred in five days, which lets us know what we're working with, um, and, and how to do the right placement. And then it goes over the reintegration, um, team that we'll talk about how to reintegrate a student if there's issues and when, and how you can do an alternate placement in education.

And I think I would just add to Susan that we appreciated the collaborative process. Um, this was, uh, worked on, uh, for many months now, and we appreciated that a lot. The, I also would say that it helps both keep the, the school itself safer, uh, the students in the school safer, but it also affords better due process to those students who, who are involved in serious crimes and, and offenses. And, uh, I think, so it's, it's good for both and we appreciate the good Senator Vickers work with this.

Okay, thank you. I'll, I'll just add, there is a fiscal note on the bill for 237,000. Um, there are a couple components to that. Um, part of that is, um, to cover childcare for, for foster youth. Uh, that were, we actually, I'll say this, we actually think that this is an answer to the bill last year, and not necessarily to language this year, but the Senate has already, uh, you know, a agreed this morning to to fund that, uh, and work on, uh, you know, dealing with, dealing with that childcare need. And so, um, that's that primary purpose. But this bill came to me as a result of a constituent who reached out, who had concerns about a another student that was reintegrated during that 30 day period that a person can enroll, but their records haven't caught up to them. And then after the records caught up to the individual, the school realized a change needed to be made based on the reintegration plan, based on that student's safety. And so, uh, that's why we looked at trying to move this to, you know, that's why we're moving this to five days, uh, to shorten up that timeline. So, um, there's also a couple of amendments the Representative MacPherson has in his name, uh, that will clarify the bill when it is time for that, uh, consideration with that Mr. Chair. That can, that concludes my presentation.

Yes. Thank you. I'm just wondering, we passed House Bill three 10 from Representative Romero. I'm just wondering how this works in conjunction with that bill. Yeah, they'll have coordinating clauses, uh, you know, making sure that the policy, uh, overlaps or in the right place. Uh, you know, this is, uh, we had a, like I said, we had a work group that was working through, uh, these policies and a member of our work group highlighted, uh, Representative Romero that there was, uh, that this issue was out there and she engaged as well. And so, uh, you know, she's been great to work with this policy area as well. And I don't think there will be an issue with both Bills pass.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, thank you for your work on this, on this bill. I think this is great. I I have a question with regard, uh, to, um, records. I've heard of a number of, of cases where schools are not keeping appropriate disciplinary records, um, and in, in fact not documenting stuff. Um, so it's easier as students, um, leave that it doesn't, it doesn't complicate things there, is there, is there any consideration given to whether or not schools are properly documenting, um, disciplinary, um, uh, events and making sure that that is actually available for, for the new school?

Well, we know how important that is, right? So that the records are, are accurate so that we can deal with these safety issues as they're needed. I'm gonna turn over to my school experts for just a moment and give them a chance to shine on the issue. How's that?

Um, I would hope and like to think that that's not the case for serious offenses. I think you have a lot of disciplinary actions and they are, uh, documented locally and they're documented in schools when you get to serious offenses. And, uh, many of the things that are conceived of here, I would like to think that we're pretty darn good at it because we do share and we do, um, discuss. It is noted in here that these, uh, incidents do have to be documented and then it lists out, uh, various types, uh, lists, links to a different section that lists various types that have to be spelled out and transferred. Yeah, I would just add to that, that most LEA policies have requirements for serious offenses that they have to follow. Um, I can't speak for every district, but for now in ours, we do have a, a pretty tight process that we follow whenever a student is involved in a serious offense. And I would, I would add to that, that it has also been conceived of in some of representative Wilcox's school safety bills, um, those type of, uh, documentations as well.

So, Mr. Chair, one more question if I Yeah,

So, um, so the phrase quote, any school safety incidents or safe school violations seems to be a, a little bit broad. Is that broad on, on purpose? Um, we actually had that discussion this morning on whether that needed to be narrowed down

Yeah, I mean, that's a great question. Um, you know, as you look at it, the school safety incidents could be a, a broad term and maybe what we can look at is potentially using that to, uh, you know, relate to the section that, um, uh, that enumerates those that are required. Right? So maybe that's, maybe that's the better way to handle that component. And I Think the intent here is to give flexibility to the LEA. If they want to deny a student and they have, they have grounds for that, this isn't too restrictive, it gives 'em enough flexibility to say, you know what? We're gonna push pause on this until we get some more things figured out. The, yeah, the intention originally on that was, is kind of that or, so the safe school violations is very well determined in code and in law what a safe school violation is. And we're all familiar with that. This was kind of a, this is language or what you're referring to as safe school violation. But we had some discussion this morning that we may need to work on that very first couple of words this say the any school safety incident. Okay. But I think, but I think to your point representative, it seems like this language being this broad, it does allow for a denial of admission for, you know, a larger list of things than would potentially be included in the mandatory reporting. And so maybe it'd be wise to narrow that down to that, to that point, and we can work on amendment for the floor.

Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, my question actually is kind of on the side of this, 'cause I was just curious about your working group. Um, one section that I don't think is in this area of code is when it comes to when these offenses originally occur. We do have mandatory expulsion language and code right now for certain types of offenses, but a lot of cases currently superintendents kind of have a, uh, a discretionary ability to kind of, um, intervene in certain circumstances. Has this at all been considered also in part of your review of this whole process? I'm just curious.

I don't know that the expulsion, this has really been once a student has been determined to have committed an offense and, and it's really dealing more with the transitory nature of these students, um, if that answers your question, But it hasn't necessarily been aimed at the reason that they're transitory. Right? Sure. To your point, this is really just a, making sure that when they are transitory, 'cause a a lot of times expulsion, you know, they may not get to the expulsion level, they may leave. Hmm. Right. And so that's, that's what we were having the problem with is what happens if they just leave and there's not an expulsion. And so how do we close that loop prior to? So that's, that's the purpose of this. And I think we could look at those, those expulsion events as we're looking at line 65.

Yeah. And I think my question comes more on the opposite side. If there is a mandatory expulsion event, essentially in a superintendent decides not to, uh, to effectively, uh, intervene and, and, and prevent that, uh, from happening. I'm just curious if that was looked at as well, but again, it's not part of this bill. I was just curious since you had a working group on it. Yeah, thank

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just had a question maybe to harken back a little bit to the other one in the coordinating clauses, like what exactly is different? 'cause are you the Senate sponsor on that one as well? Yes. Okay. Can you just maybe walk through what exactly is different between the two?

Both. We had this conversation this morning and I don't know yet the answer, if that's fair. Um, uh, can I answer that later on today? Okay. I don't know. In other words, we're, we're trying to preserve the policy at the same time, uh, you know, uh, deal with, uh, with the realities of, of being in a similar policy area and make, making them coordinate. We may abandon and just go to one bill. Uh, right now my bill has a fiscal note, ironically, and Hearst is not, uh, which also is, you know, uh, we, we don't understand how that's in the same policy area, but so we're, we're trying to figure that out. I think you've got an agency that looks at, at one being more likely to be funded than the other. Uh, really we're trying to figure that out. So, uh, those are questions we had before we could get, before we could get them. We couldn't get those answers before we got to committee today.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd move House Amendment six. That motion is in order. Would you like to speak to it just Briefly? This clarifies some of the language. Right now. It has a school district listed in many areas of this bill we're in, indicating that it's an LEA and the relevant LEA. Um, also there's some language starting on line one 20 that talks about when school is not in session. Currently, when you're in session, the definition works just fine, but in the negative aspect, when we're talking about when we're not in session, there's some lack of clarity on how it applies to, um, schools with summer break and certain things. So we made some clarification in the code to just kind of clean that up and make sure that, um, it applies in both cases.

Yep. I'll continue. Uh, motion to pass out favorably SB 1 67 As amended. That motion is an order.

Um, I'm just gonna note, uh, I'm, uh, supportive of this policy. Um, I know this was something that's been the, the working group has been highly engaged. Um, I appreciate the efforts in this space. Um, as a matter of principle, though, I'm concerned we have two bills exactly in the same space doing exactly the same thing, particularly this late in the, in the session. And so, uh, I'm in support of the policy, but I'm gonna be no, because of the, just the conflicting nature of the two bills.

Well, um, uh, I appreciate the committee's time, Mr. Chairman. Uh, I hope that you'll extend to me the trust that we can, with our working group effort help us straighten this out. Uh, I don't know that this necessarily need to a no vote, so to speak, um, but I can assure you that if we're stuck with the exact same policy, with the exact same bill, only one will pass. Thank you. And to the pon to the maker of the motion, I will waive.

Thank you Mr. President. Senate Bill 1 67 is, uh, a bill that, uh, caught a loophole in reintegration program. Um, what we had was a time limit as part of the reintegration program that allowed for students to enroll in school before their safety or security could be identified or verified by a local LEA. So the purpose of Senate Bill 1 67 is to change that timeline and make it so that it is less, and I need to double check present 'cause I think I have an amendment that is online. Um, I'm just checking one second. Sorry. I do have amendment three that I wanted to move. Um, if it's okay, president, I'd like to move Senate bill, uh, amendment three for Senate bill 1 67.

Yes. Thank you. The purpose of amendment three is to change, uh, or is to trade out duplicity, uh, or duplication of notice requirements so that when a, uh, so that when a student, uh, so the courts will notify that a minor has been taken into temporary custody and not notify the school official within five days after the day on which the minor is it says released from currently and now it's taken into, which then notifies the school prior to an absence being charged or any of those other issues. So now with this amendment, we'll move that there and another part of the code requires notice after they're released. And instead of requiring a second notice upon release, we're now just unifying the program with this amendment.

Thank you President. I'm happy to waive the rest of presentation and, and I'm open for questions if there are already.

Thank you President. I'll move that. Uh, Senate bill 1 67 reintegration for dis discipline students as amended. Be read for a third time.

Vote. Senator Vickers Baldry Lewin Brammer Bus Colmore Escamia a Fillmore A Grover Harper Kinins Aye. Ipson Johnson Juab McKay Mikel Milner Musselman Owens pitcher Plum Rebe Sandal Stevenson Stratton stickers. Weiler Wilson Winterton, president Adams aye.

Senate Bill 180 7, having received 24 yay votes two nay votes, three being absent shall be read a third time.

Senator Plumb. Thank you Mr. President. I know we've had a lot of conversations and talk about this bill. There are a couple of amendments that are online about it and I think I wanted to give everyone a little notice it was coming. So I'd like to circle the bill and bring it back this afternoon. I can tell some are ready to go, but some aren't.

Thank you Mr. President. Uh, a couple years ago we passed a, a piece of legislation allowing for stem cell treatment using placental tissue and we required notification to the patient and some other things in the bill. The one thing we left out is the authority for the PR practitioner who is working in a space

Thank you. Uh, in full confession. I forgot this bill was circled up there, so, uh, should have moved it while ago. Uh, here we are. Uh, Senate Bill 1 67 just makes minor changes to a reintegration plan and, uh, makes it so that, um, uh, that when juveniles are reintroduced to the school, that they, there's proper communications between the previous school and the current school and the courts. Um, in that situation, uh, this, you know, improves transparency. It also improves the ability for schools to communicate when a reintegration plan is needed for school safety reasons. Uh, we worked with a lot of stakeholders on this and, um, they all reminded me that the bill was circled this morning. So here we are.

Senator Wilson. Motion to circle sponsors off the Floor. Motion to circle.

Thank you Mr. Speaker. This is, um, just came upon me. So many of you heard this bill already, um, in HB three 10. And so what this bill does is it just reintegrates, um, students into schools and it gives some parameters for those schools. And if you want me to repeat what I repeated last time on the floor, I can, but if not, we can just pass this bill.

Representative Romero for summation. This Is a really good bill and it's needed by our school district. So thank you.

Thank you President. Uh, house made some, uh, mining minor language changes in the, uh, in the bill and, um, supporting it. So with that, I'd like to make a motion to concur with the house amendments.

Okay, Mr. President, um, we've already debate This Bill. Uh,

Let me start again. I thought I had it on but it didn't go. Thank you. Go Ahead. Thank you Mr. President.