SCHOOL SUSPENSION/EXPULSION H.B. 5618 (H-6)-5621 (H-1) & 5693-5695:
SUMMARY OF HOUSE-PASSED BILL
IN COMMITTEE
House Bill 5618 (Substitute H-6 as passed by the House)
House Bill 5619 (Substitute H-1 as passed by the House)
House Bill 5620 (Substitute H-1 as passed by the House)
House Bill 5621 (Substitute H-1 as passed by the House)
House Bills 5693, 5694, and 5695 (as passed by the House)
Sponsor: Representative Andy Schor (H.B. 5618)
Representative Al Pscholka (H.B. 5619)
Representative Adam F. Zemke (H.B. 5620)
Representative Lisa Posthumus Lyons (H.B. 5621)
Representative Martin Howrylak (H.B. 5693)
Representative David LaGrand (H.B. 5694)
Representative Peter J. Lucido (H.B. 5695)
CONTENT
House Bill 5618 (H-6) would amend the Revised School Code to require school officials, before suspending or expelling a student, to consider a number of situation-specific factors, including whether a lesser intervention or restorative practices would address the pupil's violation or behavior.
House Bills 5693, 5694, and 5695 would amend sections of the Code that allow or require suspension or expulsion under certain circumstances to provide that they would apply subject to the requirements proposed by House Bill 5618 (H-6). Additionally, House Bill 5693 would revise an exemption to a mandatory expulsion requirement in the case of a pupil who possesses a weapon, and create a rebuttable presumption that expulsion was not justified if certain conditions were met.
House Bill 5619 (H-1) would amend the Code to do the following:
-- Require the board of a school district or intermediate school district or the board of directors of a public school academy (PSA) to consider using restorative practices (i.e., practices that emphasize repairing the harm caused by a pupil's misconduct) as an alternative or in addition to suspension or expulsion.
-- Provide that restorative practices could include conferences involving the victim, the offender, and others; and allow the attendees to establish consequences to repair the harm.
-- Specify that restorative practices should be the first consideration to remediate pupil offenses.
House Bill 5620 (H-1) would amend the Code to include provisions for considering the use of restorative practices in the correction of bullying behavior, among the elements that a school board, intermediate school board, or PSA board of directors is encouraged to include in its anti-bullying policy.
House Bill 5621 (H-1) would amend the Code to require a school board, intermediate school board, or PSA board of directors to report to the appropriate law enforcement agencies and prosecutors all information required to be reported to those officials under the Statewide School Safety Information Policy.
House Bill 5618 (H-6) is tie-barred to House Bills 5693, 5694, and 5695, and those bills are tie-barred to House Bill 5618. House Bill 5620 (H-1) is tie-barred to House Bill 5619.
House Bills 5618 (H-6), 5693, 5619 (H-1), and 5621 (H-1) are described below in further detail.
House Bill 5618 (H-6)
Under Section 1310 of the Revised School Code, if a pupil enrolled in grade 6 or above commits a physical assault at school against another pupil and the assault is reported to the school board, school district superintendent, or building principal, the school board or its designee must suspend or expel the pupil from the school district for up to 180 days.
Under Section 1311, the school board, or the district superintendent, a school building principal, or another school district official designated by the school board, may authorize or order the suspension or expulsion from school of a pupil guilty of a misdemeanor or persistent disobedience if, in the judgment of the school board or its designee, as applicable, the school's interest is served by the authorization or order. If a pupil possesses a dangerous weapon in a weapon-free school zone, or commits arson or criminal sexual conduct (CSC) in a school building or on school grounds, the school board or its designee must expel the pupil from the school district permanently. A school board, however, is not required to expel a pupil for possessing a weapon under certain circumstances (which House Bill 5693 would amend). An individual expelled for possession of a dangerous weapon, arson, or CSC is expelled from all public schools in Michigan, except for an alternative education program or strict discipline academy.
Under Section 1311a, if a pupil enrolled in grade 6 or above commits a physical assault at school against a person employed by or engaged as a volunteer or contractor by the school board and the assault is reported to the board, superintendent, or principal, the pupil must be expelled from the school district permanently. If a pupil enrolled in grade 6 or above commits a verbal assault at school against an employee, volunteer, or contractor and the assault is reported, or makes a bomb threat or similar threat directed at a school building, other school property, or school-related event, the pupil must be suspended or expelled for a period of time as determined in the discretion of the school board or its designee. An individual expelled under these provisions is expelled from all public schools in Michigan, except for an alternative education program or strict discipline academy.
(In the case of permanent expulsion, the Code prescribes a process for petitioning the school board for reinstatement.)
The bill would add Section 1310d to provide that, before suspending or expelling a pupil under Section 1310, 1311, or 1311a, the board of a school district or intermediate school district or board of directors of a PSA, or a superintendent, school principal, or other designee would have to consider each of the following factors:
-- The pupil's age and disciplinary history.
-- Whether the pupil was a student with a disability.
-- The seriousness of the violation or behavior committed by the pupil.
-- Whether the violation or behavior threatened the safety of any pupil or staff member.
-- Whether restorative practices would be used to address the violation or behavior.
-- Whether a lesser intervention properly would address the violation or behavior.
"Expel" would mean to exclude a pupil from school for disciplinary reasons for a period of at least 60 school days. "Suspend" would mean to exclude a pupil from school for disciplinary reasons for a period of fewer than 60 school days.
The bill provides that Section 1310d would apply in order to give the school board, intermediate school board, or PSA board of directors, or its designee, discretion over whether to suspend or expel a pupil as prescribed in the Code.
Section 1310d would not apply to a pupil being expelled for possessing a firearm in a weapon-free school zone. Otherwise, consideration of the factors listed in the bill would be mandatory before a student was suspended or expelled. The method used for considering the factors would be at the sole discretion of the board or its designee.
House Bill 5693
Under Section 1311, a school board, intermediate school board, or PSA board of directors is not required to expel a pupil for possessing a weapon, as otherwise required by the section, if the pupil establishes in a clear and convincing manner at least one of the following:
-- He or she did not possess the object or instrument for use as a weapon, or for direct or indirect delivery to another person for use as a weapon.
-- He or she did not knowingly possess the weapon.
-- He or she did not know or have reason to know that the object or instrument constituted a dangerous weapon.
-- He or she possessed the weapon at the suggestion, request, or direction of, or with the express permission of, school or police authorities.
Under the bill, in order for this exemption to apply, the board would have to determine in writing that the expulsion was not justified due to unique circumstances in that particular case. The bill would create a rebuttable presumption that expulsion was not justified if the pupil either established that he or she met one of the existing criteria for exemption, or had no history of suspension or expulsion.
House Bill 5619 (H-1)
The bill would require a school board, intermediate school board, or PSA board of directors, or its designee, to consider using restorative practices as an alternative or in addition to suspension or expulsion under the Code. If a board or its designee suspended or expelled a student, the board or designee would have to consider using restorative practices in addition to suspension or expulsion. If a board or its designee decided not to suspend or expel a pupil for a disciplinary issue, the board or designee would have to consider using restorative practices to address the issue.
"Restorative practices" would mean practices that emphasize repairing the harm to the victim and the school community caused by the pupil's misconduct.
Restorative practices could include
victim-offender conferences that were initiated by the victim; that were
approved by the victim's parent or legal guardian or, if the victim were at
least 15 years old, by the victim; that were attended voluntarily by the
victim, a victim advocate, the offender, school community members, and
supporters of the victim and the offender; and that provided an opportunity for
the offender to accept responsibility for the harm caused to those affected by
the misconduct and to participate in setting consequences to repair the harm.
The attendees, known as a restorative practices team, could require the pupil
to do one or more of the following: apologize; participate in community
service; restoration, or counseling; or pay restitution. The selected
consequences would have to be
incorporated into an agreement that set time limits for completion and was signed by all participants.
The bill provides that restorative practices should be the first consideration to remediate offenses such as interpersonal conflicts, bullying, verbal and physical conflicts, theft, damage to property, class disruption, and harassment and cyberbullying.
House Bill 5621 (H-1)
The Code requires each school board, intermediate school board, or PSA board of directors to comply with a Statewide School Safety Information Policy adopted, published, and distributed by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, the Attorney General, and the Director of the Department of State Police. The Policy identifies the types of incidents occurring at school that must be reported to law enforcement agencies and establishes procedures to be followed when such an incident occurs at school.
The bill would require a board or its designee to report to the appropriate State or local law enforcement agencies and prosecutors all information required to be reported to those officials under the Policy.
Proposed MCL 380.1310d (H.B. 5618) Legislative Analyst: Julie Cassidy
Proposed MCL 380.1310c (H.B. 5619)
MCL 380.1310b (H.B. 5620)
MCL 380.1308 (H.B. 5621)
MCL 380.1311 (H.B. 5693)
MCL 380.1310 (H.B. 5694)
MCL 380.1311a (H.B. 5695)
FISCAL IMPACT
The bills would have no fiscal impact on the State or local school districts. The bills would not require any changes that would add costs to the State or the process for determining discipline at the school level. Though the bills would allow more flexibility for schools to determine discipline, schools already are required to fulfill reporting requirements and have costs associated with determining and appealing discipline decisions. For these reasons, it is unlikely that the bills would have any fiscal impact on the State or local school districts.
This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.