SB 959 updates how California treats declines in average daily attendance (ADA) caused by emergencies. It requires local governing boards and county superintendents to establish material ADA losses by affidavit, empowers the State Superintendent to estimate ADA losses for apportionment purposes, and declares decreases during a gubernatorial state of emergency to be material while setting limits on the period that may be credited.
The bill also creates a set of targeted, multi‑year funding adjustments and an ongoing appropriation for districts and charters hit hard by specific past emergencies, preserves limited COVID‑era exceptions tied to staffing and quarantine criteria, and lists certain charter schools eligible for a one‑year reconciliation after the January 2025 emergency. The measure changes funding mechanics and shifts administrative burdens to local officials and the Superintendent — with direct implications for state General Fund budgeting, district cash flow, and post‑disaster recovery planning.
At a Glance
What It Does
Requires affidavits from local governing boards and county superintendents to establish that ADA was materially decreased by enumerated causes, and directs the State Superintendent to estimate the ADA that would have occurred but for the emergency for apportionment purposes. The Superintendent may determine the period of reduced ADA and may provide preliminary allocations.
Who It Affects
Public school districts, county offices of education, and charter schools (including specified charters identified for 2025 relief). The Superintendent’s office and county superintendents will carry new evidentiary and administrative responsibilities.
Why It Matters
SB 959 stabilizes school revenue after disasters by approximating lost ADA and creating targeted allocations, but it also creates discretion and workload for state and local education officials and obligates continuous General Fund appropriations for certain past losses.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB 959 sets a clear evidentiary starting point: when ADA drops materially because of fire, flood, impassable roads, epidemic, earthquake, imminent major safety hazards (as determined by local law enforcement or fire agencies), transportation strikes, certain orders under Section 41422, or snowstorms, the local governing board and the county superintendent must swear to the facts by affidavit. Those affidavits are the mechanism the bill uses to bring local factual findings to the State Superintendent for funding determinations.
The State Superintendent must then estimate the district’s or charter’s ADA for the affected fiscal year “in a manner that credits…approximately the total average daily attendance that would have been credited” absent the emergency. The Superintendent also determines how long the ADA reduction period runs; by default that period should not extend into the next fiscal year unless the district or charter shows that extension is essential to address continued reductions.
The bill authorizes preliminary allocations (up to certain amounts or timing set by the Superintendent) and makes some allocations final at the annual apportionment.SB 959 contains multiple targeted relief formulas tied to specific past emergencies. For districts and charters in which at least 5 percent of residences or facilities were destroyed in certain declared emergencies, the bill prescribes multi‑year allocation schedules and requires the Superintendent to compute and allocate differences in LCFF entitlements for listed fiscal years.
The bill also includes a narrowly drawn COVID‑era rule: from September 1, 2021, to June 30, 2022, quarantined pupils generally do not generate ADA credit unless narrow exceptions apply for individuals with exceptional needs or community day school pupils, and districts can claim credit for staff‑shortage closures only after satisfying specific exhaustion and consultation requirements.Finally, SB 959 names a set of charter schools impacted by the January 2025 state of emergency and directs a reconciliation for the 2025–26 fiscal year so the Superintendent will allocate any difference between the school’s LCFF entitlement in 2025–26 and its first principal apportionment in 2024–25. The statute applies to any ADA occurring during any part of a school year, so partial‑year attendance losses are within its scope.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill requires affidavits from the members of a school district’s or charter school’s governing board and the county superintendent of schools to establish that ADA was materially reduced by a listed cause.
When a gubernatorial state of emergency is declared in a county, any decrease in ADA below the approximate total that would have been credited is deemed material, and the State Superintendent determines the period of reduced ADA — which generally may not be extended into the next fiscal year without a showing of essential need.
For districts where at least 5% of residences or district facilities were destroyed by the November 2018 state of emergency, the Superintendent must allocate the full 2020–21 LCFF difference, then 25% of that difference in 2021–22 and 12.5% in 2022–23; those amounts are continuously appropriated from the General Fund.
Between September 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022, districts generally do not get ADA credit for pupils quarantined for COVID‑19, but may receive credit for closures or material attendance loss from COVID‑related staffing shortages only after affidavits and a showing that all certificated or classified coverage options were exhausted and county/Superintendent consultation occurred.
SB 959 lists specific charter schools affected by the January 2025 emergency and directs the Superintendent to reconcile and allocate for the 2025–26 fiscal year any LCFF entitlement difference versus the 2024–25 first principal apportionment, with allocations made final at the annual apportionment.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Affidavit requirement and enumerated causes for material ADA loss
This section enumerates nine causes (fire, flood, impassable roads, epidemic, earthquake, imminent major safety hazard as determined by local law enforcement/fire, transportation strikes, certain orders under Section 41422, and snowstorm) that can qualify a district’s or charter’s ADA decrease as material. It mandates that the governing board members and the county superintendent establish the fact by affidavit — making a simple documentary threshold the entry point for state review rather than requiring a separate investigatory process.
State of emergency deeming and period determination
When the Governor declares a county state of emergency, the bill treats decreases in ADA below the approximate credited total as material and assigns the State Superintendent discretion to determine the length of the reduced‑ADA period. The default rule bars extending that period into the next fiscal year unless the local entity proves extension is ‘essential’ to alleviate continued reductions, which creates a specific administrative standard for extensions.
Superintendent estimation of ADA and COVID‑era staffing/quarantine rules
The Superintendent must estimate ADA ‘in a manner that credits…approximately the total’ that would have occurred absent the emergency — a forward‑looking, approximation approach rather than a strict retroactive audit. The subdivision also imposes a time‑limited rule for Sept 1, 2021–June 30, 2022: quarantined pupils generally do not generate ADA credit, but narrow exceptions apply (notably for certain pupils with individualized education programs and community day school pupils). It further sets out detailed exhaustion and consultation requirements for districts claiming ADA credit for staffing‑shortage closures.
Phased allocations and continuous appropriation tied to November 2018 emergency
This provision creates a phased funding schedule for school districts and charter schools within districts where at least 5% of residences or facilities were destroyed by the November 2018 emergency: a calculation of the LCFF entitlement difference and specified percentage allocations across 2020–21 through 2022–23, plus continuous appropriation authority from the General Fund. The language also allows district transfers to county offices for pupils served by county programs and instructs finality and timing rules for allocations.
Allocation procedure following the September 2020 emergency
For the September 2020 emergency, the bill requires the Superintendent to compute the LCFF revenue difference between 2021–22 and 2019–20 and allocate that amount where eligible, and to do a similar, conditional allocation for eligible charter schools that meet 175 days of operation and a 75% reporting threshold. It imposes an eligibility notification deadline (November 1, 2021) and allows preliminary allocations through principal apportionments with finalization at the annual apportionment.
Destroyed school reporting and 'necessary small school' status for August 2021 emergency
If a school eligible for certain funding was destroyed in the August 2021 emergency, the district may continue to report attendance and the number of full‑time teachers as if the school still operated for three fiscal years (2021–22 through 2023–24). The statute also treats the destroyed campus as a necessary small school for statutory purposes in 2022–23 and 2023–24 — a practical relief aimed at preserving programmatic and staffing funding lines while reconstruction or relocation occurs.
Targeted reconciliation for specified charter schools impacted by January 2025 emergency
This subdivision identifies nine charter schools within Los Angeles Unified and Pasadena Unified (and one in the City of Pasadena) that were damaged or directly impacted by the January 2025 emergency and directs the Superintendent to calculate and allocate any LCFF entitlement difference for 2025–26 compared to the 2024–25 first principal apportionment. Allocations are finalized at the annual apportionment and the Superintendent may issue preliminary apportionments earlier.
Scope: applies to partial‑year ADA
Simple but significant: the statute covers any ADA that occurs during any part of a school year. That ensures the estimation and allocation mechanisms can be applied to partial‑year closures or intermittent attendance disruptions, not only to full‑year losses.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Education across all five countries.
Explore Education in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- School districts with physical destruction equal to or exceeding 5% of residences or district facilities (November 2018 and September 2020 provisions) — receive phased, computed LCFF restorations and continuity of certain funding streams.
- Named charter schools affected by the January 2025 emergency — receive a directed reconciliation for 2025–26 to make up LCFF differences against the prior year apportionment.
- County offices of education that operate alternative programs and suffer at least a 10% ADA decline — eligible for computed alternative education grant allocations to offset losses.
- Districts with schools destroyed in August 2021 — may continue to report attendance and staffing as if those schools operated, preserving program and staffing funding and small‑school status for specified years.
- Students with individualized education programs and community day school pupils during the COVID window — retained as a narrow exception to the general rule denying ADA credit for quarantined pupils, preserving funding tied to their placements.
Who Bears the Cost
- California General Fund and budget planners — continuous appropriations and retroactive allocations for multiple disasters create known and potential fiscal liabilities that must be absorbed in state budgeting.
- State Superintendent’s office — responsible for discretionary ADA estimation, period determinations, preliminary and final allocations, and consultation duties tied to staffing‑shortage claims.
- Local governing boards and county superintendents — required to prepare and submit affidavits and, in COVID staffing cases, to document exhaustion of staffing options and consultation steps, increasing administrative workload.
- Charter schools and districts that fail narrow eligibility tests (e.g., 175‑day operations or 75% reporting) — excluded from specific relief streams and thus directly bear any uncompensated ADA loss.
- Other districts and fiscal stakeholders — may face indirect costs if targeted appropriations change statewide funding priorities or pressure the state to prioritize disaster relief over other budget items.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill trades immediate, locally verified financial relief for schools hit by emergencies against the need for predictable, consistent, and auditable statewide fiscal policy — concentrating discretion with the State Superintendent and relying on local affidavits simplifies delivery but increases the risk of inconsistent application, fiscal exposure, and a patchwork of event‑specific remedies.
SB 959 privileges local sworn statements and executive discretion as the core drivers of post‑disaster funding relief. That simplifies front‑end access to relief but raises questions about uniformity and auditability: affidavits vary in content and probative value across counties, and the Superintendent’s instruction to estimate ADA “approximately” leaves a large gap for interpretation and inconsistent outcomes.
The statute creates multiple, event‑specific formulas and carve‑outs (2017, 2018, 2020, 2021, 2025) that solve discrete past problems but also complicate the body of law with ad hoc remedies and different eligibility triggers and thresholds.
The bill’s fiscal mechanics also create trade‑offs. Continuous appropriation language removes political friction to get money out the door, but it reduces the Legislature’s annual control over those dollars and adds certainty to state liabilities.
Narrow COVID exceptions and stringent exhaustion/consultation requirements for staffing‑shortage credit protect fiscal integrity, yet they risk leaving districts without relief where staffing crises were sudden or where documentation is thin. Finally, naming specific charter schools for 2025 reconciliation is an administratively efficient fix for those entities but sets a precedent for targeted, case‑by‑case statutory relief that can lead to perceived inequities among similarly affected schools.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.