On Oct. 1, Gov. Gavin Newsom announced that students ages 12-18 participating in in-person learning will be required to get vaccinated against COVID-19. The Governor, utilizing the emergency regulation process provided the administration in the 2015 school vaccination bill, Senate Bill 277 (Pan, D-Sacramento), noted that as vaccines receive full approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for additional age groups, those students will be required to be vaccinated too.

Officials expect the COVID vaccine to get full approval for youth ages 12-15 by January. Once that happens, the vaccination will be added to the school vaccine requirement list for grades 7-12 effective July 1, 2022, affecting the 2022–23 school year. If the vaccine is approved before January, students will be required to get the vaccine sooner, Newsom added. A state vaccination requirement for ages 5-11 will not be made until there is full FDA approval for the group and after the vaccine goes through the administrative rulemaking process.

“The California Schools Boards Association welcomes the state’s decision to use its longstanding legal authority to add COVID-19 inoculations to the vaccine requirements. CSBA endorses approaches to COVID-19 mitigation that are supported by data and science and that maximize the safety of students and staff — principles that are reflected in the new mandate,” said CSBA President Dr. Susan Heredia. “The patchwork of different methods for COVID-19 mitigation at the local level was not the most effective approach for this particular crisis. California requires a more comprehensive strategy that frees local school boards from the need to act as de facto public health officials. Those decisions are better left to people at the state level who are designated to perform public health functions. In addition, a statewide standard for student vaccinations may help defuse some of the unlawful behavior directed at school board trustees by those who oppose local mandates.”

Both medical and personal belief exemptions, which includes religious beliefs, will be available. Though the personal belief exemption was removed with the passage of SB 277, there was a caveat that when a new vaccine was added to the list of those required and not adopted through the Legislature, there may be an exemption for personal and religious beliefs.

The Governor and his office indicated their support for local educational agencies and public health departments that may choose to go further than the statewide mandate, like in Los Angeles Unified School District where 12- to 15-year-old students are being required to be vaccinated while the vaccine is approved for emergency use.

Weeks earlier on Sept. 16, Gov. Newsom signed Assembly Bill 361, amending the Brown Act to provide boards the ability to hold remote meetings during a proclaimed state of emergency without following the Brown Act’s teleconferencing rules. AB 361 sunsets on Jan. 1, 2024.

Under AB 361, boards do not have to follow the traditional Brown Act teleconferencing rules if they find that there is a proclaimed state of emergency and state or local officials have imposed or recommended social distancing or meeting in person would present imminent health or safety risks for attendees due to the emergency. If a board chooses to use the option provided in AB 361, it must make findings every 30 days that the board has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of emergency and either the state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the members to meet safely in person or state or local officials continue to impose or recommend measures to promote social distancing.

If boards choose to use the remote meeting option provided in AB 361, they must also adhere to the following requirements:

• Give notice of meetings and post agendas as otherwise required by the Brown Act;
• Provide members of the public virtual access to the meeting and an opportunity to address the board directly through that virtual access;
• Provide notice of the means by which members of the public may access the meeting virtually in any instance in which they give notice of the time for the teleconferenced meeting or post the agenda for the teleconferenced meeting;
• Ensure the agenda identifies and includes an opportunity for all persons to attend the teleconference meeting by a call-in option or internet-based service option;
• Provide an opportunity for the public to address the board in real-time; boards may not require members of the public to submit comments in advance;
• Stop the meeting if there is a disruption to the call-in option or internet-based service option that results in members of the public being unable to access the meeting. Boards may not take action on any agenda items during this disruption of access; and
• Refrain from closing a timed public comment period before the time for the comment period has elapsed. If boards do not use timed public comment periods, they must allow a reasonable time per agenda item for public comment.