Bill
S 359
The bill requires schools to prioritize re-engagement and alternative remedies (eg, restorative justice, mediation, PBIS) before suspensions or expulsions, with documented outcomes
Status: COMMITTED TO RULES (introduced Feb 3, 2025; hearing scheduled 07/08/2025)
Primary filer/petitioner in text: Senator Paul R. Feeney (Bristol and Norfolk)
Purpose
- To reduce reliance on suspension and expulsion by requiring school decision‑makers to prioritize re‑engagement and documented alternative remedies before excluding students from school, and to require implementation of school‑ or district‑wide re‑engagement models.
Key changes / provisions
- Amends Section 37H 3/4 of Chapter 71 of the Massachusetts General Laws by replacing subsection (b) with new language that:
- Requires any principal, headmaster, superintendent, or person acting as the decision‑maker at a student hearing to consider ways to re‑engage the student in learning when deciding consequences.
- Prohibits suspension or expulsion until alternative remedies have been employed and their use and results documented in direct response to the specific incident(s), unless a documented reason explains why such remedies are unsuitable or counterproductive.
- Lists examples of alternative remedies (non‑exhaustive): mediation; conflict resolution; restorative justice; collaborative problem‑solving.
- Allows an exception where the student’s continued presence would pose a specific, documentable concern of inflicting serious bodily injury or other serious harm, or where the student has caused a significant disruption to the learning environment.
- Requires schools/districts to implement broader re‑engagement models, including (but not limited to) Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and trauma‑sensitive learning models. It clarifies that these school/district models do not substitute for incident‑specific remedies.
Who is affected
- Public school students in Massachusetts; school administrators (principals, headmasters, superintendents) and hearing officers; school districts (policy, training, and documentation practices); families and school staff.
- Likely impacts include disciplinary procedures, staff training needs, recordkeeping practices, and resource allocation to support restorative and trauma‑informed approaches.
Potential impacts and considerations
- May reduce out‑of‑school suspensions and expulsions by shifting to restorative and re‑engagement practices.
- Imposes documentation and process requirements on decision‑makers and schools.
- Requires investment in training, staffing, and program implementation (e.g., PBIS, restorative justice, trauma‑informed practices).
- Safety exception preserves authority to remove students who pose documented threats of serious bodily harm or severe disruption.
Legislative timeline highlights (select)
- Filed: Jan 17, 2025 (Senate Docket No. 2503)
- Introduced / Read twice: Feb 3, 2025
- Referred to Committees (various entries in record); reported and committed to Finance: Apr 29, 2025
- Advanced to Third Reading: Jun 4, 2025
- Committed to Rules: Jun 13, 2025
- Hearing scheduled: Jul 8, 2025 (1:00 PM–5:00 PM, B‑2)
Sponsor/petitioner note
- Bill text identifies Senator Paul R. Feeney as the petitioner. Metadata supplied with the request lists additional cosponsors; refer to official Senate records for the finalized sponsor list.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
