Student attendance provisions modified, reporting requirements modified, and notification procedures for student absences and reenrollment modified.
HF2067 revises Minnesota’s student attendance laws and related reporting rules. The bill expands and clarifies what counts as a legitimate excuse for school absence, including medical, dental, orthodontic, counseling, and telehealth appointments; family emergencies; funerals or serious illness in the immediate family; active military duty; ongoing treatment for a mental health diagnosis; and other district-approved exemptions. It also preserves existing provisions allowing absences for religious instruction and adds language allowing instruction by a Tribal spiritual or cultural advisor. In addition, the bill confirms that parents may move a child out of all-day kindergarten into a half-day or alternate-day option, if available, without the child being treated as truant.
The bill also changes attendance recordkeeping and reporting. Schools must keep records of excuses, and a student is counted as present when a school employee is paid to supervise or provide services to the student. For nonpublic and home-instruction reporting, superintendents must continue annual reporting to the Department of Education, and principals must report students who leave school and are eligible to enroll elsewhere. The bill further updates average daily membership rules for school funding by requiring a student absent for 15 consecutive school days without home or hospital instruction to be dropped from the roll and treated as withdrawn.
A major operational change is the new notification and reenrollment process for students dropped from the roll for extended unexcused absences. Districts must notify the local welfare agency, include the student’s most recent contact information, and contact the family to encourage reenrollment. If the welfare agency cannot reach the family, it must inform the district, and the district must then notify the Department of Education. These provisions are effective July 1, 2025.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill’s history is strongly favorable: the House passed the bill 133-0, indicating broad bipartisan support and little visible opposition at the floor stage. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no recorded debate to identify detailed arguments. Based on the text, the bill appears aimed at making attendance rules more flexible for families while strengthening school follow-up on chronic absenteeism and improving data/reporting consistency.
The main points of possible contention are the balance between flexibility and enforcement, and the administrative burden on schools and welfare agencies. Supporters are likely to emphasize clearer excused-absence standards, mental health and telehealth recognition, and better reenrollment outreach. Potential critics could focus on the added reporting duties, the role of welfare agencies in attendance enforcement, and whether the expanded excuse categories could make attendance rules less uniform across districts.
HF2067 amends Minnesota Statutes sections 120A.22, 120A.24, and 126C.05 to change compulsory attendance exceptions, attendance documentation, nonpublic-school reporting, and average daily membership calculations used for school funding. It creates or clarifies district duties to record excuses, notify welfare agencies and the Department of Education when students are dropped for extended unexcused absences, and contact families about reenrollment. It also affects parents, students, school districts, county welfare agencies, and the Department of Education by expanding excused-absence categories and tightening follow-up procedures for chronic absenteeism.
The bill appears to have been received positively overall, with the House passing it unanimously 133-0. That vote suggests broad agreement on the need to update attendance rules and improve communication around student absences and reenrollment. Because no committee transcript was provided, there is no detailed record of objections or amendments beyond the floor version, but the final vote indicates little overt partisan or policy resistance.
The likely areas of contention are the scope of excused absences and the new enforcement/reporting framework. Some stakeholders may support the broader list of legitimate exemptions, especially for mental health, telehealth, and Tribal cultural instruction, while others may worry that broader exemptions could weaken attendance expectations. Another possible concern is the added administrative workload for districts and local welfare agencies, since the bill requires new notifications, contact attempts, and reporting to state agencies when students are absent for 15 consecutive school days.