Reading Room
AB 395 and AB 1763: What California Schools Should Know
AB 395 and AB 1763 point to the same practical planning challenge for California schools: observance conflicts are easier to manage before important dates are finalized.
Last updated September 2, 2026. The official California Legislative Information pages list AB 395 as enrolled on September 1, 2026 and AB 1763 as enrolled on August 30, 2026.
The governor has until September 30, 2026 to sign or veto bills passed by the Legislature before September 1 and in the governor's possession on or after September 1.
The two bills address different parts of school planning. AB 395 focuses on how certain public entities, including school districts, consider religious, cultural, and ancestral observances when scheduling important dates. AB 1763 focuses on excused absences for religious observance.
For school districts, the practical question is bigger than either bill: How can schools account for religious and cultural observances before they create conflicts for students, staff, families, and the public?
This guide is a plain-language planning overview, not legal advice. Districts should follow the official California Legislative Information pages for AB 395 and AB 1763 and consult counsel when making policy decisions.
What AB 395 says about school calendars
AB 395 is about scheduling. For K-12 schools, the bill focuses on the first day of class and high school graduation, when applicable.
The enrolled bill says that, beginning with the 2027-28 school year, a school district, county office of education, or charter school would need to consider making efforts to avoid scheduling those dates on a date when it knows, or has reason to know, that members of the public would be unable to participate or be present because of a ritual observance of a religious, cultural, or ancestral holiday.
The bill also points to process. It calls for actively seeking input from the affected community and considering other relevant sources when deciding which dates to avoid.
In practical terms, AB 395 is not asking calendar teams to become experts in every observance. It is asking them to make observance awareness part of the planning process before high-impact dates become public.
What AB 1763 says about religious observance absences
AB 1763 is about attendance. The bill would amend California Education Code Section 48205 so that observance of a holiday or ceremony of a student's religion is listed as its own category of required excused absence.
That is different from a calendar scheduling requirement. An excused absence protects the attendance record, but it does not erase the practical consequences of missing a test, presentation, field trip, performance, athletic event, or ceremony.
That is where calendar planning and attendance policy meet. If a student can be excused for a religious observance, schools still need a reasonable way to handle the work, communication, and participation issues that follow.
Avoiding a conflict in the first place can reduce the number of makeups, exceptions, and difficult conversations that staff and families have to manage later.
How AB 395 and AB 1763 are different
The bills are related, but they are not interchangeable.
AB 395 is about planning dates before they are placed on a public calendar. AB 1763 is about how a student's religious observance absence is treated when a conflict occurs.
One is proactive scheduling. The other is attendance protection.
Schools need both ideas in view. A strong attendance policy can help families when a conflict happens. A strong planning process can prevent some of those conflicts from happening at all.
Read the bill-specific guides
For a closer look at the scheduling provisions, read the California AB 395 school calendar guide.
For a closer look at religious-observance absences, read the California AB 1763 religious absence guide.
What the bills do not mean
Neither bill should be read as requiring every school event to avoid every possible observance. Communities are diverse, calendars are constrained, and not every conflict can be prevented.
AB 395 focuses on considering efforts to avoid certain high-impact dates and seeking relevant input. AB 1763 focuses on excused absences for religious observance.
The practical goal is not a perfect calendar. The practical goal is a more informed process: know which dates deserve a second look, understand how participation may be affected, consider reasonable alternatives, and communicate clearly when a conflict cannot be avoided.
What California schools can do now
Neither bill should be treated as law unless and until it is enacted. But districts do not need to wait to improve how they plan.
Schools can start by identifying the dates where participation matters most. These are the dates where absence is especially visible, hard to repair, or difficult to reschedule:
- First day of school
- High school graduation
- Final exams and major assessments
- Orientation and move-in events
- Open houses and back-to-school nights
- Performances, ceremonies, and athletic events
- Board meetings and public hearings
- Major family and community events
For those dates, planning teams can ask a consistent set of questions before dates are finalized.
Questions to build into the calendar process
A practical review process does not need to be complicated. The most useful questions are concrete:
- Could an observance affect student, staff, family, or public participation?
- Does the observance affect the full day or a particular time of day?
- Are there reasonable alternative dates or times?
- Would local input help the district understand the potential impact?
- If the date cannot move, how should the school communicate and plan for affected students or families?
Building these questions into the calendar process can help schools identify potential conflicts while there is still time to address them. It also creates a clearer record of how the district considered participation before making a decision.
How CommonCal helps
CommonCal was built for exactly this planning moment.
It brings religious, cultural, and civic observances into one calendar alongside practical context about when and how participation may be affected. Instead of requiring administrators to research observances one by one, CommonCal helps teams identify dates that may deserve a closer look before school events are finalized.
For AB 395-style planning, CommonCal can help teams review high-impact dates such as the first day of school, graduation, exams, meetings, and family events. For AB 1763-style attendance concerns, it can help schools see where avoidable conflicts may create a wave of excused absences, makeup work, or missed participation.
Whether or not AB 395 and AB 1763 are signed into law, the planning opportunity is the same: identify potential conflicts earlier, understand their impact, and make more informed scheduling decisions.
Questions districts may be asking
Is AB 395 law yet?
As of September 2, 2026, the official California Legislative Information page lists AB 395 as enrolled on September 1, 2026. Schools should confirm the current status on the official bill page before relying on it as law.
Is AB 1763 law yet?
As of September 2, 2026, the official California Legislative Information page lists AB 1763 as enrolled on August 30, 2026. Schools should confirm the current status on the official bill page before relying on it as law.
Does AB 395 require schools to close for religious holidays?
The enrolled bill does not create a blanket school closure requirement for every religious, cultural, or ancestral holiday. For K-12 schools, it focuses on considering efforts to avoid scheduling the first day of class and high school graduation, when applicable, on dates that may prevent public participation because of ritual observance.
What does AB 1763 change for religious observance absences?
The enrolled bill would list observance of a holiday or ceremony of a student's religion as its own category of required excused absence under Education Code Section 48205.
What should districts do before the 2027-28 school year?
Districts can begin by reviewing high-impact dates, checking religious and cultural observances before dates are finalized, documenting reasonable alternatives, seeking local input when needed, and updating attendance communication so families understand how religious observance absences are handled.
