Wash. Rev. Code » Title 28A · Chapter 28A.225
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 28A.225.030 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) If a child under the age of seventeen is required to attend school under RCW 28A.225.010 and if the actions taken by a school district under RCW 28A.225.020 are not successful in substantially reducing an enrolled student's absences from public school, after the child's seventh unexcused absence within any month during the current school year and not later than the 15th unexcused absence during the current school year the school district shall file a petition and supporting affidavit for a civil action with the juvenile court alleging a violation of RCW 28A.225.010: (a) By the parent; (b) by the child; or (c) by the parent and the child. The petition must include a list of all interventions that have been attempted as set forth in RCW 28A.225.020, include a copy of any previous truancy assessment completed by the child's current school district, the history of approved best practices intervention or research-based intervention previously provided to the child by the child's current school district, and a copy of the most recent truancy information document provided to the parent, pursuant to RCW 28A.225.005. Except as provided in this subsection, no additional documents need be filed with the petition. Nothing in this subsection requires court jurisdiction to terminate when a child turns seventeen or precludes a school district from filing a petition for a child that is seventeen years of age.
(2) The district shall not later than the seventh unexcused absence in a month:
(a) Enter into an agreement with a student and parent that establishes school attendance requirements;
(b) Refer a student to a community engagement board as defined in RCW 28A.225.025. The community engagement board shall enter into an agreement with the student and parent that establishes school attendance requirements and take other appropriate actions to reduce the child's absences; or
(c) File a petition under subsection (1) of this section.
(3) The petition may be filed by a school district employee who is not an attorney.
(4) If the school district fails to file a petition under this section, the parent of a child with seven or more unexcused absences in any month during the current school year or upon the 15th unexcused absence during the current school year may file a petition with the juvenile court alleging a violation of RCW 28A.225.010.
(5) Petitions filed under this section may be served by certified mail, return receipt requested. If such service is unsuccessful, or the return receipt is not signed by the addressee, personal service is required.
[ 2021 c 119 s 7; (2021 c 119 s 5 expired August 1, 2021); 2017 c 291 s 6; 2016 c 205 s 7; 2012 c 157 s 1; 1999 c 319 s 2; 1996 c 134 s 3; 1995 c 312 s 68; 1992 c 205 s 203; 1990 c 33 s 220; 1986 c 132 s 3; 1979 ex.s. c 201 s 2. Formerly RCW 28A.27.022.]

Notes:

Effective date—2021 c 119 ss 7-15: "Sections 7 through 15 of this act take effect August 1, 2021." [ 2021 c 119 s 18.]
Expiration date—2021 c 119 ss 5 and 6: "Sections 5 and 6 of this act expire August 1, 2021." [ 2021 c 119 s 17.]
Effective date—2021 c 119 ss 1-6: See note following RCW 28A.225.007.
Findings—Intent—2021 c 119: See note following RCW 28A.225.007.
Short title—1995 c 312: See note following RCW 13.32A.010.
Part headings not law—Severability—1992 c 205: See notes following RCW 13.40.010.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1999–2019 · leading case: Bellevue Sch. Dist. v. ES, 199 P.3d 1010 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bellevue Sch. Dist. v. ES, 199 P.3d 1010 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 4× “[7] RCW 28A.225.030(1). [8] RCW 28A.225.030(4).”
Bellevue Sch. Dist. v. E.S., 148 Wash. App. 205 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 3× “RCW 28A.225.030(1). RCW 28A.225.030(4). RCW 28A.”
In Re Mb, 3 P.3d 780 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “[26] RCW 28A.225.030, .035. [27] RCW 28A.225.035(7).”
In re the Interest of M.B., 101 Wash. App. 425 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “RCW 28A.225.030, .035. RCW 28A.225.035(12).”
Perkins v. State, 969 P.2d 1101 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “[1] They claim that RCW 28A.225.035(6), which provides that a child respondent in a truancy petition has no right to counsel at the initial hearing, is unconstitutional because it does not comply with due process requirements.”
In re the Truancy of Perkins, 93 Wash. App. 590 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “035(6), which provides that a child respondent in a truancy petition has no right to counsel at the initial hearing, is unconstitutional because it does not comply with due process requirements.”
In Re The Truancy Of R.l.P. (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 9× “We agree that the District’s compliance with statutory requirements is a matter of continuing and substantial public interest that we will consider even though the issue is moot.”
Chimacum Sch. Dist., V D.P. (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 5× “4 Because only minor changes were made to RCW 28A.225.030 in 2017, we cite to the current version.”
In Re The Truancy Of K.a.h. (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “1 The legislature amended RCW 28A.225.030 in 2017, effective July 23, 2017.”
A.j.l. v. Everett Sch. Dist. (Wash. Ct. App. 2018). “Statutory Findings A court commissioner has "authority, and jurisdiction, concurrent with a juvenile court judge, to hear all cases under RCW 28A.225.030, 28A.225.090, and 28A.225.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 28A.225.030(1) — 6 cases
Bellevue Sch. Dist. v. ES, 199 P.3d 1010 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “[7] RCW 28A.225.030(1). [8] RCW 28A.225.030(4).”
Bellevue Sch. Dist. v. E.S., 148 Wash. App. 205 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “RCW 28A.225.030(1). RCW 28A.225.030(4). RCW 28A.”
Perkins v. State, 969 P.2d 1101 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “[1] They claim that RCW 28A.225.035(6), which provides that a child respondent in a truancy petition has no right to counsel at the initial hearing, is unconstitutional because it does not comply with due process requirements.”
In re the Truancy of Perkins, 93 Wash. App. 590 (Wash. Ct. App. 1999). “035(6), which provides that a child respondent in a truancy petition has no right to counsel at the initial hearing, is unconstitutional because it does not comply with due process requirements.”
In Re The Truancy Of R.l.P. (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “We agree that the District’s compliance with statutory requirements is a matter of continuing and substantial public interest that we will consider even though the issue is moot.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 28A.225.030(4) — 2 cases
Bellevue Sch. Dist. v. ES, 199 P.3d 1010 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “[7] RCW 28A.225.030(1). [8] RCW 28A.225.030(4).”
Bellevue Sch. Dist. v. E.S., 148 Wash. App. 205 (Wash. Ct. App. 2009). “RCW 28A.225.030(1). RCW 28A.225.030(4). RCW 28A.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 28A.225.030(5) — 1 case
In Re The Truancy Of K.a.h. (Wash. Ct. App. 2019). “1 The legislature amended RCW 28A.225.030 in 2017, effective July 23, 2017.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.