Judge Michael Montero reviews truancy court, reports mixed results and program changes

Judge Michael Montero updated the Humboldt County School District board on the district’s truancy court and advisory board on May 3, describing how the court and a multidisciplinary team work to identify barriers that keep students from attending school and discussing outcomes from this school year.

The judge told the board the program is designed as “therapeutic in the sense that it’s not intended at least at the outset to be punishment. It’s designed to be helpful, try to be helpful.” He said the court and advisory board focus on identifying reasons for unexcused absences and building services around those needs.

Montero said the team meets weekly, typically on Wednesday afternoons, and includes representatives from the district attorney’s office, juvenile services, the Division of Child and Family Services, school administrators, a school social worker, school resource officers and community partners. He described use of a risk‑needs assessment tool and a new shared drive for team records to streamline information-sharing with school staff.

The judge reported program statistics for the season: 29 participants overall — 18 from the high school and 11 from the junior high. Of those, 9 students successfully completed truancy court, 15 were discharged unsuccessfully and 5 remained pending review. Montero noted some unsuccessful cases were carryovers from earlier school years or students who left for homeschooling, and he said the team decided, near the end of the year, to impose statutory dispositions rather than wait for summer school.

Montero summarized the dispositions the court may impose under statute for students who admit habitual truancy: “you’re gonna have a 30 day driver’s license suspension… you’re gonna do some community service, 8 hours of community service… you’re gonna pay the hundred dollar fine.” He said those consequences are explained to families at disposition so participants understand the stakes if they do not complete the diversion program.

Clay Sayers, who described work at the high school level, said the truancy advisory board (TAB) diverted students from court: “So we had this is the high school. We had 16 kids that actually completed TAB successfully that we didn't have to send to truancy court.” Sayers and other school staff described cases in which students improved attendance and grades after participating in TAB or truancy court.

Wendy (District Attorney’s Office) emphasized the role of partner agencies: “our multidisciplinary team is crucial,” she said, adding that the DA’s office and child‑welfare partners sometimes use the information gathered through TAB and court to inform interventions with families.

Board members and staff discussed early intervention at the elementary level as a priority, noting that students who fall behind in lower grades are harder to reengage later. Montero and several trustees encouraged continued school‑district participation on the court team and noted the statute provides a role for school board representatives to participate closer to the court process.

The judge said one more court session remained before the school year ends and that several students would be reviewed next week. He urged continued district support for the multidisciplinary approach and said he stands ready to help as the schools develop earlier interventions.