BILL NUMBER: AB 844 AMENDED
BILL TEXT
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 20, 2009
INTRODUCED BY Assembly Member Villines
FEBRUARY 26, 2009
An act to amend Sections 17553, 17557, 17557.2, and 17558 of, and
to add Article 1.6 (commencing with Section 17574.6)
Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 17590) to
Chapter 4 of Part 7 of Division 4 of Title 2 of, the Government Code,
relating to state-mandated costs.
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 844, as amended, Villines. State-mandated local programs:
school districts.
Under the California Constitution, whenever the Legislature or a
state agency mandates a new program or higher level of service on any
local government, including school districts, the state is required
to provide a subvention of funds to reimburse the local government,
with specified exceptions. Existing law establishes a test claim
procedure for local governmental agencies to file claims for
reimbursement of these costs with the Commission on State Mandates.
The commission is authorized to develop a reasonable
reimbursement methodology and statewide estimate of costs for
reimbursement of costs mandated by the state, in accordance with a
decision on a test claim.
This bill would prohibit school districts from using the test
claims provisions on and after January 1, 2010, for specified
costs mandated by the state, and would instead require the
commission to determine , with regard to any statute enacted
on or after January 1, 2010, whether that statute imposes a mandate
on school districts for which reimbursement is required by the
California Constitution, and whether there is an annual appropriation
made that funds the mandate's annual statewide estimated costs, as
adopted by the commission. The bill would require the commission, if
it determines a statute imposes that mandate on school districts, and
there is no annual appropriation for that cost, to issue an order
authorizing a school district to not comply with those provisions of
the statute that impose the mandate a reasonable
reimbur sement methodology for costs mandated by the state
on a school district by a statute that is enacted on or after
January 1, 2010, and to develop claiming instructions for those
costs. The commission would be required to examine each act enacted
by the Legislature that becomes effective on and after January 1,
2010, and determine whether the act would enact a statute that
imposes costs mandated by the state on a school district. The
commission would be required to make this determination within 6
months after the effective date of that statute. Based on the
reimbursement methodology adopted by the commission, the
commission would be required to forward to the Director of Finance
the amount of the appropriation needed to fund the statewide cost
estimate of a claim submitted by a school district. The commission
would be required to develop this methodology, the claiming
instructions, and a statewide cost estimate within one year from the
date when the commission determines that a statute imposes costs
mandated by the state on school districts .
The bill would also require the commission to examine all
statutes that were enacted on or after January 1, 1975, and not
subject to the procedure specified above, and make that same
determination. The commission would be required to issue a
determination allowing a school district to not comply with the
requirements of that statute that imposes the mandate, in a
accordance with a specified schedule.
The bill would also specify a procedure for the commission to
review these determinations when there is an annual appropriation and
would require the commission to issue an order, under specified
circumstances. The commission would be required to submit a copy of
all findings and orders made pursuant to this bill to the appropriate
committees of the Legislature.
The bill would also require the commission to develop claiming
instructions for all costs mandated by the state on a school district
by a statute that was enacted and became effective before January 1,
2010. The bill would require these instructions to provide a
procedure that allows a school district to claim a reasonable cost
reimbursement, based on specified documentation.
The bill would require the Legislative Analyst to examine all
statutes that were enacted on or after January 1, 1975, that impose a
cost mandated by the state in accordance with a schedule, and make
recommendations to the Legislature. The bill would also provide that,
from July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2012, inclusive, a school district
would not be subject to a civil penalty if the school district does
not comply with a statute that imposes costs mandated by the state,
unless the commission determines the statute is for the purpose of
protecting pupil health and safety.
Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The Legislature finds and declares all
of the following:
(a) The current process for reimbursing school districts for costs
mandated by the state is in need of reform.
(b) School districts are not receiving timely reimbursement for
costs mandated by the state, as required by Section 6 of Article XIII
B of the California Constitution (mandates).
(c) Delaying this reimbursement restricts the ability of school
districts to provide other services.
(d) There is no ongoing review of mandates to determine whether a
mandate should be repealed or amended.
(e) Small school districts are effectively prohibited from seeking
relief under Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution because of limitations on their ability to claim
mandated cost reimbursement.
(f) There is no system for the Legislature to amend or repeal a
statute imposing a mandate once the statewide cost estimate has been
determined, but prior to its implementation.
(g) The current system can result in unanticipated major fiscal
costs associated with a mandate after it has been implemented.
(h) New unfunded mandates during a time of school budget deficits
mean further cuts in school district budgets.
(i) Therefore, the Legislature finds that the current state
mandate reimbursement process for school districts needs to be made
more timely and to provide a more efficient review of claims filed
pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIII B of the California
Constitution, as well as providing greater access for the filing of
these claims.
(j) The Legislature further declares its intent that any act that
imposes a mandate on a school district should have a delayed
operative date on the second succeeding January 1 after the year in
which the act is enacted, unless the act would take effect
immediately as an urgency statute or is introduced in an
extraordinary legislative session.
SECTION 1. SEC. 2. Section 17553 of
the Government Code is amended to read:
17553. (a) The commission shall adopt procedures for receiving
claims filed pursuant to this article and Section 17574 and for
providing a hearing on those claims. The procedures shall do all of
the following:
(1) Provide for presentation of evidence by the claimant, the
Department of Finance, and any other affected department or agency,
and any other interested person.
(2) Ensure that a statewide cost estimate is adopted within 12
months after receipt of a test claim, when a determination is made by
the commission that a mandate exists. This deadline may be extended
for up to six months upon the request of either the claimant or the
commission.
(3) Permit the hearing of a claim to be postponed at the request
of the claimant, without prejudice, until the next scheduled hearing.
(b) All test claims shall be filed on a form prescribed by the
commission and shall contain at least the following elements and
documents:
(1) A written narrative that identifies the specific sections of
statutes or executive orders and the effective date and register
number of regulations alleged to contain a mandate and shall include
all of the following:
(A) A detailed description of the new activities and costs that
arise from the mandate.
(B) A detailed description of existing activities and costs that
are modified by the mandate.
(C) The actual increased costs incurred by the claimant during the
fiscal year for which the claim was filed to implement the alleged
mandate.
(D) The actual or estimated annual costs that will be incurred by
the claimant to implement the alleged mandate during the fiscal year
immediately following the fiscal year for which the claim was filed.
(E) A statewide cost estimate of increased costs that all local
agencies or school districts will incur to implement the alleged
mandate during the fiscal year immediately following the fiscal year
for which the claim was filed.
(F) Identification of all of the following:
(i) Dedicated state funds appropriated for this program.
(ii) Dedicated federal funds appropriated for this program.
(iii) Other nonlocal agency funds dedicated for this program.
(iv) The local agency's general purpose funds for this program.
(v) Fee authority to offset the costs of this program.
(G) Identification of prior mandate determinations made by the
Commission on State Mandates or a predecessor agency that may be
related to the alleged mandate.
(H) Identification of a legislatively determined mandate pursuant
to Section 17573 that is on the same statute or executive order.
(2) The written narrative shall be supported with declarations
under penalty of perjury, based on the declarant's personal
knowledge, information, or belief, and signed by persons who are
authorized and competent to do so, as follows:
(A) Declarations of actual or estimated increased costs that will
be incurred by the claimant to implement the alleged mandate.
(B) Declarations identifying all local, state, or federal funds,
or fee authority that may be used to offset the increased costs that
will be incurred by the claimant to implement the alleged mandate,
including direct and indirect costs.
(C) Declarations describing new activities performed to implement
specified provisions of the new statute or executive order alleged to
impose a reimbursable state-mandated program. Specific references
shall be made to chapters, articles, sections, or page numbers
alleged to impose a reimbursable state-mandated program.
(D) If applicable, declarations describing the period of
reimbursement and payments received for full reimbursement of costs
for a legislatively determined mandate pursuant to Section 17573, and
the authority to file a test claim pursuant to paragraph (1) of
subdivision (c) of Section 17574.
(3) (A) The written narrative shall be supported with copies of
all of the following:
(i) The test claim statute that includes the bill number or
executive order, alleged to impose or impact a mandate.
(ii) Relevant portions of state constitutional provisions, federal
statutes, and executive orders that may impact the alleged mandate.
(iii) Administrative decisions and court decisions cited in the
narrative.
(B) State mandate determinations made by the Commission on State
Mandates or a predecessor agency and published court decisions on
state mandate determinations made by the Commission on State Mandates
are exempt from this requirement.
(4) A test claim shall be signed at the end of the document, under
penalty of perjury by the claimant or its authorized representative,
with the declaration that the test claim is true and complete to the
best of the declarant's personal knowledge, information, or belief.
The date of signing, the declarant's title, address, telephone
number, facsimile machine telephone number, and electronic mail
address shall be included.
(c) If a completed test claim is not received by the commission
within 30 calendar days from the date that an incomplete test claim
was returned by the commission, the original test claim filing date
may be disallowed, and a new test claim may be accepted on the same
statute or executive order.
(d) In addition, the commission shall determine whether an
incorrect reduction claim is complete within 10 days after the date
that the incorrect reduction claim is filed. If the commission
determines that an incorrect reduction claim is not complete, the
commission shall notify the local agency and school district that
filed the claim stating the reasons that the claim is not complete.
The local agency or school district shall have 30 days to complete
the claim. The commission shall serve a copy of the complete
incorrect reduction claim on the Controller. The Controller shall
have no more than 90 days after the date the claim is delivered or
mailed to file any rebuttal to an incorrect reduction claim. The
failure of the Controller to file a rebuttal to an incorrect
reduction claim shall not serve to delay the consideration of the
claim by the commission.
(e) On and after January 1, 2010, the provisions in this section
regarding the procedures for, and the filing of, a test claim shall
not apply to a school district.
(e) This section shall apply to school district claims only for
costs mandated by the state that the commission determines were
imposed before January 1, 2010.
SEC. 2. SEC. 3. Section 17557 of the
Government Code is amended to read:
17557. (a) If the commission determines there are costs mandated
by the state pursuant to Section 17551, it shall determine the amount
to be subvened to local agencies and school districts for
reimbursement. In so doing it shall adopt parameters and guidelines
for reimbursement of any claims relating to the statute or executive
order. The successful test claimants shall submit proposed parameters
and guidelines within 30 days of adoption of a statement of decision
on a test claim. At the request of a successful test claimant, the
commission may provide for one or more extensions of this 30-day
period at any time prior to its adoption of the parameters and
guidelines. If proposed parameters and guidelines are not submitted
within the 30-day period and the commission has not granted an
extension, then the commission shall notify the test claimant that
the amount of reimbursement the test claimant is entitled to for the
first 12 months of incurred costs will be reduced by 20 percent,
unless the test claimant can demonstrate to the commission why an
extension of the 30-day period is justified.
(b) In adopting parameters and guidelines, the commission may
adopt a reasonable reimbursement methodology.
(c) The parameters and guidelines adopted by the commission shall
specify the fiscal years for which local agencies and school
districts shall be reimbursed for costs incurred. However, the
commission may not specify in the parameters and guidelines any
fiscal year for which payment could be provided in the annual Budget
Act.
(d) A local agency agency, school
district, or the state may file a written request with the
commission to amend, modify, or supplement the parameters or
guidelines. The commission may, after public notice and hearing,
amend, modify, or supplement the parameters and guidelines. A
parameters and guidelines amendment submitted within 90 days of the
claiming deadline for initial claims, as specified in the claiming
instructions pursuant to Section 17561, shall apply to all years
eligible for reimbursement as defined in the original parameters and
guidelines. A parameters and guidelines amendment filed more than 90
days after the claiming deadline for initial claims, as specified in
the claiming instructions pursuant to Section 17561, and on or before
the claiming deadline following a fiscal year, shall establish
reimbursement eligibility for that fiscal year.
(e) A test claim shall be submitted on or before June 30 following
a fiscal year in order to establish eligibility for reimbursement
for that fiscal year. The claimant may thereafter amend the test
claim at any time, but before the test claim is set for a hearing,
without affecting the original filing date as long as the amendment
substantially relates to the original test claim.
(f) In adopting parameters and guidelines, the commission shall
consult with the Department of Finance, the affected state agency,
the Controller, the fiscal and policy committees of the Assembly and
Senate, the Legislative Analyst, and the claimants to consider a
reasonable reimbursement methodology that balances accuracy with
simplicity.
(g) This section shall apply to school district claims only for
costs mandated by the state that the commission determines were
imposed before January 1, 2010.
SEC. 3. SEC. 4. Section 17557.2 of
the Government Code is amended to read:
17557.2. (a) A reasonable reimbursement methodology developed
pursuant to Section 17557.1 or a joint request for early termination
of a reasonable reimbursement methodology shall have broad support
from a wide range of local agencies or school districts .
The test claimant and Department of Finance may demonstrate broad
support from a wide range of local agencies or school districts
in different ways, including, but not limited to, obtaining
endorsement by one or more statewide associations of local agencies
or school districts and securing letters of approval from
local agencies or school districts .
(b) No later than 60 days before a commission hearing, the test
claimant and Department of Finance shall submit to the commission a
joint proposal that shall include all of the following:
(1) The draft reasonable reimbursement methodology.
(2) The proposed statewide estimate of costs for the initial
claiming period and budget year.
(3) A description of the steps the test claimant and the
Department of Finance undertook to determine the level of support by
local agencies or school districts for the draft
reasonable reimbursement methodology.
(4) An agreement that the reasonable reimbursement methodology
developed and approved under this section shall be in effect for a
period of five years unless a different term is approved by the
commission, or upon submission to the commission of a letter
indicating the Department of Finance and test claimant's joint
interest in early termination of the reasonable reimbursement
methodology.
(5) An agreement that, at the conclusion of the period established
in paragraph (4), the Department of Finance and the test claimant
will consider jointly whether amendments to the methodology are
necessary.
(c) The commission shall approve the draft reasonable
reimbursement methodology if review of the information submitted
pursuant to Section 17557.1 and subdivision (b) of this section
demonstrates that the draft reasonable reimbursement methodology and
statewide estimate of costs for the initial claiming period and
budget year have been developed in accordance with Section 17557.1
and meet the requirements of subdivision (a). The commission
thereafter shall adopt the proposed statewide estimate of costs for
the initial claiming period and budget year. Statewide cost estimates
adopted under this section shall be included in the report to the
Legislature required under Section 17600 and shall be reported by the
commission to the appropriate Senate and Assembly policy and fiscal
committees, the Legislative Analyst, and the Department of Finance
not later than 30 days after adoption.
(d) Unless amendments are proposed pursuant to this subdivision,
the reasonable reimbursement methodology approved by the commission
pursuant to this section shall expire after either five years, any
other term approved by the commission, or upon submission to the
commission of a letter indicating the Department of Finance's and
test claimant's joint interest in early termination of the reasonable
reimbursement methodology.
(e) The commission shall approve a joint request for early
termination of a reasonable reimbursement methodology if the request
meets the requirements of subdivision (a). If the commission approves
a joint request for early termination, the commission shall notify
the test claimant of the duty to submit proposed parameters and
guidelines to the commission pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section
17557.
(f) At least one year before the expiration of a reasonable
reimbursement methodology, the commission shall notify the Department
of Finance and the test claimant that they may do one of the
following:
(1) Jointly propose amendments to the reasonable reimbursement
methodology by submitting the information described in paragraphs
(1), (3), and (4) of subdivision (b), and providing an estimate of
the mandate's annual cost for the subsequent budget year.
(2) Jointly propose that the reasonable reimbursement methodology
remain in effect.
(3) Allow the reasonable reimbursement methodology to expire and
notify the commission that the test claimant will submit proposed
parameters and guidelines to the commission pursuant to subdivision
(a) of Section 17557 to replace the reasonable reimbursement
methodology.
(g) The commission shall either approve the continuation of the
reasonable reimbursement methodology or approve the jointly proposed
amendments to the reasonable reimbursement methodology if the
information submitted in accordance with paragraph (1) of subdivision
(d) demonstrates that the proposed amendments were developed in
accordance with Section 17557.1 and meet the requirements of
subdivision (a) of this section.
(h) This section shall apply to school district claims only for
costs mandated by the state that the commission determines were
imposed before January 1, 2010.
SEC. 4. SEC. 5. Section 17558 of the
Government Code is amended to read:
17558. (a) The commission shall submit the adopted parameters and
guidelines or a reasonable reimbursement methodology approved
pursuant to Section 17557.2 to the Controller. As used in this
chapter, a "reasonable reimbursement methodology" approved pursuant
to Section 17557.2 includes all amendments to the reasonable
reimbursement methodology. When the Legislature declares a
legislatively determined mandate in accordance with Section 17573 in
which claiming instructions are necessary, the Department of Finance
shall notify the Controller.
(b) Not later than 60 days after receiving the adopted parameters
and guidelines, a reasonable reimbursement methodology from the
commission, or notification from the Department of Finance, the
Controller shall issue claiming instructions for each mandate that
requires state reimbursement, to assist local agencies and
school districts in claiming costs to be reimbursed. In
preparing claiming instructions, the Controller shall request
assistance from the Department of Finance and may request the
assistance of other state agencies. The claiming instructions shall
be derived from the test claim decision and the adopted parameters
and guidelines, reasonable reimbursement methodology, or statute
declaring a legislatively determined mandate.
(c) The Controller shall, within 60 days after receiving amended
parameters and guidelines, an amended reasonable reimbursement
methodology from the commission or other information necessitating a
revision of the claiming instructions, prepare and issue revised
claiming instructions for mandates that require state reimbursement
that have been established by commission action pursuant to Section
17557, Section 17557.2, or after any decision or order of the
commission pursuant to Section 17559, or after any action by the
Legislature pursuant to Section 17573. In preparing revised claiming
instructions, the Controller may request the assistance of other
state agencies.
(d) This section shall apply to school district claims only for
costs mandated by the state that the commission determines were
imposed before January 1, 2010.
SEC. 5. Article 1.6 (commencing with Section
17574.6) is added to Chapter 4 of Part 7 of Division 4 of Title 2 of
the Government Code, to read:
Article 1.6. Mandated Costs Compliance
17574.6. (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the
commission shall determine both of the following with regard to any
statute enacted on or after January 1, 2010:
(1) Whether the statute imposes a mandate on school districts, for
which reimbursement is required by Section 6 of Article XIII B of
the California Constitution.
(2) Whether there is an annual appropriation made to fund the
mandate's annual statewide cost estimate, as adopted by the
commission.
(b) If the commission determines a statute imposes a mandate on
school districts, as specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a),
and there is no annual appropriation to fund the mandate's estimated
annual statewide cost, as specified in paragraph (2) of subdivision
(a), the commission shall issue an order authorizing a school
district to not comply with those provisions of the statute that
impose the mandate.
(c) If the commission determines a statute imposes a mandate, as
specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), but there is an annual
appropriation made to fund the mandate, as specified in paragraph
(2) of subdivision (a), this determination shall be operative only
for five years, and five years from the operative date of that
determination, the commission shall review the statute and determine
whether an appropriation for those costs has been made to fund the
mandate's annual statewide cost estimate, as adopted by the
commission. If the commission determines an appropriation to fund
that cost estimate has not been made, the commission shall issue an
order authorizing a school district to not comply with the
requirements of the statute.
(d) The commission shall submit a copy of all orders and findings
made pursuant to this section to the appropriate committees of the
Legislature.
17574.7. (a) The commission shall examine all statutes that were
enacted on or after January 1, 1975, and not subject to Section
17574.7, in accordance with the schedule specified in subdivision (b)
and determine both of the following:
(1) Whether the statute imposes a mandate on school districts for
which reimbursement is required by Section 6 of Article XIII B of the
California Constitution.
(2) Whether there is an annual appropriation that funds the
mandate's annual statewide cost estimate, as adopted by the
commission.
(b) If the commission determines a statute imposes a mandate on
school districts, as specified in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a)
and there is no annual appropriation, as specified in paragraph (2)
of subdivision (a), the commission shall issue an order allowing a
school district to not comply with the requirements of the statute
that imposes the mandate, in the following manner:
(1) Commencing January 1, 2012, the commission shall issue that
order regarding compliance with a statute that was enacted before
January 1, 1990, but not earlier than January 1, 1975.
(2) Commencing January 1, 2014, the commission shall issue that
order regarding compliance with a statute that was enacted on or
after January 1, 1990, but before January 1, 2000.
(3) Commencing January 1, 2015, the commission shall issue that
order regarding compliance with a statute that was enacted on or
after January 1, 2000, but before January 1, 2010.
(c) If the commission determines that a statute imposes a mandate,
pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a), but there is an annual
appropriation to fund the mandate's estimated annual cost, as
adopted by the commission, as specified in paragraph (2) of
subdivision (a), this determination shall be operative only for five
years, and the commission shall review that determination on a date
five years after the date of making that determination. If the
commission determines there is no annual appropriation to fund the
mandate's annual statewide cost estimate, as adopted by the
commission, the commission shall issue an order allowing a school
district to not comply with that statute.
(d) The commission shall submit a copy of all findings and orders
made pursuant to this section to the appropriate committees of the
Legislature.
17574.8. On and after January 1, 2010, a school district may not
file a test claim pursuant to this part and shall instead be subject
to the procedures specified in this article.
SEC. 6. Article 2.5 (commencing with Section
17590) is added to Chapter 4 of Part 7 of Division 4 of Title 2 of
the Government Code , to read:
Article 2.5. Mandated Costs Compliance
17590. (a) On and after January 1, 2010, a school district may
not file a test claim pursuant to Section 17551, unless either of the
following applies:
(1) The costs mandated by the state on a school district were
imposed pursuant to a statute that was enacted and became effective
on or before January 1, 2010.
(2) The costs were imposed pursuant to an act that was enacted and
became effective on or after January 1, 2010, but the act made an
amendment to a statute that was enacted and became effective before
January 1, 2010, and imposed costs mandated by the state on a school
district.
(b) The commission shall determine a reasonable reimbursement
methodology for costs mandated by the state on a school district that
are imposed on or after January 1, 2010, and shall develop claiming
instructions for those costs based on that methodology.
(c) On and after January 1, 2010, the commission shall examine
each act enacted by the Legislature that becomes effective on and
after January 1, 2010, and determine whether the act would enact a
statute that imposes costs mandated by the state on a school
district. The commission shall make this determination on or before
six months after the effective date of that statute.
(d) Upon making a determination pursuant to subdivision (c) that a
statute imposes costs mandated by the state on a school district,
the commission shall, based on the methodology adopted pursuant to
subdivision (b), forward to the Director of Finance the amount of the
appropriation needed to fund the statewide cost estimate for a claim
submitted by a
school district.
(e) The commission shall develop the methodology, claiming
instructions, and statewide cost estimate required by this section
within one year from the date when the commission determines that a
statute imposes costs mandated by the state on school districts.
17591. (a) The commission shall develop claiming instructions for
all costs mandated by the state on a school district that were
imposed pursuant to a statute that was enacted and become effective
before January 1, 2010.
(b) The claiming instructions developed pursuant to this section
shall provide for a procedure that allows a school district to claim
a reasonable cost reimbursement for costs mandated by the state if
the school district documents that it complied with the mandate. The
commission audit of this documentation shall be limited to only
determining whether the school district complied with the mandate.
(c) A school district may elect, and is not required, to file a
claim for the reimbursement of costs mandated by the state, using the
procedure authorized by this section, if the statute that imposed
the costs was enacted and became effective before January 1, 2010. A
school district may instead elect to file a claim for the
reimbursement of costs mandated by the state pursuant to the
procedures specified in Article 1 (commencing with Section 17550).
17592. (a) The Legislative Analyst shall examine all statutes
that were enacted on or after January 1, 1975, and not subject to
Section 17590, that impose a cost mandated by the state on a school
district in accordance with the following schedule:
(1) Commencing January 1, 2011, a statute enacted before January
1, 1990, but not earlier than January 1, 1975.
(2) Commencing January 1, 2012, a statute enacted on or after
January 1, 1990, but before January 1, 2000.
(3) Commencing January 1, 2013, a statute enacted on or after
January 1, 2000, but before January 1, 2010.
(b) As part of the annual analysis of the state budget, the
Legislative Analyst shall recommend to the Legislature whether a
statute subject to review pursuant to this section should be amended
or repealed or remain unchanged.
17593. (a) On and after July 1, 2010, to June 30, 2012,
inclusive, a school district shall not be subject to a civil penalty
pursuant to state law, if the school district does not comply with a
statute that imposes costs mandated by the state and the district
does not file a claim for reimbursement of the costs of that mandate,
unless the commission determines the statute is for the purpose of
protecting pupil health and safety.
(b) This article does not affect any right to relief that is
available to a school district as of January 1, 2010.