BILL ANALYSIS Ó SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION Alan Lowenthal, Chair 2011-2012 Regular Session BILL NO: AB 1662 AUTHOR: Fong AMENDED: April 26, 2012 FISCAL COMM: No HEARING DATE: June 13, 2012 URGENCY: No CONSULTANT: Daniel Alvarez SUBJECT : County boards of education: members. SUMMARY This bill permits an employee of a school district that is not within the jurisdiction of the county board of education eligible to be a member of a county board of education. BACKGROUND Current law: 1) Prohibits an employee of a school district from being an elected or appointed member of that school district's governing board unless and until he or she resigns as an employee. If the employee does not resign, the employment will automatically terminate upon being sworn into office. (Education Code § 35107) 2) Prohibits a county superintendent of schools, any member of his or her staff, or any employee of a school district from being a member of the county board of education. (EC §1006) 3) Prohibits a local agency officer (defined to include governing board members) from engaging in any employment that is inconsistent, incompatible, in conflict with, or inimical to his or her duties as a local agency officer (incompatibility of office doctrine). (Government Code Section 1126.) ANALYSIS This bill permits an employee of a school district that is AB 1662 Page 2 not within the jurisdiction of the county board of education eligible to be a member of a county board of education. STAFF COMMENTS 1) Need for the bill . According to the author, current law prohibits an employee of a school district from being a member of a county board of education. This prohibition applies even if the school district employee is seeking to serve on the county board of education in a county other than the one in which he or she is employed. The policy of this bill is supported by a 1986 Attorney General opinion, in which the AG concluded that a member of a county board of education is eligible to serve as a substitute teacher in a school district that falls outside the board's jurisdiction. By eliminating the unnecessary prohibition against school employees serving on county boards of education in counties other than the ones in which they are employed, this measure will protect the constitutional rights of school employees while allowing county boards of education to benefit from the unique insight that these employees can offer. 2) Attorney General (AG) opinion . In a similar matter, the AG, in Opinion No. 86-601, when posed the question, "may a member of a county board of education serve as a substitute teacher for a district which falls within the board's jurisdiction and may he or she do so for one which does not?" The opinion concluded "?a member of a county board of education may not serve as a substitute teacher in a district which falls within the board's jurisdiction but may do so in one which does not." 3) Proponents argue this measure is consistent with the 14th amendment of the US Constitution, the equal treatment of all people under the law, that essentially all citizens should be treated equally and that being a school employee should not exclude you as a class from being able to run for office. We have doctors, lawyers, business owners, and other professionals running for elected office. There are ample provisions in existing law to prevent any conflict of interest. AB 1662 Page 3 4) Opponents argue this measure would enable a fundamental shift in governance away from lay, community member oversight. The independent role of county boards is best protected by maintaining the current requirement that its members not be school district employees. 5) Prior legislation. Similar but more expansive legislation, AB 1212 (Thompson, 1999), among other things would have allowed a school district employee within that particular county eligible to be a member of a county board of education, was vetoed by then Governor Gray Davis. The veto message read: "This bill would violate the common law rule against the holding of incompatible offices. The purpose of this rule is to disallow a person from holding two or more offices in which he or she is in a position in one office to review and approve his or her actions in the other office, and to disallow the holding of offices wherein his or her duties and loyalties are incompatible. County boards of education have jurisdiction over several areas which would present such a conflict, such as fiscal oversight, budgeting, and student discipline and transfer. Moreover, I note that current law prohibits school district employees from being elected or appointed members of their school district governing boards. For this reason, I cannot support this measure. SUPPORT American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Association of California School Administrators California School Employees Association (sponsor) California Federation of Teachers California Labor Federation California Professional Firefighters AB 1662 Page 4 Services Employees International Union OPPOSITION California County Superintendents Educational Services Association