BILL ANALYSIS Ó
------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | SB 821|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
------------------------------------------------------------
CONSENT
Bill No: SB 821
Author: Fuller (R)
Amended: 5/17/11
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE : 9-0, 5/11/11
AYES: Lowenthal, Runner, Alquist, Blakeslee, Hancock,
Huff, Liu, Price, Vargas
NO VOTE RECORDED: Simitian, Vacancy
SUBJECT : School district reorganization : fiscal
actions of newly
organized or reorganized school districts
SOURCE : California County Superintendents Educational
Services
Association
DIGEST : This bill provides that a county superintendent
of schools, during the transition period of a school
district unification, merger, or formation may stop an
action of an outgoing governing board if that action will
have a material fiscal impact on the newly formed school
district.
ANALYSIS :
Existing Law
1.Specifies that effective upon the certification of the
CONTINUED
SB 821
Page
2
election results for a newly organized school district,
the county superintendent of schools may intervene during
the transition period before the newly organized district
becomes operational if there is reason to believe that
any actions of the outgoing school districts may
jeopardize the fiscal solvency of the new district.
2.Prescribes the duties, responsibilities, and general
powers of county superintendents of schools, including,
but not limited to, superintend the schools of their
county, and maintain the fiscal oversight of each school
district in his or her county pursuant to the authority
granted in throughout the Education Code.
3.States the intent of the Legislature that local
educational needs and concerns serve as the basis for
future reorganization of districts in each county. In
addition, current law provides for a county committee on
school district organization in each county (county
committee) to consider locally developed reorganization
petitions to transfer territory among districts; unify,
merge or create new districts or revise the boundaries of
trustee areas. Proposals for transfer of territory may
be decided by the county committee in a public hearing,
although such decisions to transfer more than 10 percent
of a district's territory must be ratified by a vote of
the people in the affected districts. The decisions of
the county committee may be appealed to the State Board
of Education (SBE) for specified reasons. When the
reorganization proposal involves more than a transfer of
territory, the county committee holds a public hearing
and forwards the proposal, along with the committee's
recommendation, to the SBE. Current law provides that if
the SBE approves a proposal for reorganization then the
proposal is returned to the county for approval of a vote
of the people in the territory being reorganized.
This bill specifies, upon the voter approval of a petition
for reorganization and continuing after certification of
election results for a newly organized school district or
upon the appointment of an interim governing board, until
the effective date of the newly organized or newly formed
school district, the existing school district(s) as
specified, are subject to all of the following:
SB 821
Page
3
1.Requires the interim board or the governing board of the
existing school district(s), and, where applicable, the
administrators of the existing school district(s), that
during the transition period to a newly organized school
district, to notify the county superintendent of schools,
in writing, and provide relevant documents or information
no less than 10 school days before taking any action that
would have a material fiscal impact on, or impose a debt
or liability on the existing, proposed, newly formed, or
newly organized school district.
Specifies that failure to provide notice and relevant
documents and information nullifies the action taken by
the board or administrator of the school district(s).
2.Permits the county superintendent of schools to review
any action taken or proposed to be taken by an interim or
existing governing board to determine whether the action
would have a material fiscal impact, debt, or liability
on the existing, proposed, newly formed, or newly
organized school district.
If, based on the review, the county superintendent
determines that the action would have la material fiscal
impact and that action is unnecessary for the immediate
functioning of the existing or newly formed school
district, then the county superintendent may stay or
rescind that action.
The county superintendent of schools is required to
inform the existing or interim reorganized school
district governing board or the school district
administrators, in writing, of his/her justification for
denying the request.
3.Requires a school district to provide documents or
information requested by the county superintendent of
schools in a timely manner related to the proposed action
that is under review.
4.Clarifies that the requirements of this bill apply
irrespective of a school district's budget or
certification, as specified.
SB 821
Page
4
Comments
Additional Background . In 2007, Sacramento voters approved
the reorganization/unification of the Grant Joint Union
High School District (GJUHSD) and three smaller elementary
school districts into one district. On July 1, 2008, the
merger resulted in a new, larger district known as the Twin
Rivers Unified School District.
In early 2008, the GJUHSD (one of the outgoing governing
boards) adopted, among other things, the awarding of
severance buyout packages to 14 administrators. At that
time, the county superintendent of schools raised concerns
about the legal propriety of the actions and how the issues
were presented to the outgoing board, and refused to
process the payroll warrants associated with the severance
buyout package. The GJUHSD file suit in Superior Court of
Sacramento seeking to compel the county superintendent and
the county office of education to process the approved
payroll warrants - citing that the county superintendent of
schools and the county office of education did not have the
right to substitute their judgment for that of the
governing board of the GJUHSD and that none of the concerns
about legal propriety had merit. The Superior Court, in
June 2008, rules in favor of GJUHSD determining that the
county superintendent abused his discretion under the
Education Code in refusing to process the payroll warrants
and that the county superintendent failed to produce
substantial evidence that the severance buyouts were
improperly adopted. The county superintendent and the
Sacramento County Office of Education filed an appeal.
After examination of the respective roles of the GJUHSD and
the county superintendent of schools, the Third Appellate
Court, in December 2009, concluded that the county
superintendent, in his refusal to process the severance
payroll warrants, had the authority to do so and did not
abuse his discretion in exercising it. The Appellate Court
pointed out that statute vests to county superintendent of
schools general oversight powers and, specifically, the
authority to act as a watchdog for each school district's
fiscal affairs, and that current law, through review of
legislative history, gave the county superintendent of
SB 821
Page
5
schools a prompt, effective means of stopping wasteful or
unnecessary expenditures by the outgoing governing boards
of school districts within his/her jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the Appellate Court overturned the writ of
mandate.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No
Local: No
SUPPORT : (Verified 5/17/11)
Calif. County Superintendents Educational Services
Association (source)
Kern County Superintendent of Schools
Riverside County Superintendent of Schools
Twin Rivers Unified School District
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : This bill is prompted by the
events of the aforementioned court cases and the need to
clearly articulate the role and responsibilities of a
county superintendent of schools during the transition
period after a vote or reorganization of a school board(s)
has been passed by the voters, and when the newly formed or
organized school district takes effect.
CPM:cm 5/17/11 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****