BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Senator Carol Liu, Chair
2015 - 2016 Regular
Bill No: SB 739
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Author: |Pavley |
|-----------+-----------------------------------------------------|
|Version: |April 6, 2015 Hearing |
| |Date: April 15, 2015 |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Urgency: |No |Fiscal: |Yes |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Consultant:|Lenin Del Castillo |
| | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Charter schools: sited outside boundaries: report:
prohibition
SUMMARY
This bill would prohibit a school district from authorizing a
new charter school to locate outside of its jurisdiction if it
is assigned a negative certification. Additionally, this bill
would authorize the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI)
to perform a study and make recommendations on the number of
charter schools that are sited outside the boundaries of their
chartering school district.
BACKGROUND
Under existing law, the Charter Schools Act of 1992 provides for
the establishment of charter schools in California for the
purpose, among other things, to improve student learning and
expand learning experiences for pupils who are identified as
academically low achieving. Charter schools are public schools
that provide instruction in any combination of grades
kindergarten through grade 12. A charter school may be
authorized by a school district, a county board of education, or
the State Board of Education, as specified. Some charter
schools are new while others are conversions from existing
schools. Except where specifically noted otherwise, California
law exempts charter schools from many of the statutes and
regulations that apply to schools and school districts.
SB 739 (Pavley) Page 2
of ?
According to the State Department of Education, there were over
1,100 charter schools with an enrollment of approximately
514,000 pupils operating in the state in 2013-14.
Parents, teachers, or community members may initiate a charter
petition, which is typically presented to and approved by a
local school district governing board. The law also allows,
under certain circumstances, for county boards of education and
the State Board of Education to authorize charter schools. The
specific goals for a charter school are detailed in the
agreement (charter) between the authorizing entity and the
charter developer. The charter petition is also required to
include a description of the educational program of the school
and several other policies and procedures relating to employees,
pupils, and finances. Current law establishes procedures for
the renewal of charter schools, not to exceed five years.
Current law requires that charter schools: 1) are nonsectarian
in their programs, admission policies, employment practices, and
all other operations; 2) not charge tuition; and 3) not
discriminate against any pupil on the basis of the
characteristics, as specified. Admission to a charter school
may not be determined according to the place of residence of the
pupil, or of his or her parent or legal guardian. Additionally,
a charter school is required to admit all pupils who wish to
attend the school. However, if the number of pupils who wish to
attend the charter school exceeds the school's capacity,
attendance is determined by a public random drawing. (Education
Code § 47605)
ANALYSIS
This bill:
1. Authorizes the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI)
to study and report to the Legislature by December 31,
2016, the number of charter schools that are sited outside
the boundaries of the chartering school district, as
specified.
2. Provides that the report may make findings, including, but
not limited to, all of the following:
SB 739 (Pavley) Page 3
of ?
A. The number and location of charter schools sited
outside the boundaries
of the chartering school district.
B. The reason that a charter school is located
outside the boundaries of the
chartering school district, as specified.
C. Whether the superintendent of the school district
where the charter school
is located was notified in advance of the charter
petition approval, as specified.
3. Provides that the report may make recommendations,
including, but not limited to, the authority of state or
local entities to enforce charter law.
4. Provides that the report be submitted in compliance with
Government Code § 9795.
5. Prohibits the governing board of a school district from
authorizing a new charter school to locate outside the
boundaries of the school district if the school district is
assigned a negative certification, as specified.
STAFF COMMENTS
1. Need for the bill. Existing law allows a charter school to
locate a facility in a school district other than the one
it is authorized by under a very limited number of
circumstances. However, according to the author's office,
when this occurs, school districts and charter schools
often have differing interpretations of state law,
difficulty in ensuring accountability, and lacking clear
lines of communication. The author's office indicates
there have been some high-profile cases in which
cash-strapped school districts have authorized charter
schools outside of the district in order to generate
revenue through "oversight fees." While these situations
have brought more attention to this issue, there is limited
information regarding the number of charter schools located
outside the boundaries of their authorizing district. This
SB 739 (Pavley) Page 4
of ?
bill seeks to shed some light on the consequences, whether
intended or unintended, of charter schools locating outside
the boundaries of their authorizing school districts.
2. Locating outside the boundaries of its authorizer. A
charter school that is unable to locate within the
jurisdiction of the authorizing school district may
establish one site outside the boundaries of the school
district, but within the same county, if the following
conditions are satisfied:
A. The school district in which the charter school
proposes to operate is notified in advance of the
charter petition approval;
B. The county superintendent of schools and the
Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) are
notified of the location of the charter school before
it commences operations; and either of the following
circumstances exists:
i) The charter school has attempted to
locate a single site or facility to house the
entire program, but a site or facility is
unavailable in the area in which the charter
school chooses to locate.
ii) The site is needed for temporary use
during a construction or expansion project.
3. Negative certification. Local education agencies (LEAs)
are required to file two reports during the fiscal year
(interim reports) on the status of the LEA's fiscal health.
The first report is due December 15 and the second report
is due March 17. The interim reports must include a
certification of whether or not the LEA is able to meet its
financial obligations. The certifications are classified
as positive, qualified, or negative. A positive
certification is assigned when the district will meet its
financial obligations for the current and two subsequent
fiscal years. A qualified certification is assigned when
the district may not meet its financial obligations for the
current or two subsequent fiscal years. A negative
SB 739 (Pavley) Page 5
of ?
certification is assigned when a district will be unable to
meet its financial obligations for the remainder of the
current year or for the subsequent fiscal year. This bill
prohibits a school district with a negative certification
from authorizing a charter school to be located outside
their jurisdiction. This is intended to remove a potential
incentive for a school district under financial distress to
authorize charter schools as a means to generate revenue.
However, the bill does not apply to county offices of
education that have a negative certification. As the bill
moves forward, the author may wish to consider whether a
county office of education with a negative certification
should also be prohibited from authorizing a charter school
located outside of its jurisdiction.
4. Would the bill affect existing schools? This bill's
provisions would not apply retroactively (only
prospectively) and hence, not affect any existing charter
school that was previously authorized by a school district
under negative certification. Additionally, the bill would
not apply if a district is assigned a negative
certification subsequent to authorizing a charter school.
Further, the bill's prohibition would not apply to a
charter school operating within a school district's
boundaries.
5. Current oversight for charter authorizers. Existing law
requires a charter school to promptly respond to all
reasonable inquiries, including, but not limited to,
inquiries regarding its financial records, from its
chartering authority, the county office of education that
has jurisdiction over the school's chartering authority, or
from the Superintendent of Public Instruction and to
consult with these entities regarding any inquiries. Each
chartering authority is also required to do all of the
following with respect to a charter school under its
authority:
A. Identify at least one staff member as a contact
person for the charter school.
B. Visit each charter school annually.
SB 739 (Pavley) Page 6
of ?
C. Ensure that each charter school complies with all
reports required of charter schools by law.
D. Monitor the fiscal condition of each charter
school under its authority.
E. Provide timely notification to the State
Department of Education if any of the following
circumstances occur or will occur with regard to a
charter school for which it is the chartering
authority:
i) A renewal of the charter is granted or
denied.
ii) The charter is revoked.
iii) The charter school will cease operation
for any reason.
Existing law requires each charter school to annually
prepare and submit reports to its chartering authority and
county superintendent of schools or only to the county
superintendent of schools if the county board of education
is the chartering authority. These reports include a
preliminary budget, interim financial reports, and audits.
Current law also requires the chartering authority to use
any financial information it obtains from the charter
school, including, but not limited to, the reports required
by this section, to assess the fiscal condition of the
charter school.
6. Related and previous legislation.
SB 1263 (Pavley, 2014) would have authorized a charter school to
locate outside the jurisdiction of the chartering school
district with written approval from the school district within
the jurisdiction of which the charter school chooses to operate
and for purposes of construction. SB 1263 bill passed this
Committee but was eventually vetoed by the Governor with the
following message:
SB 739 (Pavley) Page 7
of ?
This bill seeks to reverse the application of a
limited exemption in law that allows a charter school
petitioner to locate a single school site outside of
its authorizing school district, under specific
circumstances. This bill would instead require the
charter school to first get permission from the host
district where it intends to locate.
Unfortunately, it appears that some districts and
charter schools have gone against the spirit of the
law and the exemption has instead become the rule.
This has led to litigation and strained relationships
among districts and charter schools.
While this bill attempts to solve a real problem, I am
not comfortable with the retroactive language that
could force existing charter schools to change
locations.
I have assembled a team to examine this situation and
come back with solutions that minimize disruption to
students and parents.
SUPPORT
Castaic Union School District
Newhall School District
San Diego Unified School District
Saugus Union School District
Sulphur Springs School District
William S. Hart Union High School District
OPPOSITION
California Charter Schools Association
Charter Schools Development Center
-- END --
SB 739 (Pavley) Page 8
of ?