BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
108 (Walters)
Hearing Date: 05/26/2009 Amended: 04/21/2009
Consultant: Dan Troy Policy Vote: Judiciary 5-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: SB 108 would prohibit a joint powers authority
formed for the purpose of risk pooling from refusing to admit a
charter school solely on the basis that the school under
consideration is a charter school.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Fund
Risk Pools $500 to $1,000, annually
General*
*Counts toward meeting the Proposition 98 minimum funding
guarantee
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: This bill meets the criteria for referral the
Suspense File.
A Joint Powers Authority (JPA) is a government-regulated public
entity formed by two or more public agencies, such as state,
cities, counties, and school districts. JPAs pool their assets
to promote risk management and pay claims against member
entities. The joint powers mechanism can be used for any
governmental function that a single government agency may
lawfully perform. Current law allows that a charter school,
including a charter school operated by or as a nonprofit
corporation, may be considered a public agency eligible for
membership in a joint powers agreement for risk-pooling.
Under the California Tort Claims Act, public entities are immune
from common law or judicially declared forms of tort liability,
except for what is required otherwise by state or federal law.
The statute defines "public entities" as the "State, the Regents
of the University of California, a county, a city, district,
public authority, public agency, and any other political
subdivision or public corporation in the state."
This bill is, in part, a response to an appellate court
decision, Courtney Knapp v. Palisades Charter High School. The
Knapp case concerns a situation in which a student visiting the
campus of the Palisades Charter High School alleges that she was
sexually harassed. The appellate court opined that charter
schools are independent legal entities apart from the
authorizing entity, and thus do not meet the definition of
"public entity" for the purposes of the California Tort Claims
Act. Proponents of the measure that access to risk pools is of
increased importance in light of the Knapp decision.
As the bill requires risk pools to admit charter schools,
Legislative Counsel has flagged the bill as a mandate. As
charter schools do not have the same broad immunity from tort
liability as other public entities, their required inclusion in
the risk pool may lead to increased costs for other pool
members. These costs may be reimbursable by the
Page 2
SB 108 (Walters)
state. Costs per pupil for school districts in a risk pool are
roughly $30 per pupil and approximately 90 percent of districts
belong to JPAs for this purpose. Assuming per pupil costs for
charter schools would be 10 percent higher, this bill could lead
to potential mandate costs of between $500,000 to $1 million,
annually.
In order to eliminate costs or cost pressures, staff suggests
amending the bill to authorize that the price of liability for
coverage extended to charter schools in risk pools be
commensurate with their risk.