BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                       



           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                   SB 592|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                         |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                         |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                         |
          |327-4478                          |                         |
           ------------------------------------------------------------ 
           
                                         
                                 THIRD READING


          Bill No:  SB 592
          Author:   Romero (D)
          Amended:  6/9/09
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE  :  9-0, 4/29/09
          AYES:  Romero, Huff, Alquist, Hancock, Liu, Maldonado,  
            Padilla, Simitian, Wyland

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  10-0, 6/29/09
          AYES:  Kehoe, Cox, Corbett, Leno, Price, Runner, Walters,  
            Wolk, Wyland, Yee
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Denham, Hancock, Oropeza


           SUBJECT  :    Charter Schools Facilities Program

           SOURCE  :     Author


           DIGEST  :    This bill authorizes a local government entity,  
          including a county board of education, a city or a county,  
          and authorizes a charter school to hold title to a charter  
          school facility constructed with state bond funds.  The  
          bill also authorizes charter school to request a district  
          currently holding title to such a facility to transfer  
          title to the charter school or other specified entity upon  
          mutual agreement.

           ANALYSIS  :    Current law establishes the School Facility  
          Program (SFP) under which the state provides general  
          obligation bond funding for various school new construction  
                                                           CONTINUED





                                                                SB 592
                                                                Page  
          2

          and modernization projects.  In 2002, Proposition 47  
          authorized $11.4 billion in general obligation bonds.   
          Among other things, it created the Charter Schools  
          Facilities Program (CSFP) and provided $100 million in  
          funding for this purpose.  In 2004, Proposition 55  
          authorized $10 billion in general obligation bonds and  
          provided an additional $300 million for the new  
          construction of facilities for charter schools.  Most  
          recently, Proposition 1D made several changes and further  
          expanded the CSFP, providing an additional $500 million for  
          charter school facilities.

          Current law requires that a school district hold title, in  
          trust, for the benefit of the state public school system,  
          to any project facilities constructed with state bond  
          funds.  Current law also provides for the continued use of  
          a charter school facility by another charter, or the school  
          district if the charter school funded under the CSFP ceases  
          to use the facility for a charter school purpose.  If the  
          district declines to take possession of the facility or it  
          is no longer needed for public school purposes, the  
          district is authorized to dispose of the facility in a  
          manner applicable to the disposal of surplus public school  
          sites.

          This bill alters the CSFP, principally, by allowing  
          entities other than the school district to hold title to  
          the facility.  The bill requires that prior to the release  
          of funds, the applicant school will provide one of the  
          following:

          1.Documentary evidence that the school district holds title  
            to the project facilities in trust for the benefit of the  
            public school system.

          2.Documentary evidence that a local government entity,  
            including a county office of education, a city and/or a  
            county, holds title to the project facilities in trust  
            for the benefit of the public school system, as  
            specified.

          3.A request that the charter school be authorized to hold  
            fee simple title to the property, on which a lien shall  
            be recorded in favor of the State Allocation Board for  







                                                                SB 592
                                                                Page  
          3

            the total amount of funds allocated for the project.

          This bill also authorizes charter schools to request a  
          school district to transfer title to the charter school or  
          other authorized entity if the district entered into an  
          agreement to hold title to the facility prior to January 1,  
          2010.  The transfer will be subject to terms and conditions  
          mutually agreed upon by the district and the charter  
          school.

          Currently, prior to the release of funds, among other  
          requirements, a school district and a charter school must  
          negotiate a use agreement.  Some districts are reluctant to  
          sign the use agreement due to liability concerns. Also,  
          some charter schools contend that districts place onerous  
          conditions on the school as part of the use agreement  
          negotiations.  This bill is intended to address some of  
          these concerns.

           Comments

          What is the problem  ?  In order to participate in the CSFP,  
          the California School Finance Authority (Authority)  
          requires three agreements:  the Memorandum of Understanding  
          (MOU), which outlines the roles and responsibilities of all  
          parties involved in the CSFP project; the Funding  
          Agreement, which sets forth the repayment terms of the  
          local matching share amount (templates for these agreements  
          were adopted by the SAB in January 2007); and the Use  
          Agreement, which is negotiated and entered into by the  
          school district and charter school.  As titleholders for  
          facilities constructed under the CSFP, school districts  
          must sign both the MOU and the Use Agreements.  All three  
          agreements must be executed prior to any fund release.   
          Charter schools contend that the time involved in  
          negotiating the use Agreements is excessive, resulting in  
          delays in initiating projects or acquiring land.  In  
          addition, charters have expressed concern that school  
          districts have placed "onerous" conditions upon them in  
          these agreements and have extracted unreasonable  
          concessions such as rights for parking, use of rights for  
          adult school programs or other non-charter programs, and  
          that they have been required to waive all rights to request  
          any other property from the district for the term of the  







                                                                SB 592
                                                                Page  
          4

          lease.  This bill attempts to address this issue by  
          authorizing both local government entities and charter  
          schools to be eligible to hold title to the facilities. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

          According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, both the  
          Legislative Counsel and legal staff from the Department of  
          General Services believes the state should incur no  
          liability resulting from the purchase of a lien on a CSFP  
          charter school project; costs resulting from this bill  
          should be minimal.  There may be some minor administrative  
          costs to adopt regulations and for review of required  
          documentation.

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  7/1/09)

          Alliance for College-Ready Public Schools
          Aspire Public Schools
          California Charter Schools Association
          Coalition for Adequate School Housing (if amended)
          Department of General Services
          Ed Voice
          Green Dot Public Schools
          Los Angeles Unified School District
          Vaughn Next Century Learning Center


          DLW:cm  7/1/09   Senate Floor Analyses 

                         SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                ****  END  ****