BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 360
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 360 (Brownley)
As Amended April 6, 2011
Majority vote
EDUCATION 7-3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Brownley, Ammiano, | | |
| |Buchanan, Butler, Carter, | | |
| |Eng, Williams | | |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Norby, Halderman, Wagner | | |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Requires charter schools to comply with the same conflict
of interest requirements as school districts, commencing July 1,
2012. Specifically, this bill :
1)Declares charter schools are subject to all of the following:
a) The Ralph M. Brown Act (Brown Act), except that a charter
school operated by an entity governed by the Bagley-Keene Open
Meeting Act (BKOMA) is subject to that Act;
b) The California Public Records Act (CPRA);
c) Article 4 (commencing with Section 1090) of Chapter 1 of
Division 4 of Title 1 of the Government Code; and,
d) The Political Reform Act of 1974 (PRA).
2)Specifies a member of the governing body of a charter school shall
abstain from voting on all matters affecting his or her own
employment and personnel matters that uniquely affect a member's
AB 360
Page 2
relative; specifies a person who is disqualified by the California
Constitution or laws of the state from holding a civil office
shall not serve on the governing body of a charter school; and,
specifies this measure does not prohibit an employee of a charter
school from serving as a member of the governing body of that
charter school.
3)Specifies that if a charter school governing body engages in
activities that are not related to the operation of the charter
school, this bill does not make those unrelated activities subject
to the Brown Act, the BKOMA, or the CPRA; and, prohibits a meeting
of the charter school governing body to discuss items related to
the charter school to also include discussion of any item
regarding an activity that is not related to the charter school.
4)Specifies that a charter school governing body may meet within the
boundaries of the county or counties in which one or more of the
school's facilities are located provided that proper notices
pursuant to the Brown Act and the BKOMA are posted within the
boundaries of each of the counties in which any of the school's
facilities is located; specifies a charter school may also meet in
a county contiguous to the county where one or more of the
school's facilities are located, if at least 10% of the pupils who
are enrolled in the school reside in that contiguous county; and,
specifies a nonclassroom based charter school that does not have a
facility may meet within the boundaries of the county in which the
greatest number of pupils who are enrolled in the school reside.
5)Authorizes a charter school governing body to hold closed sessions
to consider a matter regarding pupil discipline.
6)Specifies for purposes of the PRA, the jurisdiction of a charter
school shall be the county or counties in which the school's
facility or facilities are located; the jurisdiction for a
nonclassroom based charter school that does not have a facility
shall be the physical boundaries of the county or counties where
at least 10% of the pupils who are enrolled in the school reside
or, if at least 10% of the pupils do not reside in a single
county, the county in which the greatest number of pupils who are
enrolled in the school reside.
AB 360
Page 3
7)Declares that a statement of economic interest that is filed by a
designated person at a charter school after the required deadline
pursuant to the PRA shall not be the sole basis for revocation of
a charter.
8)Defines for purposes of this measure, "facility" to mean a charter
school campus, resource center, meeting space, or satellite
facility.
EXISTING LAW pertaining to charter schools:
1)Provides no specific requirement for charter school governing
board conflict of interest policies.
2)Deems charter schools as school districts for the purposes of
receiving state education funds.
EXISTING LAW pertaining to school districts:
1)Specifies that Members of the Legislature, state, county,
district, and city officers or employees shall not be financially
interested in any contract made by them in their official
capacity, or by any body or board of which they are members.
(Government Code 1090)
2)Requires members of school district governing boards and
designated employees of the school district to file statements of
financial interest according to the Political Reform Act.
(Government Code 87100 et. seq.)
3)Requires a school district, or any board, commission or agency
thereof, or other local public agency to comply with the Brown
Act. (Government Code 54950 et. seq.)
4)Requires a school district to comply with the California Public
Records Act. (Government Code 6250 et. seq.)
FISCAL EFFECT : This bill is keyed non-fiscal.
COMMENTS : This bill requires charter school governing board members
to comply with substantially similar conflict of interest policies
AB 360
Page 4
by which school district governing board members currently abide.
Recent news reports of charter school board members engaging in
inappropriate financial mismanagement have highlighted the need for
charter school conflict of interest laws to be clarified.
Currently, these investigations can take many months to resolve
partly due to the fact that charter school governing board members
and designated employees do not consistently file an annual
statement of economic interest, which makes public any potential
conflicts of interest that individual may have in their official
capacity. While charter schools are given more autonomy than public
schools, their governing boards have authority over public funds to
be used for the educational benefit of their students. Charter
school governing boards should be held to the same conflict of
interest standards as school district governing boards.
This bill requires charter school boards to file statements of
economic interest according to the Political Reform Act; specifies
that charter school board members may not be financially interested
in any decision made by the board; requires charter schools to
comply with the California Public Records Act; and, requires charter
school boards to abide by the Brown Act or the Bagley-Keene Open
Meetings Act. The bill also expressly authorizes charter school
employees to serve on a charter school governing board.
The Brown Act: The Brown Act governs meetings conducted by local
legislative bodies, such as boards of supervisors, city councils,
and school boards. The Brown Act represents the Legislature's
determination of how the balance should be struck between public
access to meetings of multi-member public bodies and the need for
confidential candor, debate, and information gathering.
California Public Records Act (CPRA): The CPRA was enacted in 1968
and according to the Attorney General, in enacting the CRPA, the
Legislature stated that access to information concerning the conduct
of the public's business is a fundamental and necessary right for
every person in the state. Cases interpreting the CRPA also have
emphasized that its primary purpose is to give the public an
opportunity to monitor the functioning of their government.
Government Code 1090: Government Code 1090 states that Members of
the Legislature, state, county, district, judicial district, and
city officers or employees shall not be financially interested in
any contract made by them in their official capacity, or by any body
or board of which they are members. In a 1983 opinion the Attorney
General stated, "Section 1090 of the Government Code codifies the
AB 360
Page 5
common law prohibition and the general policy of this state against
public officials having a personal interest in contracts they make
in their official capacities. Mindful of the ancient adage, that
'no man can serve two masters,' the section was enacted to ensure
that public officials 'making' official contracts not be distracted
by personal financial gain from exercising absolute loyalty and
undivided allegiance to the best interest of the entity which they
serve."
Political Reform Act: The Fair Political Practices Commission
(FPPC) was created by the Political Reform Act of 1974, a ballot
initiative passed by California voters as Proposition 9. The FPPC
provides written and oral advice to public agencies and officials;
conducts seminars and training sessions; develops forms, manuals and
instructions; and receives and files statements of economic
interests from many state and local officials. The FPPC
investigates alleged violations of the Political Reform Act, imposes
penalties when appropriate, and assists state and local agencies in
developing and enforcing conflict-of-interest codes. School board
members are required to comply with the PRA, and in so, must file a
statement of economic interest, annually.
Previous legislation: AB 572 (Brownley) from 2010 was substantially
similar to this bill and was vetoed by the Governor.
Analysis Prepared by : Chelsea Kelley / ED. / (916) 319-2087
FN: 0000178