BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Senator Noreen Evans, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
SB 1213 (Walters)
As Amended April 30, 2012
Hearing Date: May 8, 2012
Fiscal: Yes
Urgency: No
RD
SUBJECT
Charter Schools: Legal Claims and Actions
DESCRIPTION
In 2009, the California Law Revision Commission (CLRC) was
authorized to study the legal implications of treating a charter
school as a public entity for the purposes of claims and actions
brought against public entities and employees as specified.
This bill would require this analysis to be submitted to the
Legislature no later than January 15, 2013.
BACKGROUND
The California Government Tort Claims Act (TCA) (Government Code
Sections 810-996.6) was intended to abolish all common law or
judicially declared forms of liability for public entities,
except for such liability as may be required by the state or
federal constitutions. (See Government Code Section 815,
Legislative Committee Comments.) In the absence of a
constitutional requirement, public entities may be held liable
for tortious injury only if a statute is found declaring them to
be liable. (Government Code Sec. 815.) Moreover, under
Government Code Section 815(b), the immunity provisions of the
California Government Tort Claims Act will generally prevail
over any liabilities established by statute. Essentially,
sovereign immunity is the rule in California; governmental
liability is limited to exceptions specifically set forth by
statute. (See Zuniga v. Housing Authority (1995), 41
Cal.App.4th 82, 92; See also Wright v. State of California
(2004) 122 Cal.App.4th 659, 671.)
(more)
SB 1213 (Walters)
Page 2 of ?
Also under California law, 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. (AB 101 (Steinberg, Ch. 14,
Stats. 2000).) 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.
In Courtney Knapp v. Palisades Charter High School (2007) 146
Cal.App.4th 708, a plaintiff visiting student sued Palisades
Charter High School, and others, alleging that she had been
sexually harassed and suffered emotional distress as a result of
that harassment. The appellate court held that, as an alleged
nonprofit public benefit corporation, the charter school was not
a public entity under the TCA, and therefore could not avail
itself of the governmental immunity provisions of the TCA.
Both the California Supreme Court (2007 Cal. LEXIS 3086) and the
United States Supreme Court (552 U.S. 888) denied petitions to
review the case.
In 2009, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed ACR 49
(Evans, Res. Ch. 98, Stats. 2009), which, among other things,
authorized the California Law Revision Commission to study the
implications of treating charter schools as public entities
pursuant to the TCA. This report is anticipated to be released
in June 2012.
This bill, sponsored by the California Charter Schools
Association Advocates (CCSA Advocates), is intended to be a
vehicle to codify a compromise among stakeholders that will
balance the concerns of protecting access to the legal system
with a degree of protection for charter schools, based upon the
California Law Revision Commission's report.
CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
Existing law authorizes the California Law Revision Commission
to study topics approved by concurrent resolution of the
Legislature. (Gov. Code Sec. 8293.)
Existing law , the California Government Tort Claims Act, governs
the tort liability and immunity of, and claims and actions
SB 1213 (Walters)
Page 3 of ?
against, public entities and their officers and employees. A
public entity is not liable for an injury, except as otherwise
provided by statute. (Government Code Secs. 810-996.6 et seq.)
Existing law , the Charter Schools Act of 1992, specifies that a
charter school is deemed to be a school district for purposes of
statutory provisions regarding appointments from the State
School Fund, allowances for transportation, and state lottery
funds and provisions of the California Constitution regarding
the calculation of the minimum amount of funding for the support
of school districts and community college districts. (Ed. Code
Sec. 47600 et seq.)
Existing law provides that a charter school may operate as, or
be operated by, a nonprofit public benefit corporation. A
chartering authority that grants a charter to be operated by, or
as, a nonprofit public benefit corporation, is exempt from
liability for the debts or obligations of the charter school, or
for claims arising from the performance of acts, errors, or
omissions by the charter school, if the authority has complied
with all oversight responsibilities required by law. (Ed. Code
Sec. 47604.)
Existing law provides that a charter school, including a charter
school organized pursuant to Education Code Section 47604, may
be considered a public agency for the purpose of being eligible
for membership in a joint powers agreement for risk-pooling.
(Gov. Code Sec. 6528.)
This bill would provide that the California Law Revision
Commission shall submit its analysis of the legal and policy
implications of treating a charter school as a public entity for
the purposes of the Government Tort Claims Act.
This bill would make a finding and declaration that the
California Law Revision Commission, pursuant to Resolution
Chapter 90 of the Statutes of 2009, is analyzing the legal and
policy implications of treating a charter school as a public
entity for the purposes of the Government Tort Claims Act.
COMMENT
1. Stated need for the bill
According to the author:
SB 1213 (Walters)
Page 4 of ?
�The] California Law Revision Commission was asked to prepare
a report analyzing the implications of treating charter
schools as a public entity pursuant to the Government �Tort]
Claims Act �TCA]. That report is nearly complete; currently
awaiting final consideration by the committee members, likely
at its June 2012 meeting. In 2007, the California Second
District Court of Appeal, in Courtney Knapp v. Palisades
Charter High School, concluded that charter schools are not
public agencies for purposes of the TCA (Government Code
Section 810 et seq.) The court's decision in Knapp has had
immediate practical ramifications, which has led to the loss
of real dollars used to educate our students. The primary
source of charter school revenue is ADA �average daily
attendance], which means that any damage awards that are not
covered by insurance come out of the classroom. . . . CCSA
Advocates is seeking movement of SB 1213 in order to have a
vehicle in place to adopt language that comports with the
recommendations of the CLRC when those are released this year.
The sponsor is in discussions with the Consumer Attorneys of
California �CAOC] who are interested in protecting access to
the legal system. CCSA Advocates are also interesting in
finding a balance that satisfies CAOC's concerns while
providing a degree of protection for charter schools.
2. Charter schools and government tort liability
The California Law Revision Commission (CLRC), created in 1953,
is tasked with the responsibility for a continuing substantive
review of California statutory and decisional law, in order to
discover defects and make related recommendations to the
Legislature for needed reforms. As discussed in the Background,
in 2009, the Legislature passed a resolution that charged the
CLRC with studying the implications of treating charter schools
as public entities pursuant to the Government Tort Claims Act.
(ACR 49 (Evans, Res. Ch. 98, Stats. 2009).) This bill would
require the CLRC to submit its analysis of the legal and policy
implications of treating a charter school as a public entity for
purposes of the TCA, by January 15, 2013.
According to the author, the CLRC report is currently expected
to be released in June 2012 and it is the hope of the proponents
of this bill to adopt language based upon the report that will
SB 1213 (Walters)
Page 5 of ?
also balance the concerns of protecting access to the legal
system with a degree of protection for charter schools. The
author and her sponsors hope to use this bill to adopt the
outcome of that attempted compromise between the sponsor and
other stakeholders based upon the CLRC report.
Committee staff notes that any substantive amendments to this
bill based upon the results of that study would arguably have
significant implications for tort liability, especially if the
bill were to grant charter schools governmental immunity from
tort liability without the same degree of strict public and
regulatory oversight that is given to public entities/agencies.
As such, the author and her sponsor have committed to bring this
bill back to the Committee for hearing if and when it is
substantively amended to incorporate language based on the CLRC
report and the anticipated compromise.
Support : None Known
Opposition : None Known
HISTORY
Source : California Charter Schools Association Advocates
Related Pending Legislation : None Known
Prior Legislation :
SB 108 (Walters, 2009) would have prohibited a JPA for school
district insurance risk pooling from denying access by a charter
school on the sole basis that it is a charter school. That
bill passed this Committee 5-0, and upon passing the Senate
Floor, was referred to the Assembly Judiciary Committee where it
died.
ACR 40 (Evans, Resolution Ch. 98, Stats. 2009) See Background.
AB 1868 (Walters, 2008) would have required the CLRC to submit a
report to the Legislature, on or before March 1, 2009, that
would include a description of the policy purposes of existing
statute concerning government tort liability and the possible
consequences of adding charter schools to the list of public
agencies covered by those statutes. The bill would also have
prohibited the CLRC from making any recommendation on whether
SB 1213 (Walters)
Page 6 of ?
charter schools should be treated as a public entity for the
purposes of government tort liability. This bill was held in
Senate Appropriations.
**************