CSBA sues over Prop. 39 charter facilities rules

CSBA’s Education Legal Alliance sued the State Board of Education this week to overturn new regulations SBE imposed on school districts faced with charter school facilities requests under Proposition 39.

Unless overturned, the new regulations will apply to facilities requests received by districts this fall for the 2009-10 school year. Approved earlier this year after years of discussion, the requirements stray far beyond the intent of the initiative that the state’s voters approved in 2000, CSBA representatives say. Some changes exceed the scope of the state board’s authority and so are not legally valid, they add.

"It’s unfortunate that we have been forced to seek recourse in the courts to get clarity on the legal authority of the State Board of Education,” said CSBA President Paul H. Chatman. “We are convinced these new regulations are clearly outside of its statutory responsibility. If charter schools are to have expanded authority under the law, then that is a matter for the Legislature. It is not the role of the State Board of Education to enact laws; its role is to carry out the laws enacted by the Legislature."

CSBA Senior Policy Analyst Stephanie Medrano Farland was heavily involved in negotiations with State Board staff over the drafting of the regulations.

“Many of these regulations are detrimental to school districts,” Farland said.

For example, Proposition 39 specifies that charter school facilities provided by districts must be “furnished and equipped,” but the new regulations define that provision broadly, including furniture, vehicles, machinery, motion picture film, videotape and intangible assets such as major software programs in the requirement.

The new regulations also give districts just 30 calendar days to review charter schools’ facilities requests for the following school year. The requests—which include enrollment projections and other components that affect charters’ actual needs—are due Nov. 1, and districts have only until Dec. 1 to verify those needs.

Farland said the new timeline will require significant staff time and resources, especially since the review period coincides with the Thanksgiving holiday. The burden will fall most heavily on districts that receive more than one facilities request, and on districts with small administrative office staffs, Farland said.

“School districts are spending an inordinate amount of effort on these facilities requests already, Farland said. “ Nearly 98 percent of public school students have chosen to stay in traditional public schools. With these new regulations, the State Board of Education continues down the path of ignoring the needs of traditional school students in charter school matters and has adopted regulations here that favor the 2 percent over the 98 percent.”

Conversion charters, such as those created when a district school’s parents or faculty submit a petition to convert a district-operated school into a charter school, pose another set of problems. Farland continued.

Those schools will be entitled to remain at school sites where they were operating before they became charter schools as long as they request use of the sites from the school district on an annual basis. Districts can seek a waiver from the State Board to move conversion charters, but Farland is skeptical that many waivers would be granted.

The Education Legal Alliance lawsuit, filed July 24 in Sacramento County Superior Court, seeks to block the new requirements from taking effect and to clear the way for new, more equitable regulations to be negotiated. Alliance Director Richard Hamilton hopes for a decision by mid-September.