LEAs should be aware of revised Prop. 39 timeline

As previously reported in EdCal, ACSA’s Education Legal Support Fund, along with the California School Boards Association’s Education Legal Alliance and the California Association of School Business Officials, have filed suit against the State Board of Education for changing the regulations under Proposition 39 as it pertains to requiring school districts to provide school facilities to charter schools.

Because the regulations were delayed in their passage, they do not apply to facility requests until the 2009-10 fiscal year. The basis of the lawsuit is that SBE acted outside the scope of its authority in advancing a proposition without going through statute, and therefore the regulations are not valid.

ACSA, CSBA and CASBO had hoped that once the lawsuit was filed a stay would have been issued by the court to prevent the changes in Prop. 39 regulations from taking effect until the matter had been resolved through the legal system. But this did not occur and appears unlikely now.

So it’s important that school districts begin making their plans for the 2009-10 school year with the new regulations in mind. Following is the timeline under the changed Prop. 39 regulations:

• Nov. 1: The charter application is due.

• Dec. 1: The school district shall review the charter school’s projected needs and let the charter school know of any objections. These objections must be in writing and the district must state the projections that they feel are reasonable.

• Jan. 1, 2009: The charter school must respond to any objections expressed by the school district and to the district’s projections by this date. Keep in mind that this is the middle of the holiday season, so expect these responses earlier.

• Feb. 1, 2009: Deadline for the school district to prepare, in writing, a preliminary proposal regarding the space to be allocated to the charter school and/or to which the charter school is to be provided access. The preliminary proposal shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

– Projections of in-district classroom ADA on which the proposal is based.

– Specific location or locations of the space.

– All conditions pertaining to space, including a draft of any proposed agreement pertaining to the charter school’s use of the space.

– The projected pro-rata share amount and description of the methodology used to determine that amount.

– A list and description of the comparison group schools used in developing its preliminary proposal, and a description of the differences between the preliminary proposal and the charter school’s facilities request.

• March 1, 2009: The charter school shall respond in writing to the school district’s preliminary proposal informing the district of any concerns, addressing differences between the preliminary proposal and the charter school’s facilities request and making a counter proposal if necessary.

• April 1, 2009: The school district shall submit in writing a final notification of the space offered to the charter school. The notification shall include a response to the charter school’s concerns, if any, and a counter proposal, if necessary.

• May 1, 2009: The charter school must notify the school district in writing whether or not it intends to occupy the space offered.

Under Prop. 39, the facilities must be furnished, equipped and available for occupancy 10 working days prior to when the charter school begins instruction. An agreement worked out in the regulation development process allows this period to be reduced by the school district for good cause. However, the timeline cannot be reduced below seven working days.

ACSA will continue to keep you apprised of any outcomes of this lawsuit and other issues as they arise. In the meantime, please contact ACSA Legislative Advocate Laura Preston at lpreston@acsa.org should you have any questions regarding this issue.

 

You may also be interested in...

  • Investing in our Public Schools
    By Bob Wells, Kevin Gordon and Dick Hamilton
  • Other states wooing CA teachers away
    There are signs that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s proposed huge cuts to education funding may be having an immediate impact in the classroom.
  • Ed Coalition decries proposed budget cuts
    As the Legislature scurries to address the issue of mid-year cuts, the Education Coalition recently held a press briefing on the governor’s proposed budget. Representatives of the state’s top education organizations raised a number of telling points to show how the proposed budget would hurt students.
  • Education Coalition calls on governor to halt devastating proposed cuts to California's schools
    Members of the Education Coalition detailed the devastating impact of Governor Schwarzenegger’s proposed budget to California’s students and schools, showing how a $4.8 billion budget cut severely damages the quality of education in our state, during an event Jan. 18 in Sacramento.
  • Per-pupil spending numbers in question
    ACSA members may be aware of a new report released by the U.S. Census Bureau, which says California ranks 25th in per-pupil school funding. Although some proponents of cutting school funding may use this as validation for their arguments, there are caveats to the census figures.
  • Budget woes: Gov's approval rating dips
    The devastation of the tidal wave of March 15 notices is still being felt and the reverberations have reached all the way to the top.
  • Finding Answers to Questions about School Finance
    From EdSource
  • Education outcry influences May Revise
    Parents and educators have voiced their strong opposition to all cuts to schools and students. And while the governor’s revised fiscal year 2008-09 state budget proposal avoids suspending Proposition 98, the state’s minimum school funding law, it still cuts billions of dollars from public education.
  • CA turns thumbs down on May Revise
    A recent poll from the Public Policy Institute of California shows that most Californians dislike Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s latest May Revise budget plan and oppose his proposal to borrow from the state lottery.
From: 
Email:  
To: 
Email:  
Subject: 
Message: