California 2017-2018 Regular Session Status: In Committee 1 D cosponsors

SB 949 — Conflicts of interest: public officers and employees: charter schools.

Last action — April 24 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.

Track this bill free

No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. 2
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.

This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.

Summary

(1) Existing law, the Charter Schools Act of 1992, provides for the establishment and operation of charter schools and provides that a charter school may operate as, or be operated by, a nonprofit public benefit corporation. Existing law prohibits certain public officials, including, but not limited to, state, county, or district officers or employees, from being financially interested in any contract made by them in their official capacity, or by any body or board of which they are members, except as provided. A willful violation of these provisions is a crime. This bill would expressly state that members of the governing body of a charter school, solely with respect to the operations of that charter school, are subject to those conflict-of-interest provisions, except in limited circumstances, as prescribed. The bill would further specify that, as used in those conflict of interest provisions, a member of the governing body of a charter school is considered a public officer, a charter school is considered a government entity, district, public board or commission, public agency or public district, and a member means a person who serves on a governing body of a charter school, excluding members of nonprofit public benefit corporations, as defined, not serving on the governing body of the charter school. (2) Existing law excepts from the above conflict-of-interest provisions certain remote interests, as described, including those of officers or employees of a nonprofit entity exempt from taxation or a nonprofit corporation, except as prescribed. This bill would also except from these remote interest provisions those of a nonprofit limited liability company. (3) Existing law also excepts from those conflict-of-interest provisions the remote interest of an owner or partner of a firm serving as an appointed member of an unelected board or commission of a contracting agency, if the owner or partner recuses himself or herself from providing any advice to the contracting agency regarding the contract between the firm and the contracting agency and from all participation in reviewing a project resulting from that contract. This bill would create another remote interest exception for a member of the governing body or board regarding collective bargaining agreements and personnel matters that affect a class of employees to which the member's relative belongs, as prescribed. The bill would also create a remote interest exception for an employee of or independent contractor to a charter school, serving as a member of the governing body of the charter school by which he or she is employed or under contract with, if that employee or independent contractor abstains from voting on, or influencing or attempting to influence another member of the governing body regarding matters uniquely affecting, his or her own employment or contract. (4) Existing law identifies other situations in which officers or employees are deemed to not be interested in a contract. These include when the officer or employee's interest is: (A) as a recipient of public services generally provided by the body or board of which he or she is a member, on the same terms and conditions as if he or she were not a member of the body or board; (B) that of a landlord or tenant of the contracting party, if the contracting party is, among others, the state or any department or agency of this state; (C) that of the spouse of an officer or employee of a public agency in his or her spouse's employment, as prescribed; and (D) that of a person receiving salary, per diem, or reimbursement for expenses from a government entity. This bill would create 2 additional exceptions for the situation in which an officer or employee provides a loan to a public school, including a charter school, due to a fiscal emergency, or leases real property to be used for public school purposes. Additionally, the bill would make other specified, noninterests provisions apply to nonsalaried directors or members and noncompensated officers of nonprofit limited liability companies. (5) Under existing law, a contract made in violation of the conflict-of-interest provisions may be avoided at the instance of any party, except the officer interested in the contract. Existing law establishes that an action under this provision may be commenced within 4 years after the plaintiff discovered, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have discovered, the violation. This bill would require an interested person, before commencing an action under this provision, to make a written demand to cure or correct the alleged violation. The bill would authorize the demanding party, if the contract is not set aside or reformed within 30 days of the demand, to bring an action under that provision.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. April 24 set for first hearing canceled at the request of author.

  2. Set for hearing April 24.

  3. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  4. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  5. From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on RLS. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 4532.) (April 4). Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

  6. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on ED.

  7. Set for hearing April 4.

  8. Referred to Com. on ED.

  9. From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 2.

  10. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Subjects

labor education
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 949 do?
(1) Existing law, the Charter Schools Act of 1992, provides for the establishment and operation of charter schools and provides that a charter school may operate as, or be operated by, a nonprofit public benefit corporation. Existing law prohibits certain public officials, including, but not limited to, state, county, or district officers or employees, from being financially interested in any contract made by them in their official capacity, or by any body or board of which they are members, except as provided. A willful violation of these provisions is a crime. This bill would expressly state that members of the governing body of a charter school, solely with respect to the operations of that charter school, are subject to those conflict-of-interest provisions, except in limited circumstances, as prescribed. The bill would further specify that, as used in those conflict of interest provisions, a member of the governing body of a charter school is considered a public officer, a charter school is considered a government entity, district, public board or commission, public agency or public district, and a member means a person who serves on a governing body of a charter school, excluding members of nonprofit public benefit corporations, as defined, not serving on the governing body of the charter school. (2) Existing law excepts from the above conflict-of-interest provisions certain remote interests, as described, including those of officers or employees of a nonprofit entity exempt from taxation or a nonprofit corporation, except as prescribed. This bill would also except from these remote interest provisions those of a nonprofit limited liability company. (3) Existing law also excepts from those conflict-of-interest provisions the remote interest of an owner or partner of a firm serving as an appointed member of an unelected board or commission of a contracting agency, if the owner or partner recuses himself or herself from providing any advice to the contracting agency regarding the contract between the firm and the contracting agency and from all participation in reviewing a project resulting from that contract. This bill would create another remote interest exception for a member of the governing body or board regarding collective bargaining agreements and personnel matters that affect a class of employees to which the member's relative belongs, as prescribed. The bill would also create a remote interest exception for an employee of or independent contractor to a charter school, serving as a member of the governing body of the charter school by which he or she is employed or under contract with, if that employee or independent contractor abstains from voting on, or influencing or attempting to influence another member of the governing body regarding matters uniquely affecting, his or her own employment or contract. (4) Existing law identifies other situations in which officers or employees are deemed to not be interested in a contract. These include when the officer or employee's interest is: (A) as a recipient of public services generally provided by the body or board of which he or she is a member, on the same terms and conditions as if he or she were not a member of the body or board; (B) that of a landlord or tenant of the contracting party, if the contracting party is, among others, the state or any department or agency of this state; (C) that of the spouse of an officer or employee of a public agency in his or her spouse's employment, as prescribed; and (D) that of a person receiving salary, per diem, or reimbursement for expenses from a government entity. This bill would create 2 additional exceptions for the situation in which an officer or employee provides a loan to a public school, including a charter school, due to a fiscal emergency, or leases real property to be used for public school purposes. Additionally, the bill would make other specified, noninterests provisions apply to nonsalaried directors or members and noncompensated officers of nonprofit limited liability companies. (5) Under existing law, a contract made in violation of the conflict-of-interest provisions may be avoided at the instance of any party, except the officer interested in the contract. Existing law establishes that an action under this provision may be commenced within 4 years after the plaintiff discovered, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have discovered, the violation. This bill would require an interested person, before commencing an action under this provision, to make a written demand to cure or correct the alleged violation. The bill would authorize the demanding party, if the contract is not set aside or reformed within 30 days of the demand, to bring an action under that provision.
Who sponsors SB 949?
SB 949 is sponsored by Allen, Benjamin (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 949?
This bill died with 2017-2018 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
Where can I track SB 949?
Track SB 949 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 949

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 949

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →