Lozano Smith's attorneys are recognized leaders in the state on charter school issues. The firm has been involved in every aspect of charter school law on behalf of education agencies throughout the state, including review of initial and renewal petitions, assisting boards with the denial and appeals process, assisting in all aspects of facilities issues, drafting Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs) for operational and special education services, assisting staff in oversight of approved charters, and charter revocation. The firm has also assisted school districts and county boards of education to establish and operate dependent charter schools.
Areas of Practice
To ensure the success of its clients, the Charter Schools Practice Group specializes in:
- Review of petitions to establish charter schools
- MOUs for operational and special education services
- Reviewing and assisting districts with renewal and revocation processes
- Navigate facilities obligations to charter schools
Real World Applications
The firm’s attorneys help school districts and county offices of education navigate the law and manage their relationships with the charter schools that they authorize. Our client authorizers vary, with charter school communities that are small and large. Lozano Smith has advised numerous clients on issues relating to Proposition 39 charter facilities and related funding questions. This has included negotiating facilities agreements and litigating issues regarding use of particular facilities.
Charter School Facilities
The firm has provided counsel and advocacy in every aspect of charter school law on behalf of authorizers throughout the state, including assisting in all aspects of charter school facilities issues and Prop. 39. Lozano Smith has provided advice to many school district clients on issues regarding Proposition 39, charter school facilities, and related legal obligations. This advice has been on issues related to negotiating facilities agreements with charter schools, reviewing and negotiating charter school petitions, as well as litigating issues regarding use of particular facilities. We also counsel large and diverse school districts that are impacted by a high concentration of charter schools.
New Federal Tax Credit May Result in Greater Funding for Private Schools
August 20, 2025 Number 35 In a victory for school choice advocates, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB), signed into law by President Donald Trump on July 4, 2025, introduces a new tax credit available to individual taxpayers who make “qualified contributions” to Scholarship Granting Organizations (SGOs). Contributions to SGOs differ from conventional school voucher programs in certain key respects. School vouchers are state financial obligations that parents can give t...
A Supreme Split on Religion-Based Charter Schools
May 2025Number 21On May 22, 2025, in a 4-4 split decision, the United States Supreme Court upheld an Oklahoma Supreme Court decision denying approval of a religion-based charter school on the grounds that approval of the charter would violate the Establishment Clause of the United States Constitution. BackgroundThe Oklahoma Statewide Virtual Charter School Board (the Board) is a statutorily created public entity with authority to authorize and sponsor Oklahoma statewide virtual charter s...
California Court Checks The State Board of Education on Charter School Appeal
April 2025Number 16In Napa Valley Unified School District v. State Board of Education (Cal. Ct. App., Mar. 14, 2025, No. C099068), California’s Third District Court of Appeal examined the discretion afforded to charter school authorizers in approving or denying charter petitions. While the initial ruling was issued as an “unpublished opinion”, the Court ordered publication on April 10, 2025, authorizing use of this holding as valid legal authority.HistoryNapa Foundation for ...
Ninth Circuit Addresses Due Process Rights of Students in Relation to Suspensions
March 2025Number 13In K.J. by and through Johnson v. Jackson (9th Cir. 2025) 127 F.4th 1239, the United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals found that the procedural due process rights outlined in Goss v. Lopez (1975) 419 U.S. 565 must be observed when imposing a suspension or extending a suspension based on new allegations or evidence. Specifically, students must receive oral or written notice of the charges against them, an explanation of the evidence authorities have, and an opportunity ...
President Trump Signs Executive Order Banning Transgender Women from Women’s and Girls’ Sports
February 2025Number 12On February 5, 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order (EO) entitled “Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports” (EO 14201).In this EO, President Trump aims to ban transgender women from women’s and girls’ sports, relying on the definitions of “male” and “female” from his prior EO, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government” (EO 14168). Specific...
California Attorney General Responds to President’s Executive Order Regarding “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling”
February 2025Number 11On January 29, 2025, President Trump signed an Executive Order (EO) titled “Ending Radical Indoctrination in K-12 Schooling,” which aims to address what is described as the influence of “radical, anti-American ideologies” and the resulting infringement on parental rights. While the EO previews policies the Trump Administration intends to implement, it remains to be seen precisely how those policies will take shape and how they might conflict with ...
Department of Homeland Security Issues Directive Rescinding Policy Limiting Immigration Enforcement in Protected Areas
February 2025Number 9On January 20, 2025, Acting Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary, Benjamine Huffman, rescinded a longstanding policy that shielded places like schools, hospitals, and churches from immigration enforcement. This was replaced with a directive granting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) agents’ broad authority to conduct enforcement actions in these locations.BackgroundFor over a decade, DHS policy limited immig...
Representative Cases
| In New Jerusalem Elementary School District v. Academy of Arts & Sciences Charter School, San Joaquin County Superior Court Case No. STC-cv-UMC-2016-1072, Lozano Smith obtained a $1.5 million settlement on behalf of New Jerusalem School District against a charter schools for recovery of funds allocated to two charter schools previously operated by the charter schools, which become dependent charter schools operated by the District. The settlement was reached after Lozano Smith successfully argued that such funds belonged and should follow the students to which the funding was allocated by the State. The charter school argued that any funds not expended on instruction properly belonged to the nonprofit operating the schools, a practice commonly known as “sweeping” – and which is prevalent in charter management organizations that have ties to for-profit service providers. The $1.5 million settlement represented over 75% of the dollars at issue in the case. |
| In Anderson Union High School District v. Shasta Secondary Home School (2016) 4 Cal.App.5th 262, the Lozano Smith litigation team successfully argued, in a case of first impression, that the geographic and site limitations of the Charter Schools Act (Ed. Code, § 47600 et seq.) are applicable to all charter schools, including “nonclassroom-based” programs. |
| CSBA’s Education Legal Alliance (“ELA”) often retains our firm to litigate matters that will have an impact on school districts and county boards of education on a statewide basis. We have been retained by ELA to file amicus briefing in matters where LAUSD was a party, including UTLA v. LAUSD (2012) 54 Cal.4th 504 (regarding whether provisions of California’s Charter Schools Act regarding petition review precludes the terms of a collective bargaining agreement.) |
| ELA retained Lozano Smith to request that the Court of Appeal publish a significant decision regarding charter school facilities under Prop. 39 (CCSA v. LAUSD (2012) 212 Cal.App.4th 689.). The request to publish was successful. |
| Prevailing in litigation that challenged the Alameda County Board of Education’s decision not to renew a countywide charter school due to significant operational and governance issues. |
| Advising North Monterey County Unified School District on the oversight and revocation of the charter of a nonclassroom-based charter school that persistently permitted the purchase of religious instructional materials with public funds. |
| Working with the Board of the Sacramento City Unified School District through the closure of the Visual and Performing Arts Charter School (VAPAC) and negotiations over the disposition of VAPAC’s assets and the resolution of its debts to the District. |
| Working with Westwood Unified School District to address fiscal and conflict of interest issues at a charter school, and, in lieu of revocation, negotiating a settlement agreement that allowed the charter school to continue operating after taking measures to address the district’s concerns. |
| Successfully defended a charter school’s challenge in Superior Court to the Pajaro Valley Unified School District’s rights to control use of its facilities. |
| Assisted a school district in community discussions regarding fiscal and programmatic impacts a new charter school would have on that Basic Aid district. |
| Provided counsel to numerous school districts through denial of the charter school petition and subsequent appeals to the County and State Boards of Education. |
| Assisted in the formation of “dependent” charter schools. |
| Worked with a school district to favorably settle an audit appeal on behalf of a dependent charter school that would have disallowed half of the school’s annual budget. We were able to demonstrate compliance by the District for a significant portion of the independent study attendance accounting requirements that were the subject of the finding. |
| Successfully defended a charter school’s challenge in Superior Court to a school district’s rights to control use of its facilities. |
| Successfully prosecuted the revocation of the charter of Gateway Charter School. Successfully defended Fresno Unified School District from $1.8 million in claims from the charter school’s creditors. |
| Assisted West Park Elementary School District in revoking the charter of Rosalyn Charter School - avoiding any litigation against the district challenging its decision. |
