## Facts

- The Utah Legislature enacted the Utah Charter Schools Act in 1998 as a three-year pilot program authorizing up to eight charter schools.
- The Act classified charter schools as part of the state’s public education system and aimed to improve and customize public education programs.
- The Act gave the Utah State Board of Education authority to review and approve or deny charter school applications.
- After approval, the Act required the charter to be formulated with the State Board and executed as a contract between the school’s governing body and the State Board; charter modifications required mutual agreement.
- The Act authorized the State Board to terminate or refuse to renew a charter on statutorily specified grounds and imposed reporting obligations to the State Board, local school boards, and the legislature.
- The Act directed the State Board to adopt rules on specified aspects of charter school funding distribution within a legislative funding framework.
- The Utah School Boards Association sought declaratory relief, arguing the Act unconstitutionally expanded the State Board’s role and encroached on local boards.
- The district court granted summary judgment for the State Board; the Utah Supreme Court reviewed constitutionality de novo.

## Issues

1. Whether the Utah Constitution’s grant to the State Board of “general control and supervision” of public education bars the legislature from assigning the State Board specific supervisory functions over individual charter schools (including approval, contracting, termination, and funding-related rulemaking).
2. Whether the Act’s charter-school governance and finance structure exceeded constitutional limits by reallocating authority among the State Board, local school districts/boards, and the legislature.

## Decision

- The Utah Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for the State Board and upheld the Charter Schools Act as constitutional.
- The court held that “general control and supervision” is a broad grant of authority and does not restrict the State Board to only system-wide or abstract functions.
- The court concluded the legislature acted within constitutional bounds by placing charter schools in the public system and assigning the State Board direct supervisory and administrative responsibilities over them.
- The court sustained statutory provisions authorizing State Board application approval, charter contracting and modification processes, termination/nonrenewal authority, and funding-related rulemaking within the statutory framework.

## Legal Principles

- Statutes are presumed constitutional; a challenger must show a clear conflict with the constitution, and doubts are resolved in favor of validity.
- The constitutional phrase “general control and supervision” refers to the State Board’s jurisdiction over the public education system and permits performance of specific supervisory tasks affecting individual schools and programs.
- The legislature has broad authority to create and structure components of the public education system, including new types of public schools, so long as it does not violate explicit constitutional commands.
- Legislative delegation to an education agency to implement statutory policy through rulemaking is permissible when the legislature sets the basic framework and the agency fills in administrative details.

## Conclusion

The Utah Supreme Court held that the Charter Schools Act fit within the state constitutional allocation of education authority because the State Board’s “general control and supervision” allows detailed oversight of charter schools, and the legislature may structure and fund such schools as part of the public education system.


Utah Sch. Bds. Ass’n v. Utah State Bd. of Educ., 17 P.3d 1125 (Utah 2001)