¶0 This office has received your request for an official Attorney General Opinion in which you ask the following questions:
1. Does the Oklahoma Charter Schools Act establish the Statewide Virtual Charter School Board as a state agency/entity separate and apart from the State Department of Education?
2. Does the Office of Management and Enterprise Services ("OMES") have the authority to establish a separate cash account for the Statewide Virtual Charter School Board?
3. Does the Oklahoma Charter Schools Act require the State Department of Education to serve as the budgeting entity of the Statewide Virtual Charter School Board after December 31, 2014?

¶1 Since 1999, Oklahoma has supplemented its traditional public school system with a concurrent system that allows for the creation and maintenance of charter schools. See 1999 Okla. Sess. Laws ch. 320, § 6 (currently at 70 O.S.2011, § 3-131). Among other things, charter schools encourage the development of innovative teaching methods, foster healthy competition with traditional public schools, and increase learning opportunities for students. See 70 O.S.2011, § 3-131. While it used to be that charter schools could only exist in brick and mortar buildings within clearly defined school districts, that is not true today. Technological advances led to the emergence of virtual charter schools whose boundaries extend to all corners of the State. Because these virtual schools cannot be contained within the traditional geographical boundaries of a school district, the Legislature created a new mechanism for their sponsorship--the Statewide Virtual Charter School Board. Your questions revolve around whether the Legislature intended this Board to be its own state agency.

¶2 The Oklahoma Legislature created the Statewide Virtual Charter School Board ("Board") in 2012,¹ giving the Board "sole authority to authorize and sponsor statewide virtual charter schools" within the State. 70 O.S.Supp.2015, § 3-145.1(A). The Board is made up of five appointed members--one by the Governor, two by the President Pro Tempore of the Senate, and two by the Speaker of the House of Representatives--and two ex-officio, non-voting members, the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, and the Secretary of Education, or their designees. Id. Pursuant to statute, the Board must:

¶4 In construing any statute, we must first ascertain and give effect to legislative intent. YDF, Inc. v. Schlumar, Inc., 2006 OK 32, ¶ 6, 136 P.3d 656, 658. Where that intent is not expressly stated, we look to "various provisions of the relevant legislative scheme to ascertain and give effect to the legislative intent and the public policy underlying that intent." Id. Because there is no language providing for the creation of an agency or executive office in the Board's enabling statute, we must look to the structure and nature of the Board itself as evidence of the Legislature's intent.

¶6 For example, in 2003 we examined the statutorily created Oklahoma State Bond Advisor ("Bond Advisor") and that position's relationship to the Department of Central Services. See A.G. Opin. 2003-3. In that opinion, we concluded that the Bond Advisor was not subject to control by or subordinate to the Director of the Department of Central Services. Id. at 20. At its outset, the Bond Advisor was a "position within the [Department of Central Services.]" Id. at 16, (citing 62 O.S.Supp.1987, § 695.7(B)).² However, that description was later amended to read "[t]he Oklahoma State Bond Advisor shall be an independent position within the [Department of Central Services]" and "may employ the necessary staff to carry out the duties of the Bond Advisor." 1990 Okla. Sess. Laws ch. 342, § 2(B) (amending 62 O.S.Supp.1989, § 695.7(B)). Additionally, funding for the Bond Advisor flowed to the Bond Oversight Revolving Fund. Even though the Fund's provision stated that "[a]ll monies accruing to the credit of said fund are hereby appropriated and may be budgeted and expended by the Department of Central Services," A.G. Opin. 2003-3, at 19 (quoting 62 O.S.2001, § 695.8a), we found that "nothing in the statutes authorizes the Department of Central Services to regulate how the money in the revolving fund may be spent." A.G. Opin. 2003-3, at 20. Therefore, we concluded that "[t]he Director of the Department of Central Services ha[d] no authority to impose specific budget cuts on funds appropriated for the Oklahoma State Bond Advisor." Id.

¶7 That same year, we also analyzed the relationship between the Real Estate Appraiser Board and the Oklahoma Insurance Department. See A.G. Opin. 2003-9. In that Opinion, we concluded that the Real Estate Appraiser Board functioned independently from the Oklahoma Insurance Department for three main reasons. First, the Legislature had explicitly stated that it was "independent" from and "adjunct to" the Insurance Department. Id. at 39 ("Actions of the Board shall not be subject to review by the [Insurance] Department."). Id. at 40. Second, the role of the Insurance Department with respect to the Real Estate Appraisers Board was limited only to providing administrative support and other assistance as may be requested by the Board. Id. at 40. And third, the Real Estate Appraiser Board had the authority to promulgate regulations and other functions necessary to implement the Act. Id.; see 59 O.S.2011, § 858-706.

¶9 Based on these factors, it appears that it was the Legislature's intent to create an autonomous entity that did not require budgetary or administrative approval from the State Department of Education.³ The structure and nature of the Statewide Virtual Charter School Board closely resembles the structure and nature of boards and offices we have in the past determined to be independent entities. For these reasons, we find that the Board is an agency independent from the State Department of Education.

¹ See 2012 Okla. Sess. Laws ch. 367, § 3 (codified at 70 O.S.Supp.2012, § 3-145.1)

² That provision now states that "[t]he Office of the State Bond Advisor shall be a separate state agency as set forth in Section 695.7a . . . ." 62 O.S.Supp.2015, § 695.7(B).

³ The Board is not, however, completely separate and distinct from the State Department of Education. As with many state agencies, the Board and the State Department of Education are interrelated. For instance, the Board uses the State Department of Education's facilities for its office, see 70 O.S.Supp.2015, § 3-145.1(F), and receives travel reimbursement from the State Department of Education, see id. § 3-145.2(C). Further, if the Board denies, declines to renew, or terminates a charter contract with a statewide virtual charter school, that decision may be appealed to the State Board of Education. See id. § 3-145.3(F).