[1]NOTE:
As provided in LFC policy, this report is intended only for use by the
standing finance committees of the legislature. The Legislative
Finance Committee does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of the information
in this report when used in any other situation.
Only the most recent
FIR version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be obtained from the
LFC’s office in Suite 101 of the State Capitol Building North.
SPONSOR: |
Carraro |
DATE TYPED: |
01/23/02 |
HB |
|
||
SHORT TITLE: |
Secretary of Public Education |
SB |
SJR 1 |
||||
|
ANALYST: |
Baca |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation Contained |
Estimated Additional Impact |
Recurring or Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
FY02 |
FY03 |
FY02 |
FY03 |
|
|
|
|
$0.1 |
See Narrative |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis ( ) Indicate
Expenditure Decreases)
Duplicates HJR 1
State Department of Education (SDE)
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of Bill
SJR 1 proposes an
amendment to Article XII, Section 6 of the New Mexico Constitution to create a
Public Education Department within the executive department headed by a
cabinet-level secretary of public education appointed by the Governor with the
consent of the Senate. SJR 1 further proposes
the appointment of an advisory Board of Education appointed by the Governor as
provided by law.
Significant
Issues
SJR 1 will create a Department of Public Education within the executive branch of government. All powers and duties currently carried out by the SDE would be transferred to the new department and carried out as provided by law. These responsibilities include the determination of public school policy and vocational education policy and control, management and direction, including financial direction, distribution of school funds and financial accounting of all public schools pursuant to authority provided by law.
The Governor shall appoint an advisory state board of education as provided by law.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
SJR 1 does not contain an appropriation. However, some costs may be incurred in the transfer of responsibilities should it be adopted by the voters. The SDE analysis states, “…Inasmuch as SJR 1 proposes an advisory state board of education, it appears that no savings will be realized with regard to the operations of a state-level board.”
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
The SDE analysis states SJR 1 if adopted by the voters:
1. Could result in reorganization and restructuring of the public education department and public education on a periodic basis in accordance with the political and administrative philosophies of an incumbent governor; and
2. Could result in a change of cabinet-level
secretary and all exempt employees whenever an administration changes because
they serve at the pleasure of the governor.
The analysis further states that a comprehensive
reassessment of the Public School Code will be required along with a review and
adoption of regulations currently in place.
DUPLICATION
SJR 1 is identical to
HJR 1.
With regard to vocational education, according to the SDE analysis, use of an advisory State Board of education does not appear to meet the requirements federal law (20 U.S.C. 2301 etseq.). Thus creation of an additional board may be necessary.
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
The analysis points out that SJR 1 does not
amend all the provisions that relate to the State Superintendent and the State
Board of Education and cites those shown below:
1. Article V, Section 3 would remain and
raises questions as to the applicability of the requirements of this provision
to an appointed secretary. (Article V,
Section 3 states that "No person shall be eligible to the office of
superintendent of public instruction unless he be a trained and experienced
educator.")
2. Article XII, Section 15 provides that the
State Board of Education shall adopt a resolution to establish the terms of the
first board elected after the creation of a seven-member school board.
POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
1. Is there a
good reason why we should consider a review and possible reorganization of a
state agency a positive and sometimes necessary activity ?
2. Do we have
evidence that a newly elected Governor will replace all exempt positions in an
agency under his control ?
3. Should we
consider a comprehensive review of the Public School Code and existing regulations
undesirable ?
4. Or should such
an activity be conducted periodically as a matter of sound management practice?
5. Why would the
proposed appointed state board not meet federal requirements in the area of vocational
education?
6. Is there a constitutional prohibition against applying the constitutional qualifications to an appointed Superintendent of Public Education?
[1]Begin typing on the * in replace mode. Do not add or delete spaces.