LESC reviews draft to allow suspension of individual school board members with due process

LESC staff walked the committee through a draft bill that would narrow the department’s existing authority (previously focused on whole‑board suspension) to permit suspension of an individual school board member in limited circumstances. The draft frames suspension as distinct from removal and emphasizes due process: written notice specifying alleged failures, proposed remedial actions and a corrective deadline, with suspension only if those remedies are not completed.

Staff said the bill would preserve existing appeal pathways under the Administrative Procedures Act and allow further recourse in district court. It would also limit the PED secretary’s role during suspension: the secretary or a designee could act as that member’s proxy only to break a deadlock, not as a long‑term proxy for day‑to‑day governance. "We've tried to outline some broad procedures here… the secretary shall give written notice, say how they can fix that, and then what, you know, what are the actions if they don't," staff explained.

Committee members raised due‑process, oversight and implementation concerns: who investigates allegations, the role of the Public Education Commission, timelines for remedial actions, how complaints are to be received, and whether an appeal process should exist prior to public suspension. Staff responded that the draft creates a distinct statutory section for individual suspensions (PEC is not included in that section) and that staff will work to clarify intake, timelines and other procedural protections.

Members also pressed on consequences if a suspended member appeals and litigation lingers; staff said the statutory framework closely follows existing suspension law for whole boards, and the practical sequence could leave a member suspended while the court reviews the case. Staff said the bill intentionally avoids authorizing removal, leaving that decision to voters and courts.