Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Intervention topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee adopts SB929 committee substitute adding 'maladministration' grounds and setting 36-month intervention rules
Summary
The committee approved a committee substitute for SB929 that expands grounds for state-board intervention to include maladministration (including late financial statements), requires a 36-month exit plan for any intervention and repayment timelines for state loans, and applies provisions retroactively to interventions on or after Jan. 1 (citing Hancock County); the committee also adopted an amendment referencing article 6-9-1 oversight and reported the bill to the full Senate.
The Senate Education Committee approved a committee substitute for SB929 that broadens when the State Board of Education may intervene in a county school system and establishes time limits and reporting requirements for such interventions.
Committee counsel told the panel the substitute adds “maladministration” to the grounds for state-board intervention and defines that term in part to include failure to file a county board’s financial statement within 90 days of the deadline and failure to file within an additional 60 days after a written warning from the state superintendent. The substitute requires the State Board to create a plan to end an intervention within 36 months; if intervention must continue beyond that, the State Board must report to the Legislature the reasons and identified problems and how they have been or could be resolved. Any loan the State Board advances to a county system must be repaid within 36 months and intervention continues until full repayment.
The substitute applies retroactively to interventions starting on or after Jan. 1 and explicitly references the recent intervention in Hancock County Schools and the associated supplemental appropriation.
Amendment and oversight clarification: Senator Taylor offered an amendment to require county boards to be subject to the oversight and reporting requirements of article 6-9-1, while adding language to make clear the amendment would not grant the state auditor authority over education policy, curriculum, or personnel decisions. Jerry McClanahan, representing the Department of Education, said the department had no objection to referencing article 6-9-1 provided the amendment does not introduce conflicting code requirements.
Committee action: members adopted the amendment by voice vote, counsel incorporated it into the committee substitute, and the committee voted to report SB929 as amended to the full Senate with the recommendation that it do pass.
Next steps: the bill will advance to the full Senate for further consideration.
