Request By:
Mr. David L. Keller
Executive Director
Kentucky School Boards Association
Route #3, Box 96A
Englewood Office Park
Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
Opinion
Opinion By: [Missing Page]
By letter dated November 1, you have requested a written opinion regarding the annual in-service training requirement for district board of education members found in KRS 160.180(5). You state that this request is based upon several questions recently posed to the Kentucky School Boards Association by school district board members.
Your questions are as follows:
"1. Is it constitutional, under the Kentucky Constitution, to require school board members to obtain annual in-service training?
"2. Keeping in mind that KRS 160.180(5) contains no penalty provision, what action, if any, can be taken against board members who fail to obtain the required training?
"3. Must board members who were elected and serving on a board of education prior to the enactment of KRS 160.180(5) comply with the required training?
"4. Does KRS 160.180(5) apply only to board members who are elected and take office after the enactment of the in-service requirement?
"5. What are the requirements under KRS 160.180(5) for individuals who are appointed to fill unexpired terms on a board of education? These individuals may be appointed at any time during a calendar year and may have fewer opportunities to obtain the required hours than a member who has served the entire year."
The statutory provision at the center of your inquiry is KRS 160.180(5), which states:
"All local board members shall complete at least fifteen (15) hours of in-service training annually. The state board of education shall identify the criteria for fulfilling this requirement."
As to the constitutional validity of requiring school board members to obtain annual in-service training, it should be pointed out that ". . . The General Assembly is empowered to enact any legislation not forbidden by the Constitution of the United States or the Commonwealth of Kentucky."
Wilson v. Bates, 313 Ky. 333, 231 S.W.2d 39, 41 (1950). We can find no constitutional provision which prohibits the enactment of KRS 160.180(5).
It has been established that the right to hold office in a state comes from the state and is subject to its regulation and control. See,
Arnett et al v. Stumbo et al, 287 Ky. 433, 153 S.W.2d 889, 892 (1941). Since the Commonwealth has the power to fix the qualifications which shall render a person eligible to hold a state office or position, it is a valid exercise of legislative power to require school board members to meet the qualifications and requirements set out in KRS 160.180, including KRS 160.180(5).
In your second question you inquire as to what action, if any, can be taken against board members who fail to obtain the required in-service training. "Failing to meet the qualifications or doing that which is proscribed in KRS 160.180 constitutes cause for consideration for removal of a board of education member from office for usurpation of that office by the Attorney General. KRS 415.050." OAG 78-159. Usurpation, or ouster, proceedings have successfully been used in the past to enforce other sections of KRS 160.180, such as KRS 160.180(4), which generally prohibits voting to employ one's relative. Likewise, ouster proceedings under KRS 415.050 and 415.060 can be the penalty for failure to comply with KRS 160.180(5).
In your third question, you inquire as to whether board members who were elected and serving on a board of education prior to the enactment of KRS 160.180(5) must comply with the required training. KRS 446.080(3) provides that no statute shall be construed to be retroactive, unless expressly so declared. KRS 160.180(5) does not expressly relate back to board members already serving a term of office on the provisions' effective date of July 13, 1984. Therefore, board members elected or appointed and serving prior to July 13, 1984, are not subject to KRS 160.180(5) during the remainder of their service in that term of office. However, board members serving prior to July 13, 1984, and re-elected after July 13, 1984, will, by virtue of their re-election to the board after the effective date of the statute, be subject to KRS 160.180(5). As a result, only board members elected, re-elected, or appointed after July 13, 1984, are required to meet the requirements of fifteen (15) hours in-service training annually. This conclusion resolves your fourth question as well as your third.
Your fifth and final question relates to individuals who are appointed to fill unexpired terms on a board of education. You state that these individuals may be appointed at any time during a calendar year and they may have fewer opportunities to obtain the required hours than a member who has served the entire year. As a result, you question the extent to which such a late-appointed board member is subject to the requirements of KRS 160.180(5).
KRS 160.180(5) requires that the minimum of fifteen (15) hours of in-service training be obtained annually. That statute also states that the state board of education shall identify the criteria for fulfilling this requirement. So far, the criteria identified by the state board of education for fulfilling this requirement have been promulgated as 702 KAR 1:115. In Section 5 of that regulation, the state board of education provides that the annual fifteen (15) hours of in-service training requirement shall become effective January 1, 1985. In Section 4 of that regulation, it is stated:
"The State Board of Education, in cases of emergency, may grant an extension of time within which a local board member may complete the fifteen (15) hours of in-service training requirement."
If an individual is appointed late in the year to fill an unexpired term on a board of education, and obtaining the required in-service training will be very difficult before the end of the calendar year, it is suggested that such individual may apply under 702 KAR 1:115(4) for an extension of time within which to complete the fifteen (15) hours of required in-service training. The state board of education has not yet promulgated a regulation that more directly responds to this predicament. [Missing Page]