Request By:
Ms. Layne Tackett
Pikeville High School
Championship Drive
Pikeville, Kentucky 41501
Opinion
Opinion By: Frederic J. Cowan, Attorney General; Mitchell L. Perry, Assistant Attorney General
Re: School-Based Decision Making
By letter dated August 30, 1990, you requested an opinion from the Attorney General concerning School-Based Decision Making (SBDM) with regard to the faculty at your school voting to enter SBDM.
The SBDM concept is part of the recent 1990 Kentucky Education Reform Act (KERA). The KERA has now been promulgated into the Kentucky Revised Statutes. The statute dealing specifically with School-Based Decision Making is KRS 160.345. SBDM is a new educational concept which creates a council at each school made up of parents, teachers, and administrators who set the policies which provide an environment to enhance student achievement. The council will choose instructional material and student support services and set school policy relating to matters such as curriculum, school schedules, and school space.
In your letter you pose three specific questions concerning your actions as a faculty member and member possible delay by administrators or school board members.
First, you ask if it was proper for the faculty to vote to enter SBDM before the 1-1-91 date by which your school board must have in place a policy implementing SBDM. The SBDM statute specifically allows early entry into school-based decision making. KRS 160.345(5) provides: "After July 13, 1990, any school in which two-thirds (2/3) of the faculty vote to implement school-based decision making shall do so."
Next you ask, if the vote was proper, must the superintendent and school board acquiesce to the SBDM council's decisions. KRS 160.345(5) requires that all schools in the Commonwealth enter SBDM by July 1, 1996. Moreover, as noted above, the statute specifically provides for early entry into SBDM. The statute requires the council to have parent and teacher representatives. KRS 160.345(2)(a). The council shall adopt policies pursuant to KRS 160.345(2)(j). The statute states, at KRS 160.345(2)(c), "The school council shall have the responsibility to set school policy which shall provide an environment to enhance students' achievement and help the school meet the goals established by KRS 158.645 and 158.6451." Those two statutes, KRS 158.645 and 158.6451, constitute the General Assembly's recognition of the magnitude of the task at hand and emphasize cooperation at all levels of education, especially at the school level, where education actually takes place. Cooperation between school boards and SBDM school councils is not only encouraged, it is required. Therefore, SBDM council decisions must be complied with.
Finally, you ask what the proper action would be if confronted with an administrator or a school board that refuses to implement SBDM decisions. Administrative opposition should be easily circumvented since each SBDM council will include the school's lead administrator. The administrator will have the same input that the faculty members and parents have on the council. Therefore, any administrative opposition that exists will be a part of the council's decision-making process. Thus, any decision the council reaches should represent a concensus of the entire school community.
Since school boards are outside the SBDM council's control, school board opposition would present a different problem. Initially, a SBDM could seek the help of the Office of Education Accountability. The General Assembly created this oversight function when it enacted the Kentucky Education Reform Act (KERA). That office is tasked, inter alia , with monitoring the implementation of KERA and will also "investigate allegations of wrongdoing of any person or agency . . . which have not been resolved or satisfactorily explained by the local superintendent or local school board. " KRS 7.410.
If the Office of Education Accountability can not assist the SBDM council, then legal action should be considered to force the school board to comply with the statute. However, that should not be necessary since the statute contains protections within it. First, the SBDM statute mandates that the Department of Education develop sample guidelines for school boards and provide professional development for SBDM councils. KRS 160.345(6). This will help ensure that all parties understand the applicable law. Second, the SBDM statute requires the State Board of Elementary and Secondary Education to develop a formula for the distribution of school district funds to SBDM councils. Ostensibly, this means the SBDM council will have the discretion, without local school board interference, to spend the funds appropriated to it. Thus, with legal and fiscal guidelines, hopefully court action will not be needed.
We hope this response has been helpful. If you have any questions or need further assistance please contact our office.