Any elected local school board member is subject to recall by the voters of the school district from which elected. A petition for a recall election must cite grounds of malfeasance or misfeasance in office or violation of the oath of office by the member concerned. The recall petition shall be signed by registered voters not less in number than thirty-three and one-third percent of those who voted for the office at the last preceding election at which the office was voted upon. Procedures for filing petitions and for determining validity of signatures shall be as provided by law. If at the special election a majority of the votes cast on the question of recall are in favor thereof, the local school board member is recalled from office and the vacancy shall be filled as provided by law. (As added November 6, 1973 and as amended November 4, 1986.)
Notes to Decisions
Evidence.
—Inadmissible.
In a case where a juvenile was adjudicated to have committed the delinquent act of misdemeanor larceny, a dispositional finding under former 13-14-28F, 1953 Comp. (now 32A-2-16 NMSA 1978) that he was in need of care and rehabilitation, which was based solely on hearsay evidence contained in a pre-disposition report, was improper because the evidence was not competent, material, or relevant in nature, and the court explained that to use hearsay evidence to determine delinquency was constitutionally impermissible under N.M. Const. art II § 14 and U.S. Const. amend VI, as a denial of a child’s constitutional right to confront witnesses against him. Doe v. State, 1978-NMSC-068, 92 N.M. 74, 582 P.2d 1287, 1978 N.M. LEXIS 959 (N.M. 1978).
Requirements.
Citizens were required to show that the board members’ conduct amounted to willful and knowing wrongdoing to be successful on their recall petitions; there was no evidence that the board members acted out of an improper motive. Caps v. Board Members, 1992-NMSC-035, 113 N.M. 729, 832 P.2d 790, 1992 N.M. LEXIS 178 (N.M. 1992).
Standing.
Under the New Mexico Constitution, a citizens group had standing to bring a recall petition against a school board member; hence, the member’s action for a declaration that the group lacked standing was properly dismissed. Cordova v. Cline, 2013-NMCA-083, 308 P.3d 975, 2013 N.M. App. LEXIS 25 (N.M. Ct. App. 2013).
Sufficiency of allegations.
Allegations by recall petitioners that school board members knowingly made policy decisions concerning the respective roles of the superintendent and the school board without public participation in violation of the New Mexico Open Meetings Act [10-15-1.1 NMSA 1978], provided a sufficient legal basis for the a recall process, and said allegations were not merely a means of harassment or for purely political or personal purposes. Frizell v. Martinez (In re Request for Recalls of Gadsden Indep. Pub. Sch. Bd. Members), 2005-NMSC-037, 138 N.M. 575, 124 P.3d 210, 2005 N.M. LEXIS 550 (N.M. 2005).