A local school board shall have the following powers or duties:
A. subject to the rules of the department, develop educational policies for the school district;
B. employ a local superintendent for the school district and fix the superintendent’s salary;
C. review and approve the annual school district budget;
D. acquire, lease and dispose of property;
E. have the capacity to sue and be sued;
F. acquire property by eminent domain pursuant to the procedures provided in the Eminent Domain Code [42A-1-1 NMSA 1978];
G. issue general obligation bonds of the school district;
H. provide for the repair of and maintain all property belonging to the school district;
I. for good cause and upon order of the district court, subpoena witnesses and documents in connection with a hearing concerning any powers or duties of the local school board;
J. except for expenditures for salaries, contract for the expenditure of money according to the provisions of the Procurement Code [13-1-28 NMSA 1978];
K. adopt rules pertaining to the administration of all powers or duties of the local school board;
L. accept or reject any charitable gift, grant, devise or bequest. The particular gift, grant, devise or bequest accepted shall be considered an asset of the school district or the public school to which it is given;
M. offer and, upon compliance with the conditions of such offer, pay rewards for information leading to the arrest and conviction or other appropriate disciplinary disposition by the courts or juvenile authorities of offenders in case of theft, defacement or destruction of school district property. All such rewards shall be paid from school district funds in accordance with rules promulgated by the department; and
N. give prior approval for any educational program in a public school in the school district that is to be conducted, sponsored, carried on or caused to be carried on by a private organization or agency.
HISTORY:
1953 77-4-2, enacted by Laws 1967, ch. 16, § 28; 1973, ch. 3, § 1; 1979, ch. 335, § 3; 1981, ch. 116, § 1; 1981, ch. 125, § 48; 1990, ch. 52, § 2; 1992, ch. 77, § 2; 1993, ch. 226, § 12; 2003, ch. 153, § 21; 2004, ch. 27, § 20; 2005, ch. 315, § 3.
Amendment Notes.
The 2004 amendment, effective May 19, 2004, throughout the section, substituted “department” for “state board”; in Subsection I, substituted “board” for “boards”; and added Subsection N.
The 2005 amendment, effective April 7, 2005, inserted “annual” in Paragraph C.
Notes to Decisions
Contracts.
Corporation’s action requesting the trial court to declare null and void a school district’s contracts and agreements with a city for both the temporary and permanent water systems was properly dismissed. School boards are required to contract according to all but two sections of the entire Procurement Code, and this means that all the bidding requirements of the Code, including all the exemptions to those requirements, apply to School District contracts. Morningstar Water Users Ass'n v. Farmington Mun. Sch. Dist. No. 5, 1995-NMSC-052, 120 N.M. 307, 901 P.2d 725, 1995 N.M. LEXIS 268 (N.M. 1995).
A local school board has only limited authority to promulgate policies and enter into contracts; any attempt by a local school board to enter into a contract or formulate a policy that violates the specific statutory provisions governing it is ultra vires and void. Swinney v. Deming Bd. of Educ., 1994-NMSC-039, 117 N.M. 492, 873 P.2d 238, 1994 N.M. LEXIS 158 (N.M. 1994).
Employees.
Local boards have exclusive power over employment and discharge of school employees, and thus, the state board does not have even supervisory control in that area. Daddow v. Carlsbad Mun. Sch. Dist., 1995-NMSC-032, 120 N.M. 97, 898 P.2d 1235, 1995 N.M. LEXIS 193 (N.M. 1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1067, 116 S. Ct. 753, 133 L. Ed. 2d 700, 1996 U.S. LEXIS 371 (U.S. 1996).
Plaintiff school administrators were not entitled to declaratory relief, reinstatement, and compensatory damages when the school board voted to declare their positions vacant rather than to terminate them; the school district’s personnel policies could not provide them with greater rights than those granted by statute which disallowed for any expectancy of reemployment of an administrator. Naranjo v. Board of Educ. of the Espanola Pub. Sch., 1995-NMSC-015, 119 N.M. 401, 891 P.2d 542, 1995 N.M. LEXIS 79 (N.M. 1995).
Inherent in the power given to a board of education to employ a superintendent is the ability for the board to supervise and discharge a superintendent. Stanley v. Raton Bd. of Educ., 1994-NMSC-059, 117 N.M. 717, 876 P.2d 232, 1994 N.M. LEXIS 223 (N.M. 1994).
School boards must approve or disapprove the employment or discharge of all employees and certified school personnel since a school superintendent has only the power to recommend a termination. Gallegos v. Los Lunas Consol. Sch. Bd. of Educ., 1980-NMCA-117, 95 N.M. 160, 619 P.2d 836, 1980 N.M. App. LEXIS 927 (N.M. Ct. App. 1980).
Local board of education had authority to reach the conclusion that good cause existed for terminating the employment of a tenured teacher, as a part of the necessary reduction of faculty, in that classes she was now teaching were being cut and that these classes could be cut without affecting the academic program adversely, whereas other subjects, to be taught by non-tenure teachers being re-hired, could not be cut without seriously affecting the academic program. Ft. Sumner Mun. Sch. Bd. v. Parsons, 1971-NMCA-066, 82 N.M. 610, 485 P.2d 366, 1971 N.M. App. LEXIS 701 (N.M. Ct. App. 1971), cert. denied, 82 N.M. 601, 485 P.2d 357, 1971 N.M. LEXIS 1664 (N.M. 1971), superseded by statute as stated in Board of Educ. v. New Mexico State Bd. of Educ., 1975-NMCA-057, 88 N.M. 10, 536 P.2d 274, 1975 N.M. App. LEXIS 657 (N.M. Ct. App. 1975).
Court reversed the State Board’s affirmance of the teacher’s dismissal because the local school board’s label, or lack of label, in its decision to dismiss the teacher did not determine whether work performance was involved in the teacher’s conduct physically punishing students contrary to local policies. Morgan v. New Mexico State Bd. of Educ., 1971-NMCA-102, 83 N.M. 106, 488 P.2d 1210, 1971 N.M. App. LEXIS 810 (N.M. Ct. App.), cert. denied, 83 N.M. 105, 488 P.2d 1209, 1971 N.M. LEXIS 1638 (N.M. 1971).
School board’s decision that a tenured teacher could not be discharged when the school for which she worked closed because she had not committed misconduct was sustained; the board’s decision was final when supported by substantial evidence. Sanchez v. Board of Educ., 1969-NMSC-063, 80 N.M. 286, 454 P.2d 768, 1969 N.M. LEXIS 1622 (N.M. 1969).
Immunity.
Although the State Board has general authority over schools statewide such as to determine public school policy, local school boards have many other responsibilities and duties, which they perform without state control and supervision, such as the election of local board members and supervision of public schools and their property; thus, local school boards are not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. Duke v. Grady Mun. Sch., 127 F.3d 972, 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 28809 (10th Cir. N.M. 1997).
Local school board was not absolutely immune from suit by employee for wrongful discharge, because the local school board was a local governing body with substantial political and fiscal autonomy. Daddow v. Carlsbad Mun. Sch. Dist., 1995-NMSC-032, 120 N.M. 97, 898 P.2d 1235, 1995 N.M. LEXIS 193 (N.M. 1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1067, 116 S. Ct. 753, 133 L. Ed. 2d 700, 1996 U.S. LEXIS 371 (U.S. 1996).
OPINIONS OF ATTORNEY GENERAL
Analysis
Authority of local school board president.
Authority of school board to make boundaries within district.
Authority of school district to provide health club membership.
Authority of local school board president.
A local school board president has the authority to deny citizens the right to address the local school board during a meeting of that board, if he is authorized to do so by rules promulgated by the school board and he does not exercise that authority arbitrarily or capriciously. 1990 N.M. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 90-26, 1990 N.M. AG LEXIS 23.
Authority of school board to make boundaries within district.
School boards may impose boundaries within the school district for the purpose of allocating students among the public schools. 1979 N.M. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 79-36.
Authority of school district to provide health club membership.
A school district may spend public funds to provide its full time employees with membership in a private health club, if the membership is provided in return for services rendered to the school district. 1989 N.M. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 89-20, 1989 N.M. AG LEXIS 4.
Authority to ban smoking.
The state board of education and local school boards have the authority to ban smoking on public school campuses if they choose. 1994 N.M. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 94-03, 1994 N.M. AG LEXIS 4.
Salary.
A school district may grant “creative” salary increases, such as: calculate the average salary of all school district employees, apply 5% to that average salary, and then increase each employee’s salary by that dollar amount. 1990 N.M. Op. Att'y Gen. No. 90-12, 1990 N.M. AG LEXIS 1.
As to whether state agencies, institutions of higher education, public schools, and local public bodies have statutory authority to enter into agreements to reduce the salary of an employee and cause a portion of the salary to be treated as an agency contribution under a cafeteria plan. 1986 Attorney General Advisory Letter No. 86-21, 1986 N.M. AG LEXIS 25.