Colorado Legislative Council Staff

LOCAL

FISCAL NOTE

School District Expenditure Impact


Drafting Number:

Prime Sponsor(s):

LLS 98-213

Rep. Allen

 

Date:

Bill Status:

Fiscal Analyst:

February 8, 1998

House Education

Harry Zeid (866-4753)

 

TITLE:            CONCERNING AN EXPEDITED DISMISSAL PROCEDURE FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS WHOSE PERFORMANCE REMAINS UNSATISFACTORY FOLLOWING COMPLETION OF INTENSIVE REMEDIATION.



Summary of Legislation


STATE FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY

FY 1998/99

FY 1999/2000

State Revenues

General Fund

Other Fund



 



 

State Expenditures

General Fund

Other Fund


 


 

FTE Position Change

None

None

Local Government Impact The expedited dismissal procedure for public school teachers may reduce costs associated with the dismissal process for certain school districts. The number of annual dismissals that would be expedited is unknown.


            This bill would allow a school district or a board of cooperative services to provide a one-year remediation plan with a teacher to correct deficiencies identified in the teacher’s evaluation. The teacher would receive a documented observation every two weeks and a written evaluation report every 45 days that identifies the teacher’s progress or lack of progress towards the requirements of remediation. If the final written evaluation report shows that the teacher is performing satisfactorily, no further action would be taken. However, if the report shows that the teacher is still not performing satisfactorily, the evaluator may make additional recommendations for improvement, or the evaluator may recommend the dismissal of the teacher on the grounds of unsatisfactory performance under an expedited procedure.


            Under the expedited procedure for dismissal, within 24 hours after the school district board of education meeting at which the chief administrative officer of the district recommends dismissal of a teacher based on unsatisfactory performance, the teacher would receive written notice of intent to dismiss, including relevant documentation. The notice and accompanying materials, including information regarding the teacher’s rights and the procedures, would be sent to the teacher by certified mail.


            The teacher may request a hearing within three days after receipt by the teacher of the notice of dismissal. Failure by the teacher to file a hearing request would be deemed to be a waiver of the right to a hearing, and the dismissal would be final. The request for a hearing by the teacher would include documents that the teacher intends to rely on at the hearing. The teacher would continue to receive regular compensation for up to 39 days until a decision is rendered by the board of education. Upon request for a hearing, the school district would request appointment of an administrative law judge by the Department of Personnel within three days. Costs of the hearing officer would be paid by the school district. Any hearing under the expedited procedure for dismissal would be completed within two days after commencement.


            The hearing officer would review evidence and testimony, and make written findings of fact. The hearing officer would recommend that the teacher be dismissed or retained by the school district. The board of education would review the findings of the hearing officer, and take action. If the board dismisses the teacher over the hearing officer’s recommendation of retention, the decision must be supported by the hearing officer’s findings of fact. If the board of education takes action to dismiss the teacher, the teacher may file an action for review in the court of appeals. In this case, the costs of the appeal incurred by both parties, including the costs of the transcript and attorney fees, would be paid by the party who does not prevail on appeal, and the court would enter a judgement for the costs.


            The shortened time lines for the dismissal procedure under certain circumstances may reduce expenditures at the school district level. Therefore, the bill is assessed as having local expenditure fiscal impact. The bill would become effective upon signature of the Governor.



School District Impact


            The shortened time lines for the expedited dismissal procedure for public school teachers may reduce costs associated with the dismissal process for certain school districts. The number of annual dismissals that would be expedited is unknown. The bill provides for an expedited procedure for dismissal of teachers who have completed a remediation period, and who continue to perform unsatisfactorily. Time lines for each step of the expedited dismissal process would be shortened or limited compared to the time lines for dismissal under current law where the reasons for dismissal are for reasons other than unsatisfactory performance:

 

                      the teacher must receive written notice within 24 hours of the chief administrative officer’s recommendation to the board of education for dismissal compared to seven days under current law;

                      the teacher’s written notice of objections and request for hearing must be filed within three days rather than seven days;

                      the time for which a teacher may receive regular compensation while on suspension is limited to 39 days rather than 120 days;

                      administrative law judge must be assigned within three days rather than five days upon receipt of the teacher’s written notice of objection;

                      hearings must commence within ten days after assignment of the hearing officer. Current law sets no time limit;

                      hearings would be limited to two days after commencement, rather than ten days;

                      following the hearing, the hearing officer must render findings of fact and recommendations not later than ten days following the hearing, rather than 20 days; and

                      the board of education must render its decision within ten days, rather than 20 days.


            The bill specifies that a teacher on a remediation plan must be observed every two weeks and receive a written evaluation every 45 days. This will require more evaluator time than is currently required. It is believed that increased evaluator time, however, will not equate to increased expenditures at the school district level. The reduction in time that a teacher may be on paid suspension is reduced in the bill from 120 days to 39 days. This would result in a cost savings to school districts in dismissal cases. Based on an average daily rate of pay for teachers of $191, this provision may reduce the maximum pay per suspended teacher by an average of $15,471 per suspended teacher. The number of future suspensions and the average term of the suspension is uncertain. Therefore, the statewide cost savings to school districts for this provision has not been identified.


            The reduction in hearing time will also result in reduced school district costs. Since the criteria for an expedited dismissal procedure is so narrowly defined in the bill, it is unlikely that the number of cases heard before administrative law judges will be substantially different than under current law. Costs per hearing, however, will be reduced. Concluding hearings in two days rather than ten days would reduce hearing costs for hearing officer charges and paralegal fees. Hearing officer fees ($676 per day) would be reduced from $6,760 for a ten day hearing to $1,352 for a two day hearing, a cost reduction of $5,408 per hearing. Paralegal charges ($365 per day) would be reduced from $3,650 per hearing to $730, a cost reduction of $2,920 per hearing. It is also assumed that the compression of the time lines and the limitations on the evidence and issues which may be considered at the hearing and appeals court level will reduce costs for attorneys representing both the teacher and the school district.


            Costs of an appeal to the court of appeals incurred by both parties, including the costs of the transcript and attorney fees, would be paid by the party who does not prevail on appeal, and the court would enter a judgement for the costs. This provision may reduce the number of appeals. 


Spending Authority


            The fiscal note would imply that no new spending authority or appropriations are required to implement the provisions of the bill.



Departments Contacted

 

            Education       Judicial