Certified Final Objection No. 15 of the
Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules
At its meeting on October 24, 1990, the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules (Committee) voted to make a preliminary objection to Final Proposal 90-200, containing proposed rules of the State of New Hampshire Department of Education relative to Alternative V: Provisional Certification Plan. The Board responded by letter dated November 19, 1990, by amending some of the proposed rules to address some of the Committee's concerns.
At its meeting on January 10, 1991 the Committee voted, pursuant to RSA 541-A:3-e, V(c), to make a final objection to two aspect of the rules in Final Proposal 90-200. The final objection has been filed with the Director of the Office of Legislative Services for publication in the New Hampshire Rulemaking Register. The effect of a final objection is stated in RSA 541-A:3-e, VI:
After a committee objection is filed with the director under paragraph V(c), to the extent that the objection covers a rule or portion of a rule, the burden of proof thereafter shall be on the agency in any action for-judicial review or for enforcement of the rule to establish that the part objected to is within the authority delegated to the agency, is consistent with the intent of the legislature, and is in the public interest. If the agency fails to meet its burden of proof, the court shall declare the whole or portion of the rule objected to invalid. The failure of the committee to object to a rule shall not be an implied legislative authorization of its substantive or procedural lawfulness.
The following outlines the rule to which the Committee objects and the reason for the final objection:
1. Ed 502.05(e)
The Committee objected that rule Ed 502.05(e) violates Committee Rules 402.02 as it is contrary to legislative intent by delegating rulemaking authority in violation of RSA 541-A:12, III(e).
The rule requires that superintendents or their designees, rather than the State Board of Education, set the requirements for certification of teacher candidates through the formulation of the candidates’ education plans. The Committee concluded that, as the State Board of Education is charged by RSA 186:11, I(a) to adopt rules relative to the certification of teachers, allowing the superintendents or their designees to set such requirements amounts to a delegation of rulemaking authority.
2. Ed 502.05(e)
The Committee objected that rule Ed 502.05(e) violates Committee Rule 403.02(d) as it is contrary to the public interest by not being capable of uniform application because the rule does not treat like entities in a similar
The rule requires superintendents or their designees to set the requirements for certification of teacher candidates through the formulation of the candidates’ education plans. There are no uniform standards for education plans for each teacher candidate as each superintendent or his designee formulates such plans. Without uniform standards it impossible that no two candidates will be treated in the same way, even within a single school district.