Rep. Morrison (and co-authors Teshka, Morris, and Prescott) have introduced HB 1016 which would prohibit employees or “agents” of schools from being on the school board. So far as I can tell, “agent” is undefined.
Because this provision is in IC 3-8-1-34 regarding candidate qualifications, this would prohibit employees or “agents” from being candidates — not just from serving on the school board. There is currently a provision in IC 20-26-4-11 which states that an individual who is employed as a teacher or as a non-certified employee is ineligible to be a member of the governing body of the school corporation.
There is a provision with respect to employees of certain units of government (County, Cities, Towns) that ends up meaning that they can run for office as an employee but, if elected and they take office, they cease to be an employee. I suspect the same would be true under current law for school employees. This new law would disqualify school employees from being candidates in the first place. It would also exclude “agents,” whatever that means exactly.
It’s unclear what exactly this bill is trying to accomplish. It seems like it is not accomplishing a great deal, but maybe is an effort to limit people knowledgeable about local school operations from being on the school board. (It doesn’t seem to do much of anything with respect to conflicts of interest because, again, there is a law on the books about school employees serving on the board.)
Given that Prescott is involved and he’s generally up to little that’s useful, it’s likely that the law isn’t needed or just intended to stick to the teachers of Randolph County. IIRC he was behind the effort to politicize school board elections, and the first question on his legislative survey is
“Would you support legislation that would restrict educators from advancing their political beliefs in the classroom and ensure ideological neutrality in Hoosier schools?”
I’m going to guess he’s not after a teacher who might wear a Make America Great Again hat in the classroom.
All that said, I’d question why police officers get a carve-out in the law (Ind. Code § 36-8-3-12) but teachers aren’t entitled to the same.
I mean, if it’s wrong to have teachers on the school board, that’s fine, but shouldn’t we also have the same laws restricting police from being on boards that oversee or implement police policies?
Trying to make sense of the most recent guidance I could find wasn’t the easiest, but I’m glad that someone determined that being appointed to the Indiana State Egg Board isn’t considered a “lucrative” office.
https://www.in.gov/attorneygeneral/files/DOH-Guide-2019-Update.pdf