No. 40331 (Repeal): Rule R277-206. Drug Related Offenses

(Repeal)

DAR File No.: 40331
Filed: 04/15/2016 06:06:58 PM

RULE ANALYSIS

Purpose of the rule or reason for the change:

Rule R277-206 is repealed based upon a court ruling which concluded that the Utah State Board of Education had not followed proper rulemaking procedures in its adoption. Necessary language in this rule is incorporated into the new Rule R277-214 which, following appropriate rulemaking procedure, is being filed simultaneously with the repeal of this rule. (DAR NOTE: The proposed new Rule R277-214 is under DAR No. 40338 in this issue, May 1, 2016, of the Bulletin.)

Summary of the rule or change:

Rule R277-206 is repealed in its entirety.

State statutory or constitutional authorization for this rule:

• Art X, Sec 3
• Section 53A-1-401
• Section 53A-6-306

Anticipated cost or savings to:

the state budget:

Rule R277-206 is repealed in its entirety, and necessary language in this rule is incorporated into the new Rule R277-214, which likely will not result in a cost or savings to the state budget.

local governments:

Rule R277-206 is repealed in its entirety, and necessary language in this rule is incorporated into the new Rule R277-214, which likely will not result in a cost or savings to local government.

small businesses:

Rule R277-206 is repealed in its entirety, and necessary language in this rule is incorporated into the new Rule R277-214, which likely will not result in a cost or savings to small businesses.

persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local governmental entities:

Rule R277-206 is repealed in its entirety, and necessary language in this rule is incorporated into the new Rule R277-214, which likely will not result in a cost or savings to persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local government entities.

Compliance costs for affected persons:

Rule R277-206 is repealed in its entirety, and necessary language in this rule is incorporated into the new Rule R277-214, which likely will not result in any compliance costs for affected persons.

Comments by the department head on the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses:

To the best of my knowledge, there should be no fiscal impact on businesses resulting from repeal of this rule.

Sydnee Dickson, Interim State Superintendent

The full text of this rule may be inspected, during regular business hours, at the Division of Administrative Rules, or at:

Education
Administration
250 E 500 S
SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84111-3272

Direct questions regarding this rule to:

• Angela Stallings at the above address, by phone at 801-538-7656, by FAX at 801-538-7768, or by Internet E-mail at [e-mail]

Interested persons may present their views on this rule by submitting written comments to the address above no later than 5:00 p.m. on:

05/31/2016

Interested persons may attend a public hearing regarding this rule:

• 05/12/2016 02:00 PM, Utah State Office of Education, 250 E 500 S, Salt Lake City, UT

This rule may become effective on:

06/07/2016

Authorized by:

Angela Stallings, Associate Superintendent, Policy and Communication

RULE TEXT

R277. Education, Administration.

[R277-206. Drug Related Offenses.

R277-206-1. Authority and Purpose.

(1) This rule is authorized by:

(a) Utah Constitution Article X, Section 3, which vests general control and supervision over public education in the Board;

(b) Section 53A-6-306, which directs the Board to adopt rules regarding UPPAC duties and procedures; and

(c) Subsection 53A-1-401(3), which allows the Board to adopt rules in accordance with its responsibilities.

(2) The purpose of this rule is to establish procedures for disciplining educators regarding drug related offenses.

(3) The standards and procedures of the Utah Administrative Procedures Act do not apply to this rule under the exemption of Subsection 63G-4-102(2)(d).

 

R277-206-2. Action by the Board if a Licensed Educator Has Been Convicted of a Drug Related Offense.

(1)(a) If as a result of a background check, it is discovered that a licensed educator has been convicted of a drug related offense in the previous ten years, the minimum conditions described in this Subsection (1) shall apply.

(b) One conviction--a letter shall be sent to the educator informing the educator of the provisions of this rule.

(c) Two convictions--a letter shall be sent to the educator informing the educator of the provisions of this rule and requiring documentation of clinical assessment and recommended treatment following the second conviction.

(d) If the most recent conviction was more than three years prior to the discovery of the conviction(s) and the educator provides documentation of clinical treatment, the Board shall send a letter of warning to the educator.

(e) If the most recent conviction was less than three years prior to the discovery of the conviction(s) and the educator provides documentation of clinical treatment, the Board shall send a letter of reprimand to the educator and a letter to the district with notice of treatment.

(f) If the most recent conviction was less than three years prior to the discovery of the conviction(s) and the educator provides no documentation of clinical treatment, UPPAC or the Board may initiate an investigation of the educator based upon the drug offenses.

(g) Three convictions--a letter shall be sent to the educator informing the educator of the provisions of this rule and requiring documentation of clinical treatment following the third conviction.

(h) If the most recent conviction was more than five years prior to the discovery of the conviction(s) and the educator provides documentation of clinical assessment and recommended treatment, the Board shall send a letter of warning to the educator.

(i) If the most recent conviction was less than three years prior to the discovery of the conviction(s) and the educator provides documentation of clinical assessment and recommended treatment, the Board shall send a letter of reprimand to the educator and send a copy of the letter of reprimand to the educator's employer.

(j) If the most recent conviction was less than three years prior to the discovery of the conviction(s) and the educator provides no documentation of clinical assessment and recommended treatment, UPPAC shall recommend suspension of the educator's license to the Board, subject to the educator's right to a hearing under Rule R277-202.

(2) This rule does not preclude more serious or additional action by the Board against an educator if circumstances warrant it.

 

R277-206-3. Board Action Towards an Individual Who Does Not Hold Licensing.

(1)(a) If as a result of a background check, it is discovered that an applicant has been convicted of a drug related offense within ten years of the date of the background check, the minimum conditions described in this Subsection (1) shall apply.

(b) One conviction--the individual shall be denied clearance for a period of one year from the date of the conduct giving rise to the charge.

(c) Two convictions--the individual shall be denied clearance for a period of three years from the date of the conduct giving rise to the most recent charge and the applicant shall present documentation of clinical assessment and recommended treatment before clearance shall be considered.

(d) Three convictions--the individual shall be denied clearance for a period of five years from the date of the conduct giving rise to the most recent charge.

(2) UPPAC or the Board may require the applicant to present documentation of clinical assessment and recommended treatment and may recommend denial of clearance.

 

KEY: educators, disciplinary actions, drug offenses, background checks

Date of Enactment or Last Substantive Amendment: October 8, 2015

Authorizing, and Implemented or Interpreted Law: Art X Sec 3; 53A-6-306; 53A-1-401(3)]

 

---