Resolution to eliminate education cabinet secretary position advances
A proposal to amend the New Mexico Constitution and reconfigure public education governance passed the Senate Education Committee Friday and advances to the Senate Finance Committee.
Senate Joint Resolution 3, sponsored by Sen. Bill Soules (D-Las Cruces), chair of the Senate Education Committee, received a do-pass by a vote of 7-2 by committee members. The Senate Rules Committee previously advanced the bill without recommendation.
The resolution proposes amending the state Constitution to shift oversight of the Public Education Department from a governor-appointed cabinet secretary to a superintendent of public schools hired by a public schools board. If the resolution passes, it will be up to voters to decide during the next general election.
Soules pointed out to committee members Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham's administration has had five public education cabinet secretaries thus far.
'Education needs consistent leadership at the top,' he said during the meeting.
The Senate Education Committee adopted an amendment to SJR 3 Friday, to make sure there is still a separate Public Education Commission in place to authorize charter schools in the state.
The state school board would be made up of 10 elected members and five appointed by the governor. They would determine department policies and appoint a superintendent.
The proposed structure is how governance was organized up until former Gov. Bill Richardson's administration, when voters approved a constitutional amendment creating a cabinet-level position to lead the Public Education Department. Former Sen. Steven Neville (R-Aztec) and President Pro Tempore Mimi Stewart (D-Albuquerque) introduced a similar resolution in 2023, which passed the Senate but died before a House vote.
Representatives from the New Mexico School Board Association, New Mexico Coalition of Educational Leaders, New Mexico School Superintendents, Albuquerque Teacher Federation and a current Public Education Commissioner all spoke in favor of the resolution.
'It's very important that a superintendent go beyond three years in order to enact change within his district. It's no different at the state level. Matter of fact, it's very much more important,' Martin Madrid, president of the New Mexico School Superintendents Association, said during the meeting. 'In my short tenure as the president since June, I've had to build a relationship with two separate secretaries.'
Members of NewMexicoKidsCAN, the Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce, New Mexico Chamber of Commerce, Think New Mexico and Teach Plus New Mexico voiced their opposition to changing the governance of public education in the state as a way to address shortcomings in student performance.
'I worry it will include more chaos as we make all of these transitions,' Amanda Aragon, executive director of NewMexicoKidsCAN, said. 'I think you need look no further than the local school board elections in your own districts to know that school board elections are becoming really, really political.'
Mariana Padilla, secretary designate of the Public Education Department, also voiced her opposition to the bill, noting that the time and resources it will take to restructure the department 'would be much better spent on focusing on the educational initiatives and needs of our students and our educators.'
'There is no body of research that indicates that a state school board structure is a better governance structure,' Padilla told committee members.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
24 minutes ago
- The Hill
Oklahoma testing some incoming teachers to spot ‘radical leftist ideology'
A new test will be administered to out-of-state teachers coming to Oklahoma from blue states in a move the state superintendent said is meant to root out 'radical leftist ideology' from classrooms. The test, set to be administered by conservative educational platform PragerU, will be required for the teachers to receive an Oklahoma certification. 'As long as I am superintendent, Oklahoma classrooms will be safeguarded from the radical leftist ideology fostered in places like California and New York. Any teacher coming from these states will be required to pass our new PragerU assessment before receiving certification, because we refuse to let Gavin Newsom's woke, Marxist agenda turn Oklahoma into the same dumpster fire California has become,' Ryan Walters said. The test has not been administered yet but a spokesperson for Walters's office said it will be 'very soon.' While the full test was not shared, some questions seen by The Hill ask incoming teachers basic civics questions, such as the first three words of the Constitution and why freedom of religion is important in America. The move comes after other controversial initiatives by Walters in Oklahoma such as trying to put Bibles in every classroom or changing the way the 2020 election is taught to work in President Trump's baseless allegations of widespread fraud.
The Hill
24 minutes ago
- The Hill
California Republicans file suit to halt redistricting plan
California Republican legislators on Tuesday announced a state Supreme Court petition, an effort to stop Gov. Gavin Newsom's (D) plan to redistrict House seats in the Golden State. 'Today I joined my colleagues in filing a lawsuit challenging the rushed redistricting process. California's Constitution requires bills to be in print for 30 days, but that safeguard was ignored. By bypassing this provision, Sacramento has effectively shut voters out of engaging in their own legislative process,' Assemblyman Tri Ta said on X. The petition cites a section of the state constitution that requires a month-long review period for new legislation. Democrats are working quickly to set up a special election that would let voters weigh in on the redistricting plan. Four state Republican legislators have signed on to the petition, according to a copy for a writ of mandate, shared by the New York Times. They're asking for immediate relief, no later than Aug. 20, and arguing that action can't be taken on the legislative package before Sep. 18. 'Last night, we filed a petition with the California Supreme Court to stop the California legislature from violating the rights of the people of California,' said Mike Columbo, a partner at Dhillon Law Group, in a Tuesday press conference alongside California Republicans. 'The California constitution clearly gives the people of California the right to see new legislation that the legislature is going to consider, and it gives them the right to review it for 30 days,' Columbo said. California Democrats swiftly introduced the redistricting legislative package when they reconvened after summer break on Monday, and are expected to vote as soon as Thursday. They have until Friday to complete the plan in time to set up a Nov. 4 special election. Columbo called that pace of action a 'flagrant violation' under the state constitution. Democrats are aiming to put a ballot measure before voters that would allow temporary redistricting, effectively bypassing the existing independent redistricting commission — which was approved by voters more than a decade ago and typically redistricts after each census — to redraw lines in direct response to GOP gerrymandering in other states. California Republicans have vowed to fight back. Democrats, on the other hand, are stressing that they're moving transparently to let voters have the final say on whether redistricting happens.
The Hill
24 minutes ago
- The Hill
Jeffries vows to call Kristi Noem to testify in long-overdue oversight push
When House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries promised that Kristi Noem would be one of the first called before Congress if Democrats take the majority in 2026, he wasn't just previewing political theater — he was signaling a long-overdue accountability moment. Because what we've seen under Noem's watch as Homeland Security secretary isn't just controversial policy, it's a collision between power and the Constitution. Listen, the government has every right to deport violent criminals. But what we're talking about here isn't that. These are families being ripped apart, U.S. citizen children deported to countries they've never known, and raids on churches, swap meets and sidewalks that read less like lawful arrests and more like kidnappings in broad daylight. Armed, masked agents storming neighborhoods — it looks less like 'law and order' and more like a scene from a dystopian movie. Except it's not fiction. It's happening here. And at the center of it is Secretary Noem, who, when asked to define 'habeas corpus' earlier this year — which, by the way, is a bedrock constitutional right — got it flat-out wrong. She described it as the president's power to deport people. That's not just a slip of the tongue; that's a fundamental misunderstanding of the very principle that protects all of us from government overreach. Habeas corpus is the right of a person to challenge their detention. Without it, the government could lock up anyone indefinitely. Even Abraham Lincoln had to go to Congress before suspending it during the Civil War. Yet somehow, Kristi Noem thinks she can redefine it on the fly. Meanwhile, lawsuits are piling up. The ACLU and others say these mass raids aren't about justice, they're about quotas. Three thousand arrests a day, demanded from the White House, no matter who gets caught in the dragnet. The result? Overcrowded, dungeon-like detention centers, families denied food, water and lawyers. That's not just cruel — it's unconstitutional. And it costs taxpayers millions to warehouse people who pose no threat to society. Jeffries is right: this calls for oversight. Not partisan point-scoring, but a public examination of what happens when immigration policy is driven by fear, politics and raw numbers instead of law, due process and human dignity. Because if the government can strip immigrants of rights today, what's to stop them from doing the same to citizens tomorrow? Kristi Noem may soon face Congress, but make no mistake — this is bigger than her. It's about whether America will continue to twist the meaning of justice until it serves whoever holds power, or whether we'll insist that justice, in this country, still means something. This isn't about Kristi Noem forgetting her civics lesson. It's about whether America still remembers its own.
