PED sued over 'unlawful, overreaching' 180-day rule

A coalition of school districts, their leaders and the superintendents’ association have filed suit against the New Mexico Public Education Department, challenging a controversial rule the department moved forward with last month requiring public schools to spend 180 days with students.

Rio Rancho Public Schools is not among the litigants.

Referring to the PED’s rule as “unlawful, overreaching mandates,” the 90-page complaint seeks a temporary restraining order and injunctive relief to keep the PED from implementing or enforcing the rule. The department previously said it would go into effect July 1.

“Plaintiffs will suffer imminent and irreparable injury, loss, or damage” if forced to comply with the rule, the suit states. “Plaintiffs will be prevented from locally determining and scheduling their own school calendar that is within the capability of their resources and in the best interest of their students, families, and staff.”

Dozens of school districts and their leaders — school boards and superintendents — are listed as plaintiffs in the suit. In addition to the PED as a whole, Education Secretary Arsenio Romero is listed as a defendant in the suit.

The rule, which originally would have also limited school districts on four-day schedules (oftentimes, those that are in rural areas) by requiring them to spend just over half their time on five-day schedules, did see some updates to make it more flexible.

For example, the requirement for a majority of school weeks to be on five-day calendars was stricken from the rule. The PED also created a process for schools and districts to apply for waivers from the 180-day rule, so long as they could show reading improvements among their students.

Although the rule wouldn’t go into effect for over two months, plaintiffs say it is already affecting school districts because they must submit budgets and academic calendars to the PED that comply with the rule.

In an interview last month, Romero told the Journal that schools vying for waivers would need to submit two academic calendars, one that complied with the 180-day rule and another that didn’t, while his department figured out whether they qualified for the waivers.

Further, despite the PED’s allowance of four-day school weeks, the suit says that schools that have historically operated on such schedules will have to completely pivot to accommodate more instructional days.

The suit also points to legislative intent from state lawmakers to allow local flexibility by school districts, and makes reference to a bill passed last year that allowed for some professional work time to serve as instructional hours — an allowance the PED’s rule seems to override.

“The requirement that professional work take place ‘before, after, or on a day other than the required minimum 180 instructional days,’ is not aligned with the Legislature’s intent to allow professional work to be embedded within the school day,” the suit states, referencing the PED’s rule.

“It was clear exiting the 2023 and 2024 legislative sessions that the Legislature did not intend to establish a minimum number of instructional days,” the suit adds.

It goes on to make reference to the State Rules Act, which reads that “no rule is valid or enforceable if it conflicts with statute,” and that any such conflict is to be “resolved in favor of the statute.”

This story will be updated.