Email, Stephanie Jacksis, media relations specialist, Association of Texas Professional Educators, Oct. 23, 2014
4:11 p.m.
Below is a response from ATPE’s Lobbyist Monty Exter.
The answer to the question as phrased is not really. Voting down HB 1610 would not have stopped schools from removing teachers convicted of a felony; it would have simply required districts to continue to observe the teachers due process rights in situations not already covered by SB 9.
ISDs have always had the discretion to remove an educator on the basis of a criminal history through non-renewal or termination for cause. The bill as passed gave ISDs the authority to waive a teacher’s due process rights in the process of firing them, even in the event that the triggering conviction was distant in time, unrelated to their effectiveness or fitness to teach, or part of an deferred adjudication or plea bargain. Additionally, SB 9, which Senator Van de Putte voted in favor of (record vote on the conference committee report), already required ISDs to remove a teacher convicted of any crime under title 5 of the Penal Code or any crime which required registry as a sex offender.
Two of the primary concerns with the bill as passed were that there were no exceptions in the bill for deferred adjudication or cases were there was a plea bargain, which sometimes occurs even when the accused person is innocent, and that there were also no exceptions for convictions that were distant in time or unrelated to the persons responsibilities as a teacher. We found that there had been cases where an educator had been convicted of crime (usually the "white collar" crimes) that arguably bore little or no relationship to their ability to be an effective teacher. This was particular compelling when the offense was one that occurred decades ago such as when the person was in college. In that situation is easy to see that the person could well have matured and become very successful teachers who need not need not have their due process rights taken away due to a youthful mistake.