But I see no where in the bill that says "only so far - then stop!" - Granite Grok

But I see no where in the bill that says “only so far – then stop!”

I’m concerned.

We’ve seen and heard the recent incidents of bullying and cyberbullying in the news and the harm and death that severe, extreme incidents of it have caused – not only by fellow students, but in one egregious event, by an adult posing as a child.  Bullying should not be condoned but I also think that some answers to this problem are rather ham-fisted and when tied in with current "no tolerance" philosophy found in many places gone crazy (e.g., the student getting suspended for having a weapon – in his truck that locked and not even on school property), are going to be a problem.  Now, couple that with Governments at all levels seemingly wishing to "do more" in meddling in their citizens’ lives, I see abuse of power scenarios.

Especially in this case, where there is no apparent "shut off" / "don’t go there" words in a new piece of legislation here in NH that is purporting to "solve the problem".  Over the weekend, I read this article:

N.H. Senate passes bullying bill
Unanimously approves legislation

CONCORD — The unanimous approval by the state Senate Wednesday morning of legislation aimed at requiring schools to have policies against bullying means other children may not have to endure the emotional and physical trauma fifth-grader David Michel of Stratham experienced.

On May 12, the Senate voted, 24-0, to approve House Bill 1523, which would update state law requiring schools to have policies against bullying, harassment and intimidation and add new language to cover cyberbullying. The new definition for cyber-bullying would address bullying through the use of electronic devices including cellular phones, computers, pagers, e-mail, instant messaging, text messaging and Web sites.

…The legislation, which requires school policies to protect students from retaliation, grew out of a committee that included parents, administrators, lawmakers and others and had widespread support.

"I’m just thrilled and delighted for the children of the state and for the parents who worked so very hard with our bill drafting ad-hoc committee to get the protection that they so desperately wanted for their children," said state Rep. Donna Schlachman, D-Exeter, the bill’s prime sponsor. "They were key and I take my hat off to all of the parents who came forward and wanted to see legislation in place that wasn’t there to protect their children when they were running into difficulties with schools. They worked hard to make sure no other children or families have to go through what they did."

…Under the legislation, school districts would be required to provide annual training in recognizing and addressing bullying for all staff and volunteers who come into regular contact with students. The New Hampshire Department of Education will be available to assist local schools and will prepare an annual report of substantiated reports of bullying or cyberbullying for the Legislature.

"It’s going to make a big difference to have a law that is clearer for school boards to implement and represents a great improvement over what we had before," said Katherine B. Miller of Exeter, a lawyer, former Exeter School Board member and now an Exeter Region Cooperative School Board member.

Now, in reading the article at a surface level, one goes "OK, what can be wrong with this?"After all, bullying can be a real situation and if done for the right reason (vs for a protected class of citizen), putting it on ice is a good thing.

And then I became real concerned; the dog was not barking – what was the Press not reporting?  This couldn’t be all sweetness and light, can it?  If the Press cannot what were the "whats" associated with this bill – and what is being swept under the rug with a 24 – zip vote in favor of passage?  Is this just one of those "can’t vote against a Mom & Apple Pie type bill?" that a politician is sometimes confronted and can’t run away?

The power of the ‘Net: The text of the bill can be seen here and I have copied it after the jump.

I am really starting to feel uncomfortable; I have posted up, over the years (years now??) some posts that seem to have the School system becoming more and more ready to become more that in loco parentis and more into a "more than school time" proxy parents.  After all, they provide health clinics for the students, contraception for students, travel to Planned Parenthood for when their comprehensive sex education curriculum fails, make sure grief counselors are available at the right time, feeding the kids breakfast and lunch (and sometimes, supper), the Political Correctness of their students thoughts (but often deny them the right of free expression of religion and patriotism) and have debates over what (as in the example given above) how far the reach of school administrators and teachers extend off school premises and outside normal school hours.

To be yet even more cynical, it seems (when evaluating the test scores) that they are more interested in everything except the fundamental learning that parents and taxpayers actually expect (and many of us wish they’d stop with the Educrats obsession with everything else and prove that THEY have mastered THEIR basics – teaching our kids!). 

The devil is in the details, and this is no exception.  I no longer care what anyone SAYS about a bill and the intent behind it – it is ALL about what is actually in the bill and what it actually says (vs. the spin), as it seems that the Education special interest group (for the lack of a less PC term) is continuing to push the boundary of what is School and what is Family?  More and more, I see the encroachment of what formerly was the private lives of families by the Educational System and the philosophy of Educators expanding into that private life under the rubric of "…it takes a village…" as well as "…parents aren’t good enough…so we have the right to make sure they are raised right…".

This country was born of the idea of a "limited government" – so where is it in this bill? Read it – and tell me if I am wrong but effectively, the wording is such is that there is no "Off" button – there is nothing in the text of this bill that says "Educators – this far and no further" – especially these:

(a) Occurs on, or is delivered to, school property or a school-sponsored activity or event on or off school property; or

(b) Occurs off of school property or outside of a school-sponsored activity or event, if the conduct interferes with a pupil’s educational opportunities or substantially disrupts the orderly operations of the school or school-sponsored activity or event.

Look at what I have bolded – and tell me where the reach of the State (and make no mistake, we are talking about Government public schools) has been limited for I seen no evidence for any.  With these words, in this time of reawakening of the desire for a limited government, where is the "governor" on the reach of a School Board, an Administration, or the teacher cadre in the lives of the students or their families?  A technical reading of the words leads me to believe there is none.  This bill allows the legal intertwining of School and family, on a perpetual basis, regardless of the want of the family – at the behes
t of the State.

I could make the argument that this is similar to the Federal Government’s power grab of carbon or healthcare – since ALL human activity either uses energy or healthcare, govt now has the right to intrude into any nook and cranny of life.  Similarly, the above statements from the bill (and similarly worded parts of the bill) extend that philosophy: "if any conduct at any time interferes with a pupil’s educational opportunities…".  If *I* can think of scenarios outside of the normal school hours or extracurricular events (e.g., sports events, field trips, et al) that could easily show negative "educational opportunities", those wishing to push the envelope intrusion can as well.

That is THE major problem with this bill – where does the role of the Government stop?  However, there are others (but subservient to the above):

  • Are we seeing, yet again, of the diminution of locally governed Education? This is not a suggestion – this is "thou shalt…"
  • Does Concord believe that all of the local School Boards and School Administrations are that so "doltish" so as to not be effective on this issue?
  • And I see nothing, absolutely NOTHING, for that implicitly acknowledges that the primary responsibility of the child is his or her parents – no role at all.
  • You gotta love the Escape Hatch in 193-F:7 ("shall be immune from civil liability" if the State says "hey, we tried, didn’t we?") and F:9 (nor shall this chapter create a private right of action for enforcement of this chapter against any school district or chartered public school, or the state)

Also, asking as a Gilford Budget Committee elected official – what is the unfunded mandated cost of this Act?  What is the local budgetary hit in order to satisfy yet another State "bright idea" (regardless of how PC it may be) that is basically saying "You at the local level?  Since you aren’t doing this, we’ll make you – but you get to pay for our ideas – again".

And yes, as a Summary – I expect this out of Democrats: what want Big Government and they BELIEVE in as much of a Centralized Government as they are allowed to get away with.

But what of the 10 Republicans that are lending them support in doing so?

HB 1523 – AS AMENDED BY THE SENATE

11Mar2010… 0764h
05/12/10 1861s

2010 SESSION

10-2094
04/05

HOUSE BILL 1523

AN ACT revising the pupil safety and violence prevention act.

SPONSORS: Rep. Schlachman, Rock 13; Rep. Judith Day, Rock 13; Rep. Spaulding, Hills 18; Rep. Stiles, Rock 15; Rep. P. Price, Hills 26; Sen. Hassan, Dist 23; Sen. Kelly, Dist 10

COMMITTEE: Education

ANALYSIS

This bill revises the statute on pupil safety and violence prevention to include harassment, intimidation, bullying, and cyberbullying.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Explanation: Matter added to current law appears in bold italics.

Matter removed from current law appears [in brackets and struckthrough.]

Matter which is either (a) all new or (b) repealed and reenacted appears in regular type.

11Mar2010… 0764h

05/12/10 1861s

10-2094

04/05

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Ten

AN ACT revising the pupil safety and violence prevention act.

Be it Enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court convened:

1 Pupil Safety and Violence Prevention; Purpose. RSA 193-F:2 is repealed and reenacted to read as follows:

193-F:2 Purpose and Intent.

I. All pupils have the right to attend public schools, including chartered public schools, that are safe, secure, and peaceful environments. One of the legislature’s highest priorities is to protect our children from physical, emotional, and psychological violence by addressing the harm caused by bullying and cyberbullying in our public schools.

II. Bullying in schools has historically included actions shown to be motivated by a pupil’s actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ancestry or ethnicity, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, age, physical, mental, emotional, or learning disability, gender, gender identity and expression, obesity, or other distinguishing personal characteristics, or based on association with any person identified in any of the above categories.

III. It is the intent of the legislature to protect our children from physical, emotional, and psychological violence by addressing bullying and cyberbullying of any kind in our public schools, for all of the historical reasons set forth in this section, and to prevent the creation of a hostile educational environment.

IV. The sole purpose of this chapter is to protect all children from bullying and cyberbullying, and no other legislative purpose is intended, nor should any other intent be construed from the enactment of this chapter.

2 Pupil Safety and Violence Prevention; Definitions. RSA 193-F:3 through RSA 193-F:5 are repealed and reenacted to read as follows:

193-F:3 Definitions. In this chapter:

I.(a) “Bullying” means a single significant incident or a pattern of incidents involving a written, verbal, or electronic communication, or a physical act or gesture, or any combination thereof, directed at another pupil which:

(1) Physically harms a pupil or damages the pupil’s property;

(2) Causes emotional distress to a pupil;

(3) Interferes with a pupil’s educational opportunities;

(4) Creates a hostile educational environment; or

(5) Substantially disrupts the orderly operation of the school.

(b) “Bullying” shall include actions motivated by an imbalance of power based on a pupil’s actual or perceived personal characteristics, behaviors, or beliefs, or motivated by the pupil’s association with another person and based on the other person’s characteristics, behaviors, or beliefs.

II. “Cyberbullying” means conduct defined in paragraph I of this section undertaken through the use of electronic devices.

III. “Electronic devices” include, but are not limited to, telephones, cellular phones, computers, pagers, electronic mail, instant messaging, text messaging, and websites.

IV. “Perpetrator” means a pupil who engages in bullying or cyberbullying.

V. “School property” means all real property and all physical plant and equipment used for school purposes, including public or private school buses or vans.

VI. “Victim” means a pupil against whom bullying or cyberbullying has been perpetrated.

193-F:4 Pupil Safety and Violence Prevention.

I. Bullying or cyberbullying shall occur when an action or communication as defined in RSA 193-F:3:

(a) Occurs on, or is delivered to, school property or a school-sponsored activity or event on or off school property; or

(b) Occurs off of school property or outside of a school-sponsored activity or event, if the conduct interferes with a pupil’s educational opportunities or substantially disrupts the orderly operations of the school or school-sponsored activity or event.

II. The school board of each school district and the board of trustees of a chartered public school shall, no later than 6 months after the effective date of this section, adopt a written policy prohibiting bullying and cyberbullying. Such policy shall include the definitions set forth in RSA 193-F:3. The policy shall contain, at a minimum, the following components:

(a) A statement prohibiting bullying or cyberbullying of a pupil.

(b) A statement prohibiting retaliation or false accusations against a victim, witness, or anyone else who in good faith provides information about an act of bullying or cyberbullying and, at the time a report is made, a process for developing, as needed, a plan to protect pupils from retaliation.

(c) A requirement that all pupils are protected regardless of their status under the law.

(d) A statement that there shall be disciplinary consequences or interventions, or both, for a pupil who commits an act of bullying or cyberbullying, or falsely accuses another of the same as a means of retaliation or reprisal.

(e) A statement indicating how the policy shall be made known to school employees, regular school volunteers, pupils, parents, legal guardians, or employees of a company under contract to a school, school district, or chartered public school. Recommended methods of communication include, but are not limited to, handbooks, websites, newsletters, and workshops.

(f) A procedure for reporting bullying or cyberbullying that identifies all persons to whom a pupil or another person may report bullying or cyberbullying.

(g) A procedure outlining the internal reporting requirements within the school or school district or chartered public school.

(h) A procedure for notification, within 48 hours of the incident report, to the parent or parents or guardian of a victim of bullying or cyberbullying and the parent or parents or guardian of the perpetrator of the bullying or cyberbullying. The content of the notification shall comply with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. 1232g.

(i) A provision that the superintendent or designee may, within the 48-hour period, grant the school principal or designee a waiver from the notification requirement if the superintendent or designee deems such waiver to b
e in the best interest of the victim or perpetrator. Any such waiver granted shall be in writing. Granting of a waiver shall not negate the school’s responsibility to adhere to the remainder of its approved written policy.

(j) A written procedure for investigation of reports, to be initiated within 5 school days of the reported incident, identifying either the principal or the principal’s designee as the person responsible for the investigation and the manner and time period in which the results of the investigation shall be documented. The superintendent or designee may grant in writing an extension of the time period for the investigation and documentation of reports for up to an additional 7 school days, if necessary. The superintendent or superintendent’s designee shall notify in writing all parties involved of the granting of an extension.

(k) A requirement that the principal or designee develop a response to remediate any substantiated incident of bullying or cyberbullying, including imposing discipline if appropriate, to reduce the risk of future incidents and, where deemed appropriate, to offer assistance to the victim or perpetrator. When indicated, the principal or designee shall recommend a strategy for protecting all pupils from retaliation of any kind.

(l) A requirement that the principal or designee report all substantiated incidents of bullying or cyberbullying to the superintendent or designee.

(m) A written procedure for communication with the parent or parents or guardian of victims and perpetrators regarding the school’s remedies and assistance, within the boundaries of applicable state and federal law. This communication shall occur within 10 school days of completion of the investigation.

(n) Identification, by job title, of school officials responsible for ensuring that the policy is implemented.

III. The department of education may develop a model policy in accordance with the requirements set forth in this chapter which may be used by schools, school districts, and chartered public schools as a basis for adopting a local policy.

IV. A school board or board of trustees of a chartered public school shall, to the greatest extent practicable, involve pupils, parents, administrators, school staff, school volunteers, community representatives, and local law enforcement agencies in the process of developing the policy. The policy shall be adopted by all public schools within the school district and, to the extent possible, the policy should be integrated with the school’s curriculum, discipline policies, behavior programs, and other violence prevention efforts.

193-F:5 Training and Assessment.

I. Each school district and chartered public school shall provide:

(a) Training on policies adopted pursuant to this chapter, within 9 months of the effective date of this section and annually thereafter, for school employees, regular school volunteers, or employees of a company under contract to a school, school district, or chartered public school who have significant contact with pupils for the purpose of preventing, identifying, responding to, and reporting incidents of bullying or cyberbullying; and

(b) Educational programs for pupils and parents in preventing, identifying, responding to, and reporting incidents of bullying or cyberbullying. Any such program for pupils shall be written and presented in age appropriate language.

II. The department of education shall provide evidence-based educational programs to support training as required under paragraph I.

III. Nothing in this chapter shall require the inclusion of any specific curriculum, textbook, or other material designed to prevent bullying or cyberbullying in any program or activity conducted by an educational institution. The omission of such subject matter from any curriculum, textbook, or other material in any program or activity conducted by an educational institution shall not constitute a violation of this chapter.

3 New Sections; Pupil Safety and Violence Prevention. Amend RSA 193-F by inserting after section 5 the following new sections:

193-F:6 Reporting.

I. Each school district and chartered public school shall annually report substantiated incidents of bullying or cyberbullying to the department of education. Pursuant to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, 20 U.S.C. 1232g, such reports shall not contain any personally identifiable information pertaining to any pupil. The department shall develop a form to facilitate the reporting by school districts and chartered public schools. The department shall maintain records of such reports.

II. The department of education shall prepare an annual report of substantiated incidents of bullying or cyberbullying in the schools. The report shall include the number and types of such incidents in the schools and shall be submitted to the president of the senate, the speaker of the house of representatives, and the chairpersons of the house and senate education committees. The department of education shall assist school districts with recommendations for appropriate actions to address identified problems with pupil safety and violence prevention.

193-F:7 Immunity. A school administrative unit employee, school employee, chartered public school employee, regular school volunteer, pupil, parent, legal guardian, or employee of a company under contract to a school, school district, school administrative unit, or chartered public school, shall be immune from civil liability for good faith conduct arising from or pertaining to the reporting, investigation, findings, recommended response, or implementation of a recommended response under this chapter. The department of education shall be immune from civil liability for its good faith conduct in making recommendations under this chapter.

193-F:8 School District Discrimination or Harassment Policies. A school district or chartered public school may establish separate discrimination or harassment policies that include categories of pupils, and nothing in this chapter shall prevent a school district or chartered public school from remediating any discrimination or harassment based on a person’s membership in a legally protected category under local, state, or federal law.

193-F:9 Private Right of Action Not Permitted. Nothing in this chapter shall supersede or replace existing rights or remedies under any other general or special law, including criminal law, nor shall this chapter create a private right of action for enforcement of this chapter against any school district or chartered public school, or the state.

193-F:10 Public Academies. The provisions of this chapter shall apply to public academies as defined in RSA 194:23.

4 Wiretapping and Eavesdropping; Interception and Disclosure. Amend RSA 570-A:2, II(k)(1) to read as follows:

(k)(1) The owner or operator of a school bus, as defined in RSA 259:96, to make an audio recording in conjunction with a video recording of the interior of the school bus while students are being transported to and from school or school activities, provided that the school board authorizes audio recording, the school district provides notification of such recording to the parents and students as part of the district’s pupil safety and violence prevention policy required under [RSA 193-F:3, I(b)] RSA 193-F, and there is a sign informing the occupants of such recording prominently displayed on the school bus.

5 New Section; Safe School Zones; Liability for Reporting. Amend RSA 193-D by inserting after section 8 the following new section:

193-D:9 Liability for Reporting. Any public or private school employee or employee of a company under contract to a school or school district who in good faith has made a report under RSA 193-D shall not be subject to liability for making the report.

6 Effective Date. This act shall take effect J
uly 1, 2010.

>