Request By:
Dr. David B. Gover
Superintendent of Hopkins County Schools
320 South Seminary Street
P.O. Box 509
Madisonville, Kentucky 42431-0509
Opinion
Opinion By: Frederic J. Cowan, Attorney General; Ian G. Sonego, Assistant Attorney General
You asked whether the employment of your wife as "coordinator for early childhood" education by the County School Board violates Section 78 of the Education Reform Act of 1990 ( Kentucky Acts 1990, Chapter 476), as amended by Section 7 of HB 529 ( Kentucky Acts 1990, Chapter 518), compiled as KRS 160.380(2)(e).
KRS 160.380(1)(a) and (2)(e) state:
As used in this section: (1)(a) "Relative" shall mean father, mother, brother, sister, husband, wife , son, daughter, aunt, uncle, son-in-law, and daughter-in-law.
* * * *
(2)(e) Effective July 1, 1991, no relative of a superintendent of schools shall be an employee of the school district. However, this shall not apply to a relative who is an employee of the school district prior to July 13, 1990 and who is certified for the position he holds, as long as the superintendent is holding office on July 1, 1991, and it shall not apply to a superintendent's spouse who has at least twenty (20) years of service in school systems. A superintendent's spouse who is employed under this provision shall not hold a position in which the spouse supervises certified or classified employees. A superintendent's spouse may supervise teacher aides and student teachers. However, the superintendent shall not promote his relative who continues employment under an exception of this subsection.
[Emphasis added.]
Therefore, our answer to your question will depend on whether you were hired as Superintendent before July 1, 1991 (as appears to be the case); and whether your wife was hired by the school district and certified for the coordinator position before July 13, 1990, or whether your wife has twenty or more years of service and was not promoted to this coordinator position after the effective date of this section. As we noted in OAG 90-94, KRS 160.380(2)(e) creates two exemptions from the prohibition on employing a relative (or in this case spouse) of a district superintendent:
1. The first exemption applies to relatives who are employees of the Superintendent's school district prior to July 13, 1990, and who are certified for the positions they hold, so long as the superintendent is holding office on July 1, 1991.
2. The second exception applies to spouses who have twenty or more years of service in school systems.
In addition, KRS 160.380(2)(e) prohibits the promotion of relatives employed under the exemption after the July 1, 1991 effective date, and prohibits a superintendent's spouse from supervising classified or certified school employees (other than teacher's aides and student teachers) . If your wife's employment by the school district does not qualify under one of the two exemptions, the school board would be required by KRS 160.380(2)(e) to terminate your employment or your spouse's employment effective July 1, 1991. Hence in answering your question, we assume that you were hired as superintendent before July 1, 1991, and that your wife qualifies under one of the two exemptions.
The next question requires that we review the job description that you submitted to determine whether your wife supervises certified or classified employees (other than teacher's aides and student teachers) . We are appending that job description. We note in particular that the coordinator is directed to serve as "liaison to parents, teachers, and school administrators" and to "train paraprofessionals. " We interpret "liaison" as referring to communication among these groups, which would not be a supervisory role, rather than to directing these groups on how to interact with each other, which would be a supervisory role. We interpret "paraprofessional" as referring to teacher aides and student teachers, which a superintendent's spouse may supervise. Beyond those two groups of paraprofessionals, the training of classified employees and certified employees to the extent of directing their activities as part of their employment would, in our opinion, violate the prohibition upon a superintendent's spouse from "supervising" such employees since a trainer is normally required to submit an evaluation of the trainee's performance, which would be a supervisory role.
Therefore, in our opinion, assuming your wife's employment qualifies under one of the two statutory exemptions previously described and assuming that our interpretation of the job description for "coordinator for early childhood" education is correct, the Hopkins County School Board may continue to employ you as superintendent and your wife as coordinator for early childhood education after July 1, 1991, without violating KRS 160.380(2)(e). If the facts of your wife's employment are contrary to either of these assumptions, we believe that the continued employment of you and your wife after July 1, 1991, could violate KRS 160.380(2)(e).