TEA Senate Bill 507 Clarification Letter
TEA Commissioner of Education Mike Morath Asks Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for Clarification of SB507
With Senate Bill 507 compliance set to start for the 2016-2017 school year, Texas Education Agency (TEA) Commissioner of Education Mike Morath has asked Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton for clarification of the bill.
Morath writes in a letter to Paxton,
“Stakeholders have expressed that portions of the bill are unclear or subject to varying interpretations and are eager for TEA to provide clarification through rulemaking.”
The letter to Paxton, dated March 11, 2016 and available for download here, asks Paxton for an expedited opinion on Senate Bill 507 interpretations so that TEA can provide immediate clarification to its stakeholders. Stakeholders have expressed confusion over portions of the bill that define the video surveillance request, the location of the surveillance, and the conclusion of the surveillance.
Please see the specific questions from Morath quoted below:
SB 507 Questions from TEA Commissioner of Education Mike Morath to Attorney General Ken Paxton
- Can section 29.022(a) reasonably be construed to mean that a request for video surveillance only requires that video surveillance be conducted in one self-contained instructional setting?
- If your response to question 1is “no,” can the statute reasonably be construed to allow a requestor to limit his or her request for video surveillance to one or more specific instructional settings? For example, if a parent’s request reflects that the parent only wants video surveillance in his or her child’s classroom, would it be permissible for the school district or charter school to only place and operate video cameras in that specific classroom?
- Can the term “staff member” in section 29.022 reasonably be construed to mean only a campus employee who is assigned to a self-contained instructional setting described in the statute and certain campus employees with supervisory authority, such as a principal and assistant principal?
- Can section 29.022(b) reasonably be construed to allow a school district or charter school to discontinue video surveillance in a self-contained instructional setting if the circumstances surrounding the request have changed substantially (e.g., the student whose parent requested video surveillance is no longer assigned to the classroom or has left the campus or district, the teacher who requested video surveillance is no longer ·~ assigned to the classroom, the term of office of the trustee who requested video surveillance has ended, etc.)?
Alarm Integrations, a PSX Company, Presents Senate Bill 507 Questions to Special Education Directors
Alarm Integrations recently presented the TEA questions to Region 18 Special Education Directors and teachers in a Senate Bill 507 (SB507) presentation. The presentation was designed to explain the requirements of SB507, and how PSX can provide the video surveillance equipment to meet these requirements.
The presentation included representatives from Choice Facility Partners, Les Hooper; Ron Alexander from Mooring Services; and Alan Morris with Alarm Integrations, a PSX Company.
The group questions at the Region 18 presentation were provoking and those questions and more will be answered in the coming days. Please download the SB 507 presentation here. It includes information about SB507 and the solutions currently available.
Please contact Alan Morris at 832-584-5901 if you have questions and/or want to order the $2500 kits with hemisphere camera, microphone and 6 month recorder with a part number aptly named SB5076mth.
Other SB507 surveillance options are available upon request.