But wait…another wrinkle to the Hatch story
Go Deeper.
Create an account or log in to save stories.
Like this?
Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.
John Croman from KARE 11 sent this:
Reference your piece on Mike Hatch, we determined Tuesday after numerous calls to Legislative Research Reference Library that Hatch is technically correct -- the statute he reviewed (120b.36) has NOT been amended.
The new law cited by Commissioner Seagren in her letter to Hatch (Chapter 263, Article 2, Section 23) was a "session law" as opposed to a statute, and did not amend 120b.36. After this year 120b.36 will continue to dictate the time table.
The bill passed on the last day of the session (SF 2994) created a session law, but did not alter the original statute Hatch reviewed. Session laws carry the full force of law, so the Department of Education does have the legal authority to extend the time frame to November 15th.
Turn Up Your Support
MPR News helps you turn down the noise and build shared understanding. Turn up your support for this public resource and keep trusted journalism accessible to all.
But it's inaccurate for Commissioner Seagren to write that 120b.36 was amended. I pointed this out her staff later, but they still contended that Hatch should have known the rules had changed. Seagren's staff faults Hatch for not knowing the law had changed, and for basing his review on an "outdated" version of the law. However the law Hatch reviewed has not been amended or rendered outdated. Just for one year the rules have been changed by another section of law.
Part of the confusion arises from the fact that 7 other bills -- 4 in the House and 3 in the Senate -- actually attempted to amend 120b. They all failed, so the language the Dept of Ed wanted was folded into a miscellaneous education bill along with a laundry list of other items.
Even the Legislative Research staff was confused because the master table it receives after each session showed no changes to 120b.36. Once we told them the Alice Seagren's citation the staff confirmed that it was on the books, but again as a session law.
Of course this all is on a level of detail we can never approach on TV. Every other journalist seems to accept the "law was changed" version. -- John
