An Act To Protect Teachers from Unfair Evaluations
Maine Legislature, Session 129, LD 1338
Committee Amendment CA_A_H400 (House)
Amends: 20-A MRSA §13201, 20-A MRSA §13703

COMMITTEE AMENDMENT "A" to H.P. 966, L.D. 1338, Bill, "An Act To 
Protect Teachers from Unfair Evaluations" 
Amend the bill by striking out everything after the enacting clause and inserting the 
following: 
'Sec. 1. 20-A MRSA §13201, sub-§3, as enacted by PL 2019, c. 132, §2, is 
amended to read: 
3. Termination upon elimination of a teaching position. The right to terminate a 
contract, after due notice of 90 days, is reserved to the school board when changes in 
local conditions warrant the elimination of the teaching position for which the contract 
was made. The order of layoff and recall is a negotiable item in accordance with the 
procedures set forth in Title 26, chapter 9-A. In any negotiated agreement, the criteria 
negotiated by the school board and the bargaining agent to establish the order of layoff 
and recall mast may include the teacher's effectiveness rating pursuant to chapter 508 as a 
factor and may also include, but may not be limited to, seniority. 
Sec. 2. 20-A MRSA §13703, as enacted by PL 2011, c. 635, Pt. A, §3, is repealed 
and the following enacted in its place: 
§13703. Use of effectiveness rating; grievance 
1. Use of effectiveness rating. A superintendent may use effectiveness ratings of 
educators to inform strategic human capital decision making, including, but not limited 
to, decision making regarding recruitment, selection, induction, mentoring, professional 
development, compensation, assignment and dismissal. 
2. Just cause for nonrenewal. Subject to appeal or grievance under the terms of an 
applicable collective bargaining agreement, receipt of summative effectiveness ratings 
indicating that a teacher is ineffective for 2 consecutive years constitutes just cause for 
nonrenewal of a teacher's contract as long as there is a reasonable basis in fact for the 
effectiveness ratings, the evaluation process leading to the effectiveness ratings has been 
performed in a manner reasonably consistent with the approved system and department 
rules and the effectiveness ratings are not the result of bad faith. 
COMMITTEE AMENDMENT 
\. 
COMMITTEE AMENDMENT ·A "to H.P. 966, L.D. 1338 
3. Appeal or grievance. Except as provided in subsection 2, a teacher does not have 
the right to an appeal or grievance of a summative effectiveness rating unless the 
summative effectiveness rating is used by the teacher's employer as a basis for 
disciplinary action. When a summative effectiveness rating is used as the sole basis for 
disciplinary action and there is an appeal or grievance under the te1ms of an applicable 
collective bargaining agreement of that disciplinary action, the standard applied to the 
summative effectiveness rating is the same as for nonrenewal under subsection 2. 
4. Opportunity to respond. A teacher may provide a written response to any 
summative effectiveness rating issued to the teacher. If a teacher provides a written 
response, the response must be attached to and made a part of that teacher's summative 
effectiveness rating.' 
Amend the bill by relettering or renumbering any nonconsecutive Part letter or 
section number to read consecutively. 
SUMMARY 
This amendment strikes and replaces the bill and provides that, in any negotiated 
agreement, the criteria negotiated by the school board and the bargaining agent to 
establish the order of layoff and recall may include the teacher's effectiveness rating as a 
factor. 
This amendment also provides that, subject to appeal or grievance under the terms of 
an applicable collective bargaining agreement, receipt of summative effectiveness ratings 
indicating that a teacher is ineffective for 2 consecutive years constitutes just cause for 
nonrenewal of a teacher's contract as long as there is a reasonable basis in fact for the 
effectiveness ratings, the evaluation process leading to the effectiveness ratings has been 
performed in a manner reasonably consistent with the approved system and department 
rules and the effectiveness ratings are not the result of bad faith. 
This amendment also provides that there is no right to an appeal or grievance of a 
summative effectiveness rating unless the summative effectiveness rating is used by the 
employer as a basis for a disciplinary action and provides that a teacher has the 
opportunity to provide a written response to any summative effectiveness rating issued to 
the teacher. 
COMMITTEE AMENDMENT