N.M. Stat. § 22-2-1 (2026)

A. The secretary is the governing authority and shall have control, management and
direction of all public schools, except as otherwise provided by law.

   B. The department may:

       (1)     adopt, promulgate and enforce rules to exercise its authority and the
authority of the secretary;

       (2)    enter into contracts to carry out its duties;

      (3)     apply to the district court for an injunction, writ of mandamus or other
appropriate relief to enforce the provisions of the Public School Code [Chapter 22
[except Article 5A] NMSA 1978] or rules promulgated pursuant to the Public School
Code; and

       (4)    waive provisions of the Public School Code as authorized by law.

History: 1978 Comp., § 22-2-1, enacted by Laws 1990 (1st S.S.), ch. 9, § 10; 1992, ch.
77, § 1; 1993, ch. 226, § 2; 2003, ch. 143, § 2; 2004, ch. 27, § 14.

                                      ANNOTATIONS

Repeals and reenactments. — Laws 1990 (1st S.S.), ch. 9, § 10 repealed former 22-2-
1 NMSA 1978, as amended by Laws 1990, ch. 52, § 1, and enacted a new section,
effective June 18, 1990.

Cross references. — For constitutional provision relating to state board of education,
see N.M. Const., art. XII, § 6.

For the public education department and commission, see 9-24-5, 9-24-10 and 9-24-15
NMSA 1978.

Temporary provisions. — Laws 2026, ch. 2, § 1, effective January 31, 2026, provided
that on verification of the number of units statewide for fiscal year 2026, but no later
than February 27, 2026, the secretary of public education may adjust the unit value. In
adjusting the unit value in February, the public education department shall consult with
the department of finance and administration, the legislative finance committee and the
legislative education study committee.

The 2004 amendment, effective May 19, 2004, amended Subsection A to change
"state board" to "secretary", amended Subsection B to change "state board" to
"department", added a new Subparagraph (2) providing for the power of the department
to enter into contracts and redesignated former Subsections C and D as Paragraphs (3)
and (4) of Subsection B.

The 1993 amendment, effective July 1, 1993, deleted former Subsection D, pertaining
to approval by the state board of a local school board's request to waive provisions of
the Public School Code relating to length of school day, staffing patterns, subject areas
or the purchase of instructional materials; redesignated former Subsection E as
Subsection D; and rewrote present Subsection D, which formerly authorized the state
board to waive provisions of the Public School Code relating to staffing patterns, class
and teaching leads, subject areas, curriculum, testing, instructional time or the purchase
of instructional materials.

The 1992 amendment, effective May 20, 1992, inserted "or the purchase of
instructional materials" in the first sentence of Subsection D and near the middle of
Subsection E; and made minor stylistic changes throughout the section.

Authority of secretary of public education to revoke teachers’ licenses. — Article
XII, Section 6 of the New Mexico Constitution, the Uniform Licensing Act, Sections 61-1-
1 et seq. NMSA 1978, the Public Education Department Act, Chapter 9, Article 24
NMSA 1978, the Public School Code, Chapter 22 NMSA 1978, and the School
Personnel Act, Chapter 22, Article 10A NMSA 1978, do not preclude the secretary of
public education from having exclusive authority to make the final decision to revoke a
teacher’s license. Skowronski v. N.M. Pub. Educ. Dep’t, 2013-NMCA-034, 298 P.3d
469, cert. granted, 2013-NMCERT-003.

Secretary’s authority to disregard hearing officer’s credibility determination. —
Where plaintiff was charged with engaging in inappropriate and improper sexual
behavior with a fourteen-year-old victim at a charter school; a hearing officer found that
the charges against plaintiff had not been proven by a preponderance of the evidence
and recommended that the disciplinary action against plaintiff be dismissed; the
secretary of public education reviewed the record before the hearing officer, adopted
some of the hearing officer’s recommendations and rejected others, and concluded that
a preponderance of the evidence warranted revocation and revoked plaintiff’s license to
teach; the essential difference between the hearing officer’s view of the case and that of
the secretary was how they viewed the credibility of plaintiff and the victim and the
believability of their testimony; the regulations of the public education department
provided that the hearing officer had the duty to make proposed findings and
conclusions; the secretary was not an appellate reviewer of the hearing officer’s findings
and conclusions, the secretary had the authority, after reviewing the record, to modify
the hearing officer’s findings and conclusions; and the secretary was ultimately
responsible for issuing a final decision; and after reviewing the record, the secretary
made independent findings of fact that were supported by references to the hearing
transcript, the secretary did not exceed the secretary’s authority by making the
secretary’s own credibility or fact-based determinations. Skowronski v. N.M. Pub. Educ.
Dep’t, 2013-NMCA-034, 298 P.3d 469, cert. granted, 2013-NMCERT-003.

Revocation of teacher’s license did not violate due process. — Where plaintiff was
charged with engaging in inappropriate and improper sexual behavior with a fourteen-
year-old victim at a charter school; a hearing officer found that the charges against
plaintiff had not been proven by a preponderance of the evidence, based in part on the
credibility of the witnesses, and recommended that the disciplinary action against
plaintiff be dismissed; the secretary of public education reviewed the record and
concluded that a preponderance of the evidence warranted revocation; the secretary’s
conclusions were supported by the record and were based on the secretary’s analysis
of the facts presented by the witnesses, the contradictions in the facts, and the victim’s
written statement, plaintiff was not denied due process by the fact that the secretary
failed to observe the witnesses’ demeanor or by the secretary’s failure to defer to the
hearing officer’s proposed findings of fact. Skowronski v. N.M. Pub. Educ. Dep’t, 2013-
NMCA-034, 298 P.3d 469, cert. granted, 2013-NMCERT-003.

Revocation of teacher’s license was supported by substantial evidence. — Where
plaintiff was charged with engaging in inappropriate and improper sexual behavior with
a fourteen-year-old victim; the victim was considering attending the charter school; the
owners and operators of the school, who were the godparents of the victim, hosted an
event in their home; the victim and plaintiff stayed overnight and slept in the living room
where the alleged contact occurred when the victim and plaintiff were alone, the
decision of the secretary of public education to revoke plaintiff’s teacher’s license was
supported by substantial evidence. Skowronski v. N.M. Pub. Educ. Dep’t, 2013-NMCA-
034, 298 P.3d 469, cert. granted, 2013-NMCERT-003.

State board has powers implied from statute. — The authority of the state board in
the rule- or regulation-making context is not limited to those powers expressly granted
by statute, but includes all powers that may be fairly implied therefrom. Redman v.
Board of Regents, 1984-NMCA-117, 102 N.M. 234, 693 P.2d 1266, cert. denied, 102
N.M. 225, 693 P.2d 591 (1985).

Board may determine action not "good cause" for firing. — It is within the province
of the state board to decide that a private affair between consenting adults, an assistant
principal and a school secretary, is not "good and just cause" to fire an employee. Board
of Educ. v. Jennings, 1982-NMCA-135, 98 N.M. 602, 651 P.2d 1037.

Legislative power as to duties of state board. — The authority granted the state
board for the "control, management and direction of all public schools" under N.M.
Const., art. XII, § 6 must be specifically defined by the legislature and the legislature
may divest the state board of duties previously defined. N.M. Const., art. XII, § 6 does
not, in itself, vest the state board with any particular duties and the legislature is
empowered to determine the scope of the board's authority. 1977 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 77-
06.

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — Validity of local or state denial of public
school courses or activities to private or parochial school students, 43 A.L.R.4th 776.