Skip to content

Michigan House Bill 5703 Imposes New Posting Requirement

October 18, 2022

On Oct. 11, Governor Whitmer signed House Bill 5703: a law that will require schools to post notices including both a provision of the Michigan School Code that reaffirms the prominence of parental rights in school, as well as a portion of the Michigan Constitution. This law will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2023. Among those responsible for making certain these texts are “prominently posted and maintained” are the boards of directors of public school academies (and charter schools), the boards of school districts or intermediate school districts (ISDs), the Michigan Department of Education, and the State Board of Education.

State Rep. Annette Glenn (R-Midland) initially introduced House Bill 5703, amid controversy and debate surrounding the role of parental rights in a child’s school environment. By schools and boards taking steps to increase the visibility of these texts, supporters of the new law hope that educators are reminded of the importance of parental involvement in educational decision-making.

Under this amendment to the Revised School Code, the following texts must be displayed:

Section 1 of Article VIII of the Michigan Constitution of 1963:

Religion, morality and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.

Section 10 of the Revised School Code:

It is the natural, fundamental right of parents and legal guardians to determine and direct the care, teaching, and education of their children. The public schools of this state serve the needs of the pupils by cooperating with the pupil’s parents and legal guardians to develop the pupil’s intellectual capabilities and vocational skills in a safe and positive environment.

The law also specifies the areas where these notices must be posted including: the rooms where the board holds meetings, rooms where the State Board of Education holds meetings, a school district’s, ISD’s, or PSA’s administrative building, the principal’s office, and buildings that are operated by the Department of Education.

In addition to the location requirements, employees of the Department of Education and State Board of Education must have these notices included in training materials and manuals.

Reminders for Districts:

While this new law requires that these two specific provisions be posted – it does not preclude the boards of school districts from posting additional provisions in a prominent way.

Under MCL 380.11a(3), boards can “exercise a power incidental or appropriate to the performance of a function related to operation of a public school.” Boards can exercise such power in a wide array of areas, including making decisions related to educating pupils, providing safe activities, maintaining school property, using school finances, and making hiring decisions for school employees. Boards of school districts ultimately have the right to set their own policies, including what messages they choose to noticeably display in various school buildings. Boards may consider posting MCL 380.11a(3) along with the newly-required provisions.

If you have questions or would like additional information, contact a member of our Education team.

Subscribe for the latest

Subscribe

Related

Event

Clark Hill's Commercial Real Estate Symposium – Dallas, Texas

Join Clark Hill’s Commercial Real Estate attorneys and industry professionals for a timely and dynamic program in Dallas, focusing on the latest challenges and top trends in the CRE industry.

Explore more
Legal Updates

What Is Likely the Weakest Provision in Your Multi-State Lease?

Using one eminent domain lease clause across states risks lost value. Learn how state laws should reflect notice and just compensation for better protection.

Explore more
Legal Updates

Critical Risk Mitigation Provisions for Design Contracts — Part 1: Waiver of Consequential Damages

An essential element of architect and engineer contracts with their clients is the treatment of risk sharing between the parties. Design professionals who are typically simply providing services for a fee, and who are not investors who will share in the profits of a successful project, can ill-afford to expose themselves to unlimited liability for negligent errors and omissions in the performance of their services. Architects and engineers would argue that it is fundamentally unfair to expose them to unlimited downside risk when they do not directly participate in the upside profit potential of the projects they design. Owners and developers would counter that this is why design professionals carry professional liability insurance. But even simple design errors can lead to liability that is many times greater than the amount of such insurance.

Explore more