Can the Connecticut State Teachers' Retirement Board cancel a teacher's pension credit if it learns from somewhere other than the state Department of Education that the teacher was working without proper certification?

Plain-English summary

The State Teachers' Retirement Board (STRB) asked whether it could rescind retirement credit for a teacher who was teaching out of certification, if the STRB learned about the miscertification from a source other than the Department of Education. The AG said no.

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10-183rr does two things. The first sentence says that any teacher who is "notified" by the Department of Education that he or she is not properly certified for the position held shall receive "no further credit" in the system until properly certified. The second sentence flatly prohibits the STRB from rescinding any credited service for that teaching, and even requires the STRB to restore any credit it had rescinded before May 27, 2008. The AG read the statute as unambiguous: rescission is off the table no matter where the certification information came from, and the suspension of new credit only kicks in when the Department of Education has actually notified the teacher.

The AG noted that the legislature passed § 10-183rr in 2008 (Pub. Act 08-112) specifically to protect teachers who had been working outside their certification area, with the policy goal of minimizing the impact on those affected. Allowing the STRB to act on tip-offs from other sources would undermine that policy. The AG recommended that the STRB and the Department of Education develop a formal notification procedure to handle these situations, since no such procedure existed at the time.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2015. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

Background and statutory framework

The Connecticut Teachers' Retirement System credits a "teacher" for service performed in a public school in a "professional capacity while possessing a certificate or permit issued by the State Board of Education." Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10-183b(26). For service on or after July 1, 2015, that certificate must be for the position the teacher actually holds.

Before 2008, an improperly certified teacher could lose retirement credit for the years spent teaching out of certification. The legislature responded with Pub. Act 08-112, codified at § 10-183rr, after Representative Fleischmann and other supporters described the rarity of the problem but the major personal impact on the affected teachers. The new statute prevented retroactive forfeiture and required restoration of previously rescinded credits, while allowing only a forward-looking suspension of credit accrual once the Department of Education has formally notified the teacher of the issue.

The interpretive question for the AG was straightforward: does the second sentence's flat prohibition on rescission depend on the source of the certification information? Under § 1-2z, the AG looked first to text. The first sentence ties the suspension trigger to notification "by the Department of Education." The second sentence is unconditional. Reading them together, the AG concluded that rescission is forbidden regardless of source, and prospective suspension is permitted only when the Department itself supplies the notification. The canon from Felician Sisters (expression of one thing implies exclusion of the other) supported the conclusion that the legislature did not intend to authorize STRB to act on its own outside information.

Common questions

Can the STRB take away retirement credit a teacher already earned for years spent teaching out of certification?

No. The second sentence of § 10-183rr flatly prohibits the STRB from rescinding any credited service for such employment, and actually required the STRB to restore credit that had been rescinded before May 27, 2008.

What happens if the STRB hears from a school district or news report that a teacher is miscertified?

Under this opinion the STRB cannot use that information to either rescind earned credit or to suspend further accrual. The triggering event for prospective suspension is formal notification by the Department of Education to the teacher. The AG recommended the STRB and the Department set up a procedure so the Department can reliably notify the STRB and vice versa.

What is the "predicate" for suspending future credit accrual?

The Department of Education must have notified the teacher (on or after December 1, 2003) that the teacher is not properly certified for the position. Without that Department notification, the STRB has no statutory authority to stop the credit clock.

Why did the legislature design the statute this way?

Section 10-183rr was passed to protect teachers caught working outside their accreditation area, often without realizing it. The legislative history shows the situation was rare but financially devastating to the affected teachers. Tying both rescission protection and any prospective suspension to formal Department of Education notice keeps the process predictable and gives the teacher a chance to fix the certification before losing future credit.

Does this opinion mean a teacher can teach out of certification forever with no consequence?

No. It deals only with retirement credit. School districts have their own authority under Connecticut education law to address miscertification through hiring, assignment, and discipline.

Citations

Statutes

• Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10-183rr (suspension and non-rescission of retirement credit for improperly certified teachers)
• Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10-183b(26) (definition of "teacher")
• Conn. Gen. Stat. § 1-2z (statutory interpretation hierarchy)
• 2008 Conn. Pub. Acts No. 08-112 (enacted § 10-183rr, effective May 27, 2008)

Cases and prior opinions

• Mattatuck Museum-Mattatuck Historical Society v. Administrator, 238 Conn. 273 (1996) (plain-language rule)
• Hartford/Windsor Healthcare Properties v. City of Hartford, 298 Conn. 191 (2010) (ambiguity defined)
• Felician Sisters of St. Frances of CT v. Historic District Commission, 284 Conn. 838 (2008) (expression of one thing implies exclusion of another)

Source

• Landing page: https://portal.ct.gov/AG/Opinions
• Original PDF: https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/ag/opinions/2015/2015-04_strb_rescind_opinion-pdf.pdf?rev=d0c17fac2073484ea18c8922d1506fc4

Original opinion text

55 Elm Street
P.O. Box 120
Hartford, CT 06141-0120

GEORGE JEPSEN
ATTORNEY GENERAL

Office of the Attorney General
State of Connecticut

November 16, 2015

Darlene Perez
Teachers' Retirement Board Administrator
Connecticut Teachers' Retirement Board
765 Asylum Avenue
Hartford, CT 06105-2822

Dear Ms. Perez,

You have requested this office's opinion regarding whether the State Teachers' Retirement Board ("STRB") has the statutory authority to rescind credit for a member in the teachers' retirement system ("System") if it learns through a source other than the Department of Education ("Department") that the teacher is not properly certified for the position in which he or she is then employed. We conclude that the STRB does not have statutory authority to rescind credit for a "teacher" who is not properly certified for the position in which he or she is employed: the controlling statute only permits the STRB to suspend credit until the teacher becomes properly certified, and then only when the Department has "notified" the teacher that he or she is not properly certified.

First, we note that upon receiving your request our office initially advised you to determine with the Department whether a procedure could be developed by which either the Department notifies the STRB of situations in which a teacher is improperly certified, or the STRB notifies the Department that it has learned of such improper certification. The STRB ultimately informed this office that no such procedure has been developed with the Department, but renewed its request for this opinion.

To answer your inquiry, we must examine § 10-183rr of the Connecticut General Statutes. If the meaning of the "text is plain and unambiguous and does not yield absurd or unworkable results, extra textual evidence of the meaning of the statute shall not be considered." Connecticut General Statutes § 1-2z; see also Mattatuck Museum-Mattatuck Historical Society v. Administrator, Unemployment Compensation Act, 238 Conn. 273, 278 (1996) (finding that when statutory language is "plain and unambiguous," courts will look no further than the words themselves because it is assumed "that the language expresses the legislature's intent"). On the other hand, "[a] statute is ambiguous if, when read in context, it is susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation." Hartford/Windsor Healthcare Properties, LLC v. City of Hartford, 298 Conn. 191, 197-98 (2010).

Connecticut General Statutes § 10-183rr provides in relevant part that:

Notwithstanding the provisions of subdivision (26) of section 10-183b concerning the requirement that a teacher hold a certificate for the position in which the person is employed, any teacher who possesses a certificate or permit issued by the State Board of Education and is notified on or after December 1, 2003, by the Department of Education that such teacher is not properly certified for the position in which the teacher is employed or has been employed, such teacher shall receive no further credit in the teachers' retirement system for employment in such position until the teacher becomes properly certified for such position. The Teachers' Retirement Board shall not rescind any credited service to such teacher for such employment and shall restore any such credit to such teacher if rescinded prior to May 27, 2008.

(Emphasis added.) In our view, the statute is unambiguous about the STRB's limited authority concerning the accrual of credit for teachers "not properly certified."

Your specific question is governed by the second sentence of § 10-183rr, which does not permit the STRB to rescind "any credited service to such teacher for such employment . . . ." (Emphasis added.) The phrase "such employment" refers to the teacher's "employment in such position" in the previous sentence, which in turn refers to the position "such teacher is not properly certified for."

Thus, regardless of the source of the information, the second sentence of the statute specifically provides that the STRB cannot rescind credited service, but in fact must "restore any such credit" if it had been rescinded before the effective date of the statute (May 27, 2008). The plain language prohibiting such a rescission of credit reflects a policy designed to protect retirement credits of teachers who work outside of their area of accreditation as opposed to penalizing them for such work. Although the second sentence of the statute does not refer to the Department of Education, as the first sentence does, this policy of the statute would be defeated if the STRB were able to rescind credit based upon certification information it received from another source.

As to the prospective suspension of "further credit in the teachers' retirement system," the first sentence of § 10-183rr provides a necessary predicate to that suspension: that the teacher "is notified on or after December 1, 2003, by the Department of Education that such teacher is not properly certified . . . ." We construe this predicate as not only mandating that the improperly certified teacher receive no further credit "until the teacher becomes properly certified," but as limiting the circumstances of that suspension to instances in which the Department determines that the certification is improper and so notifies the teacher. We do not read this statute to authorize the STRB to suspend the earning of credit based upon its own information, from a source other than the Department. Felician Sisters of St. Frances of CT v. Historic District Commission, 284 Conn. 838, 851 (2008) (the expression of one thing is evidence of the legislature's intent to exclude another).

The statute's legislative history supports an interpretation that credit is to be halted and not rescinded if the teacher is employed in a position for which he or she is not properly certified. In 2008, the legislature passed the statute to address situations in which a teacher was working outside of their area of accreditation and not receiving credit. See 2008 Conn. Pub. Acts No. 08-112. Specifically, the legislative debates reveal that the enactment of the statute was designed to minimize the impact on individuals working outside of their accreditation. Representative Fleischmann, speaking in favor of the legislation, noted the rarity of the circumstance where an individual was working outside of their accreditation and losing retirement credit, but also noted the "major implications for the individuals affected." H. Proc., 2008 Sess. 4407-10 (May 1, 2008) (remarks of Rep. Fleischmann). The statute requires the STRB to restore credit to an affected teacher if such credit was rescinded prior to enactment of the statute. Connecticut General Statutes § 10-183rr. Therefore, the statute plainly was designed to protect teachers from losing retirement credit due to teaching outside of their area of accreditation.

Thus, we conclude that pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes § 10-183rr the STRB is authorized only to suspend credit after the teacher has been notified by the Department of Education that he or she is working outside of his or her area of accreditation. The STRB cannot rescind any credit, and it must resume the accrual of credit after the teacher is properly certified for the position in which he or she is employed. In order for the STRB to fulfill its duty to properly administer the System, we recommend that the STRB develop, in conjunction with the Department of Education, a procedure of notification when either the Department or the STRB learns that a teacher is not properly certified for his or her position.

Very truly yours,

GEORGE JEPSEN
ATTORNEY GENERAL