PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 10, 2015
Local School Board Governance and Flexibility Act
Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) the responsibility for education resides with the states and the local educational agencies (LEAs) to which they have delegated authority; and (2) the Secretary of Education should only issue those regulations, rules, guidance materials, grant conditions, or other requirements that are specifically needed to implement federal legislation and are within LEAs' educational, operational, and financial capacity.
Prohibits the Secretary, unless specifically authorized by federal law, from issuing regulations, rules, guidance materials, grant conditions, or other requirements pertaining to states or LEAs that:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
conflict with the authority of LEAs delegated to them by their state;
result in additional costs to LEAs for reporting, grant administration, and general operations that are not fully covered by the federal government;
conflict with the authority of LEAs to determine how to engage or act upon community participation and advice;
impose requirements on LEAs or state educational agencies (SEAs) that would adversely affect their authority to function as legislative, executive, or quasi-judicial agencies;
conflict with states' authority to determine the appropriate governance structure of their SEA or LEAs, or their SEA's or LEAs' authority to determine how schools are governed or managed;
establish SEA or LEA reporting requirements that duplicate existing federal requirements or are issued without first conducting a fiscal impact statement; or
place conditions or requirements on grants to states or LEAs that do not directly relate to, or do not directly support, the intent of the grants or legislation authorizing the grants.
Directs the Secretary during each fiscal year to provide LEAs and the major national education organizations at least 60 days to provide written comments regarding the local impact of implementing federal regulations, rules, guidance materials, grant conditions, or other requirements for any applicable program or activity of the Secretary.
Directs the Secretary to review existing LEA reporting requirements to identify and eliminate those that are duplicative.
Prohibits the Secretary from promulgating federal regulations, rules, guidance materials, grant conditions, or other requirements pertaining to states or LEAs without first:
requesting data and recommendations from SEAs, LEAs, and the major national education organizations regarding the educational, financial, and operational costs involved in implementing them;
verifying that LEAs will have the financial resources and technical assistance they may need to successfully implement the requirements;
giving SEAs, LEAs, and national educational organizations at least 60 days' notice to respond to such requirements before they are issued, except in certain emergencies; and
giving SEAs and LEAs maximum flexibility in implementing the requirements.
Provides that if an LEA or major national education organization provides the Secretary with a written statement demonstrating that a regulation, rule, guidance material, grant condition, or other requirement does not meet the substantive or procedural requirements of this Act, the Secretary must review the merits of the statement, issue a written response within 60 days, and post that response on the Department of Education's website.
People & committees
Sen. Inhofe, James M. [R-OK] · R–OK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.690 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.690 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.690 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.690 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.