POUDRE SCHOOL DISTRICT R-1 and Poudre School District R-1 Board of Education v. Patricia STANCZYK and Poudre Education Association ( 2021 )

<div data-spec-version="0.0.3dev" data-generated-on="2024-06-02">
<div class="generated-from-iceberg vlex-toc">
<link href="https://doc-stylesheets.vlex.com/ldml-xml.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css"></link>
<div class="ldml-decision"><div class="ldml-decision"><div href="/vid/887065534" data-vids="887065534" class="ldml-header header ldml-header content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Header"><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-cite"><b class="ldml-bold">489 P.3d 743</b></span></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-party"><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-name">POUDRE SCHOOL DISTRICT R-1 and Poudre School District R-1 Board of Education</span>, <span class="ldml-role">Petitioners</span></b></span></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold">v.</b><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-party"><span class="ldml-name">Patricia STANCZYK</span></span> and <span class="ldml-party"><span class="ldml-name">Poudre Education Association</span>, <span class="ldml-role">Respondents</span></span>.</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold">Supreme Court <span class="ldml-cite">Case No. 20SC269</span> </b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><b class="ldml-bold"><span class="ldml-court">Supreme Court of Colorado</span>.</b></p><p class="ldml-metadata"><span class="ldml-date"><b class="ldml-bold">June 21, 2021</b></span></p></div><div class="ldml-counsel header ldml-header content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Counsel"><p data-paragraph-id="237" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="237" data-sentence-id="237" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-role">Petitioners</span></span>: <span class="ldml-lawfirm">Semple, Farrington, Everall & Case, P.C.</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">M. Brent Case</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Jonathan P. Fero</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Mary B. Gray</span></span>, Denver, Colorado</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="369" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="369" data-sentence-id="369" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-role">Respondents</span></span>: <span class="ldml-entity">Colorado Education Association</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Charles F. Kaiser</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Brooke Copass</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Rory Herington</span></span>, Denver, Colorado</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="494" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="494" data-sentence-id="494" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-lawyerrole">Amicus Curiae</span> Colorado <span class="ldml-entity">Attorney General</span>: <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Philip J. Weiser</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Attorney General</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Jenna Zerylnick</span></span>, Assistant <span class="ldml-entity">Attorney General</span>, Denver, Colorado</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="646" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-2"><span data-paragraph-id="646" data-sentence-id="646" class="ldml-sentence">Attorneys for <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyerrole">Amicus Curiae</span> Colorado State Board of Education</span>: <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Philip J. Weiser</span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Attorney General</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-lawyer">Julie C. Tolleson</span></span>, First Assistant <span class="ldml-entity">Attorney General</span>, Denver, Colorado</span></p></div><h2 class="ldml-opinionheading"><span data-paragraph-id="814" class="ldml-paragraph "><span class="ldml-judgepanel"><span data-paragraph-id="814" data-sentence-id="814" class="ldml-sentence">En Banc</span></span></span></h2><div class="ldml-opinion"><p data-paragraph-id="821" class="ldml-paragraph no-indent mt-4"><span class="ldml-opinionauthor content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Opinion (HART)"><span data-paragraph-id="821" data-sentence-id="821" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">JUSTICE <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-judge">HART</span></span> <span class="ldml-opiniontype">delivered <span class="ldml-entity">the Opinion of <span class="ldml-entity">the Court</span></span></span></span>.</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="869" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="869" data-sentence-id="869" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">¶1 Section 22-63-203.5, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span>, of the Teacher Employment, Compensation, and <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_869"><span class="ldml-cite">Dismissal Act <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"TECDA"</span>)</span></span></a></span> provides that, beginning with the <span class="ldml-entity">2014</span>-15 school year, a nonprobationary teacher in Colorado <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"who is employed by a school district and is subsequently hired by a different school district ... shall be granted nonprobationary status in the hiring school district"</span> if the teacher <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"can show two consecutive performance evaluations with effectiveness ratings in good standing."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="869" data-sentence-id="1351" class="ldml-sentence">In <span class="ldml-entity">2016</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">Patricia Stanczyk</span>, who obtained nonprobationary status in the <span class="ldml-entity">Thompson School District</span> in <span class="ldml-entity">1999</span>, applied for several teaching positions with the <span class="ldml-entity">Poudre School District</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-localname">PSD</span>"</span>)</span> through its online application portal.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="869" data-sentence-id="1574" class="ldml-sentence">The application required her to attest that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> voluntarily waived her right to transfer, or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"port,"</span> nonprobationary status under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_1574"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> and stated that the job was conditioned on this waiver.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="869" data-sentence-id="1780" class="ldml-sentence">Stanczyk's teaching contract for the <span class="ldml-entity">2016</span>-17 school year contained language similar to the online application and further provided that the contract was voidable at PSD's option if Stanczyk asserted portability of her nonprobationary status.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="2021" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="2021" data-sentence-id="2021" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2021"><span class="ldml-cite">¶2</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> granted certiorari to determine whether, under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2021"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span>, a school district is prohibited from asking or requiring a teacher who earned nonprobationary status in another district to waive portability of that status.<a href="#note-fr1" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr1">1</a></span> <span data-paragraph-id="2021" data-sentence-id="2253" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2253"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span> plainly places the <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_2278" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="746" data-vol="489"></span> decision-making authority with respect to asserting or waiving portability with the teacher, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> therefore hold that school districts may not require teachers to waive portability of nonprobationary status as a condition of employment.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2021" data-sentence-id="2518" class="ldml-sentence">Because waiver was required as a condition of employment in <span class="ldml-entity">this case</span>, Stanczyk's waiver of her right to assert portability was involuntary and, as a result, invalid.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2021" data-sentence-id="2685" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> therefore affirm the judgment of <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span>, albeit on other grounds, and remand for further proceedings.</span></p><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-specifier="I" data-parsed="true" data-ordinal_start="1" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-confidences="very_high" data-id="heading_2803" data-value="I. Facts and Procedural History" data-ordinal_end="1" data-types="background" id="heading_2803" data-content-heading-label="I. Facts and Procedural History"><span data-paragraph-id="2803" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="2803" data-sentence-id="2803" class="ldml-sentence">I.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2803" data-sentence-id="2806" class="ldml-sentence">Facts and Procedural History</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="2834" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="2834" data-sentence-id="2834" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_2834"><span class="ldml-cite">¶3</span></a></span> Stanczyk was a teacher in the <span class="ldml-entity">Thompson School District</span> from <span class="ldml-entity">1995</span> through <span class="ldml-entity">2016</span>; <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> attained nonprobationary status in <span class="ldml-entity">1999</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2834" data-sentence-id="2961" class="ldml-sentence">In the spring of <span class="ldml-entity">2016</span>, Stanczyk applied to several teaching positions within PSD through its online application portal.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="2834" data-sentence-id="3081" class="ldml-sentence">All teaching positions posted by PSD for the <span class="ldml-entity">2016</span>-17 school year were advertised as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"probationary,"</span> and all individuals applying for these teaching positions were required to certify their <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"understanding and agreement"</span> in their online applications that:</span></p><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_3334" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="3334" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span> the positions for which I am applying are for licensed probationary teachers and/ or special services providers; <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(b)</span> by applying for these positions I have voluntarily decided to waive my right to assert the portability of nonprobationary status I have acquired in another school district, if any; and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(c)</span> any offers of employment extended by <span class="ldml-entity">Poudre School District</span> to me for these positions are conditioned on my signing a probationary teacher employment contract and not asserting the portability of nonprobationary status I have acquired in another school district, if any.</span></blockquote><p data-paragraph-id="3914" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="3914" data-sentence-id="3914" class="ldml-sentence">Applicants were required to click <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"I agree"</span> to these statements in order to submit the application – there was no way for applicants to skip this step or indicate lack of agreement in the application portal.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="3914" data-sentence-id="4122" class="ldml-sentence">Stanczyk checked this box and submitted her application.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="4178" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="4178" data-sentence-id="4178" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4178"><span class="ldml-cite">¶4</span></a></span> PSD offered, and Stanczyk accepted, a teaching position for the <span class="ldml-entity">2016</span>-17 school year.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4178" data-sentence-id="4266" class="ldml-sentence">Stanczyk subsequently signed a <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"Probationary Teacher Employment Contract,"</span> which stated that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"is employed as a probationary teacher under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.S. § 22-63-203</span></a></span>, and has voluntarily waived the right under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">C.R.S. § 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> to assert the portability of nonprobationary status acquired in another school district, if any."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="4178" data-sentence-id="4590" class="ldml-sentence">The contract stated further that it was <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"voidable at the option of the <span class="ldml-entity">Board of Education</span> ... if the TEACHER asserts the portability of nonprobationary status acquired in another school district, if any."</span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="4794" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="4794" data-sentence-id="4794" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_4794"><span class="ldml-cite">¶5</span></a></span> Before Stanczyk signed her employment contract, <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> went to PSD's human resources office to ask about portability of her nonprobationary status from the <span class="ldml-entity">Thompson School District</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4794" data-sentence-id="4976" class="ldml-sentence">In response to Stanczyk's inquiry, an unidentified PSD employee told her that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">we</span> don't do that here."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="4794" data-sentence-id="5079" class="ldml-sentence">PSD's Human Resources Director later testified that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> did not know how her office would handle a situation where an applicant did not want to waive their right to port nonprobationary status or whether PSD would have even hired such an applicant.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4794" data-sentence-id="5328" class="ldml-sentence">Unlike many other school districts in <span class="ldml-entity">the state</span>, PSD did not have a policy in place regarding portability of nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="4794" data-sentence-id="5461" class="ldml-sentence">Thus, Stanczyk signed the employment contract in <span class="ldml-entity">August 2016</span> without getting an answer to her question regarding portability.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="5586" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="5586" data-sentence-id="5586" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_5586"><span class="ldml-cite">¶6</span></a></span> In <span class="ldml-entity">April 2017</span>, a supervisor notified Stanczyk that her teaching contract would not be renewed for the following school year.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="5586" data-sentence-id="5714" class="ldml-sentence">A few days later, Stanczyk emailed PSD's Human Resources Director to request portability of her nonprobationary status and submitted her <span class="ldml-entity">2014</span>-15 and <span class="ldml-entity">2015</span>-16 teacher evaluations from the <span class="ldml-entity">Thompson School District</span> in support of her request.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="5586" data-sentence-id="5952" class="ldml-sentence">At that time, Stanczyk was the only employee in PSD to have requested portability of her nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="5586" data-sentence-id="6065" class="ldml-sentence">PSD denied Stanczyk's request, pointing to the language contained in Stanczyk's online application and employment contract.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="6188" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="6188" data-sentence-id="6188" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6188"><span class="ldml-cite">¶7</span></a></span> Stanczyk and the <span class="ldml-entity">Poudre Education Association</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-localname">PEA</span>"</span>)</span> then filed this lawsuit seeking, among other things, a declaratory judgment that <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6188"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> requires a school district to grant a teacher nonprobationary status if the teacher provides the requisite documentation, and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span> PSD violated Stanczyk's rights under <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6188" data-sentence-id="6530" class="ldml-sentence">PSD moved for summary judgment, <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_6562" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="747" data-vol="489"></span> which <span class="ldml-entity">the district court</span> granted, finding that the right to request nonprobationary portability under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_6530"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> is waivable and that Stanczyk validly waived her right to port her nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="6188" data-sentence-id="6776" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The district court</span> also found that, because <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> did not explicitly prohibit such blanket waivers, school boards could lawfully require teachers to waive their right to port nonprobationary status as a condition of employment.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="7009" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="7009" data-sentence-id="7009" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7009"><span class="ldml-cite">¶8</span></a></span> Stanczyk appealed, and a division of <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> affirmed in part and reversed in part.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7009" data-sentence-id="7109" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7009" data-refglobal="case:stanczykvpoudreschdistr-1,2020coa27m"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Stanczyk v. Poudre Sch. Dist. R-1</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2020 COA 27M</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7009"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 5</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:–––p3d––––"><span class="ldml-cite">––– P.3d ––––</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7009" data-sentence-id="7178" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The court of appeals</span> concluded that PSD placed unreasonable restrictions on prospective teachers' right to port their nonprobationary status in violation of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7178"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> and held that if a teacher complies with <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>'s requirements, the hiring school district must grant the teacher nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7009" data-sentence-id="7498" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7178" data-refglobal="case:–––p3d––––"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i> at 11 59-60, 65-69</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="7521" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="7521" data-sentence-id="7521" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7521"><span class="ldml-cite">¶9</span></a></span> PSD petitioned <span class="ldml-entity">this court</span> for certiorari, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> granted the <span class="ldml-entity">petition to determine</span> the proper construction of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7521"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-specifier="II" data-parsed="true" data-ordinal_start="2" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-confidences="very_high" data-id="heading_7654" data-value="II. Analysis" data-ordinal_end="2" data-types="analysis" id="heading_7654" data-content-heading-label="II. Analysis"><span data-paragraph-id="7654" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="7654" data-sentence-id="7654" class="ldml-sentence">II.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7654" data-sentence-id="7658" class="ldml-sentence">Analysis</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="7666" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="7666" data-sentence-id="7667" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7667"><span class="ldml-cite">¶10</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> begin by addressing the applicable standard of review.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7666" data-sentence-id="7729" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> then examine <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7729"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span>, and specifically analyze <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7729"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> to determine whether school districts may require applicants to waive their right to port nonprobationary status as a condition of employment.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7666" data-sentence-id="7940" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> conclude that <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> may not.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="7970" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="7970" data-sentence-id="7970" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7970"><span class="ldml-cite">¶11</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_7970"><span class="ldml-cite">Section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> provides that hiring school districts <i class="ldml-italics">shall</i> grant nonprobationary status to teachers who request it and submit the documents required by <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7970" data-sentence-id="8144" class="ldml-sentence">While school districts are free to negotiate with potential hires over portability, <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> may not avoid this statutory mandate by simply requiring applicants to consent to blanket waivers during the hiring process.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="7970" data-sentence-id="8358" class="ldml-sentence">Accordingly, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> affirm <span class="ldml-entity">the decision of <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span></span>, though on different grounds.</span></p><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth2" data-specifier="A" data-parsed="true" data-ordinal_start="1" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-confidences="very_high" data-id="heading_8447" data-value="A. Standard of Review" data-ordinal_end="1" data-types="standardofreview" id="heading_8447" data-content-heading-label="A. Standard of Review"><span data-paragraph-id="8447" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="8447" data-sentence-id="8447" class="ldml-sentence">A.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8447" data-sentence-id="8450" class="ldml-sentence">Standard of Review</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="8468" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="8468" data-sentence-id="8469" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8469"><span class="ldml-cite">¶12</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> review de novo <span class="ldml-entity"><span class="ldml-entity">a district court</span>'s decision</span> to grant summary judgment.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8468" data-sentence-id="8546" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8546" data-refglobal="case:peopleexrelreinvmeagher,2020co56"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People ex rel. Rein v. Meagher</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2020 CO 56</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8546"><span class="ldml-cite">¶1</span></a></span></span> 19, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886015661" data-vids="886015661" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8546"><span class="ldml-cite">465 P.3d 554, 559</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8468" data-sentence-id="8616" class="ldml-sentence">Because <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> apply the same standard as <span class="ldml-entity">the district court</span> in our review, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> must <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"determine whether a genuine issue of material fact existed and whether <span class="ldml-entity">the district court</span> correctly applied the law."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="8468" data-sentence-id="8815" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8616" data-refglobal="case:childhelpsmotioncityoffortcollinsvcolooilgasassn,2016co28"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">City of Fort Collins v. Colo. Oil & Gas Ass'n</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2016 CO 28</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8616"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 9</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/892928593" data-vids="892928593" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">369 P.3d 586, 590</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8468" data-sentence-id="8898" class="ldml-sentence">Summary judgment is a drastic remedy that should be granted only when it is clear that the applicable standards have been met.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="8468" data-sentence-id="9025" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8898" data-refglobal="case:peopleexrelreinvmeagher,2020co56"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Meagher</i></span></a></span> , <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_8898"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 21</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886015661" data-vids="886015661" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">465 P.3d at 559</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="9057" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="9057" data-sentence-id="9058" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9058"><span class="ldml-cite">¶13</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">We</span> also review de novo issues of statutory interpretation.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9057" data-sentence-id="9121" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9058" data-refglobal="case:bloomingterraceno1,llcvkhblakest,llc,2019co58"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Blooming Terrace No. 1, LLC v. KH Blake St., LLC</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2019 CO 58</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9058"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 11</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895671414" data-vids="895671414" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">444 P.3d 749, 752</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9057" data-sentence-id="9208" class="ldml-sentence">Our primary goal when interpreting <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> is <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"to effectuate <span class="ldml-entity">the legislature</span>'s intent."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="9057" data-sentence-id="9298" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895671414" data-vids="895671414" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9208"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="9057" data-sentence-id="9302" class="ldml-sentence">To accomplish this, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">we</span> look to the entire <span class="ldml-entity">statutory scheme</span> in order to give consistent, harmonious, and sensible effect to all of its parts, and <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> apply words and phrases in accordance with their plain and ordinary meanings."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="9057" data-sentence-id="9530" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895671414" data-vids="895671414" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9302"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/885985135" data-vids="885985135" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9302"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">UMB Bank, N.A. v. Landmark Towers Ass'n</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2017 CO 107</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9302"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 22</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/885985135" data-vids="885985135" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9302"><span class="ldml-cite">408 P.3d 836, 840</span></a></span> )</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9057" data-sentence-id="9624" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-quotation quote">"If the statutory language is clear and unambiguous, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> apply it as written – venturing no further."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="9057" data-sentence-id="9725" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895671414" data-vids="895671414" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9624"><span class="ldml-cite">Id.</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-signal">accord</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9624" data-refglobal="case:billbarrettcorpvlembke,2020co73"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Bill Barrett Corp. v. Lembke</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2020 CO 73</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9624"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 14</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895630172" data-vids="895630172" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">474 P.3d 46, 49</span></a></span>.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth2" data-specifier="B" data-parsed="true" data-ordinal_start="2" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-confidences="very_high" data-id="heading_9803" data-value="B. Applicable Law" data-ordinal_end="2" data-types="backgroundlaw" id="heading_9803" data-content-heading-label="B. Applicable Law"><span data-paragraph-id="9803" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="9803" data-sentence-id="9803" class="ldml-sentence">B.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9803" data-sentence-id="9806" class="ldml-sentence">Applicable Law</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="9820" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="9820" data-sentence-id="9820" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9820"><span class="ldml-cite">¶14</span></a></span> In <span class="ldml-entity">1990</span>, the General Assembly enacted <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9820"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span>, supplanting its predecessor, the Teacher Employment, Dismissal, and <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9820"><span class="ldml-cite">Tenure Act of 1967 <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"TEDTA"</span>)</span>, ch. 435, sec. 1, §§ 123-18-1</span></a></span> to -18, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_9820"><span class="ldml-cite">1967 Colo. Sess. Laws 976</span></a></span>, and establishing new statewide standards for teacher employment, compensation, and dismissal.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9820" data-sentence-id="10125" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10125"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span> marked a seismic shift in education law in <span class="ldml-entity">the state</span>, replacing the tenure system then in force with a system under which teachers were classified as either <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"probationary"</span> or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"nonprobationary."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="9820" data-sentence-id="10325" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10125"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-103<span class="ldml-headnoteanchor"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(7)</span></span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">1990</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9820" data-sentence-id="10356" class="ldml-sentence">Unlike <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10356"><span class="ldml-cite">TEDTA</span></a></span>, which <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"entitled"</span> teachers to employment when <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> became tenured, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-115<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">1988</span>)</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10356"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span> provides teachers no such entitlement.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9820" data-sentence-id="10512" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10356" data-refglobal="case:petitionersschooldistrictno1inthecityandcountyofdenvervmasterscaseno15sc10622018co18march12,2018"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Sch. Dist. No. 1 v. Masters</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2018 CO 18</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10356"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 6</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:413p3d723,726"><span class="ldml-cite">413 P.3d 723, 726</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9820" data-sentence-id="10577" class="ldml-sentence">Still, nonprobationary status provides teachers some employment protections not offered to those <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_10674" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="748" data-vol="489"></span> with probationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9820" data-sentence-id="10701" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10577" data-refglobal="case:413p3d723,726"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">id.</i></span></a></span></span> at <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 7</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-refglobal="case:413p3d723,726"><span class="ldml-cite">413 P.3d at 726</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="9820" data-sentence-id="10735" class="ldml-sentence">For example, while probationary teachers may be nonrenewed at the end of every school year for any reason, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-203<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(4)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span>, nonprobationary teachers can only be dismissed for cause, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-301, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="10961" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="10961" data-sentence-id="10961" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10961"><span class="ldml-cite">¶15</span></a></span> Although <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_10961"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span> initially granted a teacher nonprobationary status solely based on length of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"continuous employment"</span> with a school district, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-103<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(7)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">1990</span>)</span></a></span>, another landmark reform enacted in <span class="ldml-entity">2010</span>, familiarly known as <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 191</span></a></span>, explicitly tied teachers' status to their <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"demonstrated effectiveness"</span> over a period of time.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10961" data-sentence-id="11301" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11301"><span class="ldml-cite">Ch. 241</span></a></span>, secs. 1-18, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11301"><span class="ldml-cite">2010 Colo. Sess. Laws 1053</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">codified as amended in scattered <span class="ldml-entity">sections of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_11350"><span class="ldml-cite">Title 22</span></a></span></span>, C.R.S.</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10961" data-sentence-id="11414" class="ldml-sentence">Declaring that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[a]</span> system to evaluate the effectiveness of licensed personnel is crucial to improving the quality of education"</span> in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-refname">Colorado</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 191</span></a></span> imposed demanding new performance standards on teachers through the creation of a system that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"shall be applicable to all <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[teachers]</span> ... throughout <span class="ldml-entity">the state</span>."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="10961" data-sentence-id="11725" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11414"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-9-102<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2010</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10961" data-sentence-id="11758" class="ldml-sentence">The new law provided districts with more authority to sideline poor performers, including by tying nonprobationary status to demonstrated effective performance, which was directly connected to student academic growth.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="10961" data-sentence-id="11976" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_12011,sentence_11758"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-103<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(7)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2010</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">defining a probationary teacher as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"a teacher who has not completed three consecutive years of demonstrated effectiveness"</span> or who, as a nonprobationary teacher, has demonstrated two years of ineffective performance</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_11758"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-9-106<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(e)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(II)</span></span></a></span></span>/ C.R.S. <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity">2010</span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"One of the standards for measuring teacher effectiveness shall be directly related to classroom instruction and shall require that at least fifty percent of the evaluation is determined by the academic growth of the teacher's students."</span>)</span></span><span data-paragraph-id="10961" data-sentence-id="12503" class="ldml-sentence">.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="12504" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="12504" data-sentence-id="12504" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12504"><span class="ldml-cite">¶16</span></a></span> In conjunction with the creation of these new performance standards, the General Assembly granted effective teachers who earned nonprobationary status certain new benefits, including the ability to transfer their nonprobationary status from one school district to another, beginning with the <span class="ldml-entity">2014</span>-15 school year.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12504" data-sentence-id="12821" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12504"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-203.5</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="12504" data-sentence-id="12836" class="ldml-sentence">Unlike <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12836"><span class="ldml-cite">TEDTA</span></a></span>, which stated that local school boards <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<i class="ldml-italics">may</i> grant tenure to any teacher ... who has previously acquired tenure ... in another school district,"</span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 123-18-12<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(c)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">1967</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 191</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-cert">amended</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_12836"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span></span> to provide that hiring school districts <span class="ldml-quotation quote"><i class="ldml-italics">"shall</i> ... grant<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ ]</span> nonprobationary status"</span> to nonprobationary lateral teachers who request it and can provide the requisite documentation, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-203.5, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2010</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="13293" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="13293" data-sentence-id="13294" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13294"><span class="ldml-cite">¶17</span></a></span> The General Assembly's use of the word <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"shall"</span> in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13294"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13294"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span> is presumed to be deliberate.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13293" data-sentence-id="13407" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_13480,sentence_13294" data-refglobal="case:cityandcountyofdenvervgallegosno95sc13916p2d509april22,1996"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">City & Cnty. of Denver v. Gallegos</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">916 P.2d 509, 512</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1996</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"The legislative choice of language may be concluded to be a deliberate one calculated to obtain the result dictated by the plain meaning of the words."</span></span>)</span>, <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-cert">disapproved on other grounds by</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886900341" data-vids="886900341" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13294"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Corsentino v. Cordova</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">4 P.3d 1082, 1086</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2000</span>)</span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="13293" data-sentence-id="13723" class="ldml-sentence">And because <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[t]</span>here is a presumption that the word <span class="ldml-quotation quote">‘shall’</span> when used in <span class="ldml-entity">a statute</span> is mandatory,"</span> <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886628317" data-vids="886628317" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13723"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Mook v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2020 CO 12</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13723"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 80</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886628317" data-vids="886628317" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13723"><span class="ldml-cite">457 P.3d 568, 583</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-cert">quoting</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/889625625" data-vids="889625625" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13723"><span class="ldml-refname"><i class="ldml-italics">Riley v. People</i></span> , <span class="ldml-cite">104 P.3d 218, 221</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2004</span>)</span></a></span> )</span></span>, the plain language of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_13723"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> requires school districts to grant portability so long as the statutory conditions are met.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="14081" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="14081" data-sentence-id="14081" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14081"><span class="ldml-cite">¶18</span></a></span> Although <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> decipher the General Assembly's intent by looking to the language of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14081"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span>, the legislative history of that provision buttresses our conclusion that the General Assembly did not wish to make compliance with <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14081"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> optional for school districts.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14081" data-sentence-id="14369" class="ldml-sentence">Representative <span class="ldml-entity">Christine Scanlan</span>, who introduced <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14369"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> as <span class="ldml-entity">an amendment</span> to the original version of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 191</span></a></span>, explained that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"a teacher who has earned status as an effective teacher by criteria that is recognized across <span class="ldml-entity">the state</span> ... has earned their nonprobationary status ... that will now be portable with them to <i class="ldml-italics">any other district</i> that <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> might go to."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="14081" data-sentence-id="14741" class="ldml-sentence">Hearing on <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">S.B. 191</span></a></span> before the <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">H. Educ. Comm., 67th Gen. Assemb., 2d Sess.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">May 6, 2010</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(statement of Rep. <span class="ldml-entity">Christine Scanlan</span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="14081" data-sentence-id="14886" class="ldml-sentence">Representative Scanlan added that the fact that teachers will <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"not have to re-earn <span class="ldml-parenthetical">[nonprobationary status]</span> in a new district"</span> should be <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"quite appealing"</span> to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"rural <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_15051" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="749" data-vol="489"></span> districts ... who have trouble attracting experienced teachers often."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="14081" data-sentence-id="15123" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_14886"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="15126" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="15126" data-sentence-id="15126" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15126"><span class="ldml-cite">¶19</span></a></span> This is not to say that portability is an absolute mandate: The statutory language is clear that <i class="ldml-italics">teachers</i> may well choose to opt out of requesting a transfer of their nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="15126" data-sentence-id="15321" class="ldml-sentence">In its entirety, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_15321"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> reads:</span></p><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_15364" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="15364" class="ldml-sentence">Beginning with the <span class="ldml-entity">2014</span>-15 school year, <i class="ldml-italics">a nonprobationary teacher,</i> except for a nonprobationary teacher who has had two consecutive performance evaluations with an ineffective rating, who is employed by a school district and is subsequently hired by a different school district <i class="ldml-italics">may provide</i> to the hiring school district evidence of his or her student academic growth data and performance evaluations for the prior two years for the purposes of retaining nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-sentence-id="15842" class="ldml-sentence"><i class="ldml-italics">If,</i> upon providing such data, <i class="ldml-italics">the nonprobationary teacher can show</i> two consecutive performance evaluations with effectiveness ratings in good standing, <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-entity">he</span> or <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> shall be granted nonprobationary status in the hiring school district.</i></span></blockquote><p data-paragraph-id="16074" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="16074" data-sentence-id="16074" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">Emphases added</span>.)</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="16074" data-sentence-id="16092" class="ldml-sentence">The fact that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"a nonprobationary teacher ... <i class="ldml-italics">may</i> provide"</span> proof of effectiveness to the hiring school district shows that the choice to request portability, along with the burden to provide the requisite documents, lies squarely with the teacher.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16074" data-sentence-id="16339" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16092"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16074" data-sentence-id="16361" class="ldml-sentence">A nonprobationary teacher may choose not to port that status to the hiring school district.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16074" data-sentence-id="16453" class="ldml-sentence">And a teacher may fail to provide the requisite documentation, in which case the district would not be required to grant nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16074" data-sentence-id="16598" class="ldml-sentence">However, once <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"the nonprobationary teacher can show"</span> proof to support her request to port her status, <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">she</span> <i class="ldml-italics">shall</i> be granted nonprobationary status in the hiring school district."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="16074" data-sentence-id="16777" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16598"><span class="ldml-cite"><i class="ldml-italics">Id.</i></span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-referencenote">emphasis added</span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16074" data-sentence-id="16799" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The statute</span>'s mandate on school districts could not be more plain.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="16865" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="16865" data-sentence-id="16865" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_16865"><span class="ldml-cite">¶20</span></a></span> While school districts cannot mandate waiver as a condition of employment, a school district that does not want to hire a nonprobationary teacher has several options.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16865" data-sentence-id="17036" class="ldml-sentence">First, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17036"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span> permits a school district to apply to the <span class="ldml-entity">State Board of Education</span> for a waiver of most of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17036"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span>'s requirements, including the portability of nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16865" data-sentence-id="17215" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17036"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-2-117, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16865" data-sentence-id="17242" class="ldml-sentence">If a school district does apply for a waiver, <span class="ldml-entity">the state</span> board is required to grant it if the board determines that the waiver <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"would enhance educational opportunity and quality within the school district"</span> and that the costs of compliance <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"significantly limit educational opportunity within the school district."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="16865" data-sentence-id="17554" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17242"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-2-117<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span></span></a></span>.<a href="#note-fr2" class="ldml-noteanchor" id="note-ref-fr2">2</a></span> <span data-paragraph-id="16865" data-sentence-id="17572" class="ldml-sentence">Second, a district could choose to hire a less experienced teacher who has not yet achieved nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="16865" data-sentence-id="17688" class="ldml-sentence">Finally, and as discussed more below, school districts are free to engage in arm's length negotiations with teachers regarding voluntary waivers of portability during the hiring process.</span></p></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth2" data-specifier="C" data-parsed="true" data-ordinal_start="3" data-format="upper_case_letters" data-id="heading_17874" data-value="C. Application" data-ordinal_end="3" id="heading_17874" data-content-heading-label="C. Application"><span data-paragraph-id="17874" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="17874" data-sentence-id="17874" class="ldml-sentence">C.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="17874" data-sentence-id="17877" class="ldml-sentence">Application</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="17888" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="17888" data-sentence-id="17889" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_17889"><span class="ldml-cite">¶21</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">The parties</span> here do not dispute that <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span> Stanczyk's online application and employment agreement contained language requiring a waiver of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"her right to assert the portability of nonprobationary status"</span>; <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(2)</span> <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> could not have submitted the online application without agreeing to a waiver; and <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(3)</span> her employment agreement was explicitly voidable at PSD's option if <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> asserted her right to transfer her nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="17888" data-sentence-id="18320" class="ldml-sentence">Despite this, PSD claims that waiver here was not actually mandatory because Stanczyk could theoretically have attempted to negotiate more favorable terms or submit a paper application without checking the box requiring her to waive her rights under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18320"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="17888" data-sentence-id="18591" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The court of appeals</span> disagreed and concluded that there was no dispute in the record that PSD required a waiver.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="17888" data-sentence-id="18704" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> agree with <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> that, on the undisputed <span class="ldml-entity">facts presented</span> here, the school district required Stanczyk to waive portability as a condition of employment.<span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_18873" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="750" data-vol="489"></span></span></p><p data-paragraph-id="18873" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="18873" data-sentence-id="18874" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18874"><span class="ldml-cite">¶22</span></a></span> PSD argues that even if it did require a waiver of nonprobationary portability, mandatory waivers are permissible under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_18874"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> because <span class="ldml-entity">the statute</span> does not explicitly prohibit them.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18873" data-sentence-id="19073" class="ldml-sentence">True, <span class="ldml-entity">parties</span> are generally free to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"enter into contracts abrogating or limiting statutory provisions which confer a right or benefit upon one or both <span class="ldml-entity">parties</span>"</span> in the absence of an express statutory prohibition on waiver.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18873" data-sentence-id="19295" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893399075" data-vids="893399075" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19073"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Francam Bldg. Corp. v. Fail</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">646 P.2d 345, 348</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1982</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18873" data-sentence-id="19356" class="ldml-sentence">But the General Assembly's use of the phrase <span class="ldml-quotation quote"><i class="ldml-italics">"shall</i> ... grant<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ ]</span>"</span> in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19356"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> is at least strong indication that it did not intend to give school districts the option to require contractual waivers.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18873" data-sentence-id="19566" class="ldml-sentence">Further, the ability to contract away statutory rights is limited by <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"countervailing public policy"</span> interests.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18873" data-sentence-id="19677" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893399075" data-vids="893399075" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19566"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Francam Bldg. Corp.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">646 P.2d at 348</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18873" data-sentence-id="19715" class="ldml-sentence">Accepting the logic of PSD's argument would suggest that school districts could also opt out of the many other provisions in <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19715"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span> that do not explicitly prohibit waivers.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18873" data-sentence-id="19887" class="ldml-sentence">These include provisions requiring that nonprobationary teachers be fired only for cause, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19887"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-301</span></a></span>, in accordance with specific dismissal procedures, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-302, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span>, and prohibiting discrimination in transfer assignments because of <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"sex, sexual orientation, marital status, race, creed, color, religion, national origin, ancestry, or membership or nonmembership in any group or organization,"</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-206<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span>, as well as broader provisions protecting applicants from discrimination, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_19887"><span class="ldml-cite">§§ 24-34-401</span></a></span> to - 406, C.R.S. <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity">2020</span>)</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18873" data-sentence-id="20440" class="ldml-sentence">Because this kind of local waiver requirement would effectively nullify many provisions of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20440"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> hold that school districts may not require teachers to waive benefits granted to them under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20440"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span> as a condition of employment.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="18873" data-sentence-id="20669" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886697808" data-vids="886697808" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20440"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Mosley v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2017 CO 20</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20440"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 16</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886697808" data-vids="886697808" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_20731"><span class="ldml-cite">392 P.3d 1198, 1202</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote"><span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[W]</span>e avoid statutory interpretations that defeat <span class="ldml-entity">legislative intent</span> or lead to absurd results."</span></span>)</span></span></span><span data-paragraph-id="18873" data-sentence-id="20828" class="ldml-sentence">.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="20829" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="20829" data-sentence-id="20830" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_20830"><span class="ldml-cite">¶23</span></a></span> PSD argues next that, notwithstanding the fact that waiver was required in the online application and the employment agreement, Stanczyk voluntarily waived her right to port her nonprobationary status by applying to a teaching position advertised as <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"probationary,"</span> and then accepting the terms of her employment agreement.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="20829" data-sentence-id="21158" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> disagree.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="21170" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="21170" data-sentence-id="21171" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21171"><span class="ldml-cite">¶24</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-entity">The parties</span> agree that the portability right granted by <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21171"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> may be waived.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21170" data-sentence-id="21266" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">They</span> also agree that any waiver of statutory rights must be voluntary.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21170" data-sentence-id="21337" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21266" data-refglobal="case:finneyvpeople,2014co38"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Finney v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2014 CO 38</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21266"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 16</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/893285209" data-vids="893285209" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">325 P.3d 1044, 1050</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/894551914" data-vids="894551914" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Allen</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">744 P.2d 73, 75</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1987</span>)</span></a></span>, <i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-cert">superseded by <span class="ldml-entity">statute</span> on other grounds as recognized in</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/895603334" data-vids="895603334" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Newton</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">764 P.2d 1182, 1187</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1988</span>)</span></a></span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21170" data-sentence-id="21556" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">This court</span> has concluded previously that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"voluntarily"</span> means <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"intentionally"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"of free will."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="21170" data-sentence-id="21653" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/889626897" data-vids="889626897" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21556"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Martinez</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">70 P.3d 474, 478</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2003</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21170" data-sentence-id="21704" class="ldml-sentence">As such, a waiver of statutory rights is only voluntary if the choice to waive was free and deliberate and was made without intimidation, coercion, or deception.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="21170" data-sentence-id="21866" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/889626897" data-vids="889626897" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21704"><span class="ldml-cite">id.</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-signal">see also</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886999536" data-vids="886999536" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21704"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Cardman v. People</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2019 CO 73</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_21704"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 21</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886999536" data-vids="886999536" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_21944"><span class="ldml-cite">445 P.3d 1071, 1079</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">discussing the meaning of voluntary waivers in the <i class="ldml-italics">Miranda</i> context</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888411873" data-vids="888411873" class="ldml-reference"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. Humphrey</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">132 P.3d 352, 356</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">2006</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(same)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span></span> <i class="ldml-italics">Voluntarily, Voluntary,</i> Webster's Third New International Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity">2002</span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"voluntarily"</span> means <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"in a voluntary manner: of one's own free will;"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"voluntary"</span> means <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"produced in or by an act of choice"</span> or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"done by design or intention"</span>)</span>; <i class="ldml-italics">Voluntarily, Voluntary,</i> Black's Law Dictionary <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">11th ed. 2019</span></a></span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-quotation quote">"voluntarily"</span> means <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[i]</span>ntentionally; without coercion"</span> and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"voluntary"</span> means <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[d]</span>one by design or intention"</span>)</span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="22487" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="22487" data-sentence-id="22487" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22487"><span class="ldml-cite">¶25</span></a></span> Here, Stanczyk did not make a free and deliberate choice to waive her right to nonprobationary portability under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_22487"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22487" data-sentence-id="22625" class="ldml-sentence">In fact, the record indicates just the opposite: Stanczyk inquired about asserting portability before <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> signed her employment contract but was turned away with the statement that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-entity">we</span> don't do that here."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="22487" data-sentence-id="22831" class="ldml-sentence">PSD's Human Resources Director testified that <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> did not know whether PSD would have even hired an applicant unwilling to waive her portability rights.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22487" data-sentence-id="22984" class="ldml-sentence">Because Stanczyk could not have applied to the position without agreeing to a waiver, and her employment agreement was voidable at PSD's option if <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> attempted to assert her rights, it is not speculation to conclude that her employment was, in fact, conditioned on her waiver.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="22487" data-sentence-id="23262" class="ldml-sentence">Because waiver of Stanczyk's rights under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23262"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> was mandated as a condition <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_23352" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="751" data-vol="489"></span> of employment, her waiver was not the result of a free and deliberate choice and, therefore, was involuntary and invalid as a matter of law.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="23493" class="ldml-paragraph "> <span data-paragraph-id="23493" data-sentence-id="23494" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23494"><span class="ldml-cite">¶26</span></a></span> PSD also claims that enforcing the plain language of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23494"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> would run afoul of the <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"local control"</span> provision of the <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23494"><span class="ldml-cite">Colorado Constitution</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23493" data-sentence-id="23650" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_23682,sentence_23494"><span class="ldml-cite">Colo. Const. art. IX, § 15</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">providing that a local board of education <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"shall have control of instruction in the public schools of their respective districts"</span></span>)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23493" data-sentence-id="23814" class="ldml-sentence">This argument ignores the entire structure of public education in Colorado.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23493" data-sentence-id="23890" class="ldml-sentence">Although <span class="ldml-entity">the state</span> <span class="ldml-entity">constitution</span> provides local school boards authority over teacher employment decisions, this authority is not unlimited and <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"can be restricted or limited ... by statutory criteria and/ or judicial review"</span> so long as the limitation does not <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"usurp<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ ]</span> the local board's decision-making authority or its ability to implement, guide, or manage the educational programs for which it is ultimately responsible."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="23493" data-sentence-id="24314" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/887850753" data-vids="887850753" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_23890"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Bd. of Educ. of Sch. Dist. No. 1 v. Booth</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">984 P.2d 639, 649</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-court">Colo.</span> <span class="ldml-date">1999</span>)</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23493" data-sentence-id="24389" class="ldml-sentence">Balancing the General Assembly's obligation to <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"provide for the establishment and maintenance of a thorough and uniform system of free public schools,"</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24389"><span class="ldml-cite">Colo. Const. art. IX, § 2</span></a></span>, against local school boards' decision-making authority, <span class="ldml-entity">this court</span> has <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"consistently upheld <span class="ldml-entity">statutory schemes</span> that limit local board authority"</span> in interpreting <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24389" data-refglobal="case:tecda,booth,984p2dat649"><span class="ldml-refname">TECDA, <i class="ldml-italics">Booth</i></span>, <span class="ldml-cite">984 P.2d at 649</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23493" data-sentence-id="24759" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal">For example</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24759"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span></span> lawfully limits school boards' hiring and firing authority to ensure a uniform public school system throughout <span class="ldml-entity">the state</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23493" data-sentence-id="24900" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_24935,sentence_24759"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-201<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span>, C.R.S.</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">requiring that districts hire only licensed teachers</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_24759"><span class="ldml-cite">§§ 22-63-301</span></a></span></span> to - 302 <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(providing grounds and procedures for teacher dismissals)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">see also</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">§§ 22-60.5-101</span></a></span></span> to - 309.5, C.R.S. <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity">2020</span>)</span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">Colorado Educator Licensing Act</span></a></span>)</span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23493" data-sentence-id="25156" class="ldml-sentence">And such limitations are not new —school districts have historically been subject to <span class="ldml-entity">the state</span>'s supervision over teacher employment.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23493" data-sentence-id="25290" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See, e.g.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_25156"><span class="ldml-refname">An Act to Establish and Maintain a System of Free Schools</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">ch. 92, 1877 Colo. Sess.</span></a></span></span> Laws 807<span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-refname">An Act Relating to the Tenure of Service of Teachers in the Public Schools</span>, <span class="ldml-cite">ch. 215, 1921 Colo. Sess.</span></a></span></span> Laws 726<span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">Teacher Tenure Act</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">ch. 230</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">,</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">1949 Colo. Sess. Laws 661</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">Teacher Tenure Act of Colorado, ch. 212, sec. 3</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">1953 Colo. Sess. Laws 559</span></a></span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">Teacher Employment, Dismissal, and Tenure Act of 1967, ch. 435, sec. 1, §§ 123-18-1</span></a></span></span> to -18, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">1967 Colo. Sess. Laws 976</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="23493" data-sentence-id="25758" class="ldml-sentence">Like these many other laws, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_25758"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span>'s <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_25758"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> limits the scope of a local board's authority, but it does not run afoul of the local control clause because school districts still retain ultimate authority over teachers' employment <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(and dismissal)</span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="26014" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="26014" data-sentence-id="26014" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_26014"><span class="ldml-cite">¶27</span></a></span> Last, PSD argues that <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[i]</span>f portability is a mandate that neither a teacher nor a school district can bargain away,"</span> the teaching market for experienced teachers would narrow because school districts would <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"obvious<span class="ldml-parenthetical">[ly]</span>"</span> prefer to hire <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"new or less experienced teachers."</span></span> <span data-paragraph-id="26014" data-sentence-id="26289" class="ldml-sentence">But <span class="ldml-entity">this proposition</span> is far from obvious.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="26014" data-sentence-id="26331" class="ldml-sentence">School districts may very well choose to hire experienced teachers and provide nonprobationary status upon request because <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> value the experience that a seasoned teacher brings.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="26014" data-sentence-id="26512" class="ldml-sentence">And if a nonprobationary hire does not ultimately meet the standards expected by a school district, the district would not be without recourse: School districts may dismiss nonprobationary teachers after <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> have twice been rated <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"ineffective"</span> or <span class="ldml-quotation quote">"partially effective,"</span> <span class="ldml-entity">Dep't of Educ.</span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_26512"><span class="ldml-cite">1 Colo. Code Regs. 301-87:3.03<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(A)</span>-<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(B)</span></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-date">2020</span>)</span></a></span>, or after notice and a hearing in accordance with the procedures established by <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_26512"><span class="ldml-cite">TECDA</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="26014" data-sentence-id="26931" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-signal"><i class="ldml-italics">See</i></span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_26948,sentence_26512"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-301</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">unsatisfactory performance is a ground for dismissal</span>)</span><span class="ldml-referenceseparator">;</span> <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_26512"><span class="ldml-cite">§ 22-63-302</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(dismissal procedures)</span></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="26014" data-sentence-id="27039" class="ldml-sentence">What a school district cannot do is enjoy the benefit of hiring experienced and effective teachers while also refusing to provide them the benefits that <span class="ldml-entity">they</span> are entitled to under <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_27039"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span>.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="27239" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="27239" data-sentence-id="27239" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_27239"><span class="ldml-cite">¶28</span></a></span> In any event, our holding today is limited to the conclusion that school districts may not require waiver of the statutory right to port nonprobationary status as a condition of employment.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27239" data-sentence-id="27433" class="ldml-sentence">School districts are free to engage in arm's length negotiations during the hiring process in order to obtain voluntary waivers of portability rights.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27239" data-sentence-id="27584" class="ldml-sentence">Because the issue is not before <span class="ldml-entity">us</span>, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> do not speculate as to what such negotiations would entail.</span></p><p data-paragraph-id="27682" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="27682" data-sentence-id="27682" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_27682"><span class="ldml-cite">¶29</span></a></span> Although PSD here improperly mandated a waiver of Stanczyk's portability <span class="ldml-pagenumber" data-page_type="bracketed_cite" data-id="pagenumber_27759" data-rep="P.3d" data-val="752" data-vol="489"></span> rights, several factual issues remain unresolved.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27682" data-sentence-id="27810" class="ldml-sentence">First, it is unclear from the record whether Stanczyk submitted the documentation required by <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_27810"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> to assert portability of her nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27682" data-sentence-id="27977" class="ldml-sentence">Second, the record suggests that Stanczyk requested portability several months after <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> began working for PSD, and after <span class="ldml-entity">she</span> was informed that her employment agreement would not be renewed for the next school year.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27682" data-sentence-id="28193" class="ldml-sentence">It is unclear whether the timing of this request bears on its effectiveness.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27682" data-sentence-id="28270" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">The trial court</span> is best suited to make these factual determinations.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27682" data-sentence-id="28339" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See</span> </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886635173" data-vids="886635173" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_28270"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">People v. McRae</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2019 CO 91</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_28270"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 19</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/886635173" data-vids="886635173" class="ldml-reference"><span class="ldml-cite">451 P.3d 835, 840</span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="27682" data-sentence-id="28398" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> therefore remand to <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span> with instructions to return <span class="ldml-entity">the case</span> to <span class="ldml-entity">the trial court</span>.</span></p></div></div><div class="ldml-section"><section class="ldml-heading content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-specifier="III" data-parsed="true" data-ordinal_start="3" data-format="upper_case_roman_numeral" data-confidences="very_high" data-id="heading_28498" data-value="III. Conclusion" data-ordinal_end="3" data-types="conclusion" id="heading_28498" data-content-heading-label="III. Conclusion"><span data-paragraph-id="28498" class="ldml-paragraph "><b class="ldml-bold"><span data-paragraph-id="28498" data-sentence-id="28498" class="ldml-sentence">III.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="28498" data-sentence-id="28503" class="ldml-sentence">Conclusion</span></b></span></section><p data-paragraph-id="28513" class="ldml-paragraph "><span data-paragraph-id="28513" data-sentence-id="28513" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_28513"><span class="ldml-cite">¶30</span></a></span> Because the plain language of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_28513"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span> provides teachers the choice to assert portability when hired by a new school district, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> hold that school districts may not require teachers to waive portability of nonprobationary status as a condition of employment.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="28513" data-sentence-id="28787" class="ldml-sentence">Because waiver was required as a condition of employment in <span class="ldml-entity">this case</span>, Stanczyk did not voluntarily waive her right to assert portability of her nonprobationary status.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="28513" data-sentence-id="28956" class="ldml-sentence">Accordingly, <span class="ldml-entity">we</span> affirm the judgment of <span class="ldml-entity">the court of appeals</span>, albeit on other grounds, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.</span></p></div></div><div class="ldml-notes content__heading content__heading--depth1" data-content-heading-label="Footnotes"><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="29106" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr1" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr1">1</a> <span data-paragraph-id="29106" data-sentence-id="29107" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> granted certiorari to review the following issue:</span></p><blockquote data-paragraph-id="b_29159" class="ldml-blockquote"><span data-sentence-id="29159" class="ldml-sentence">Whether a school district is prohibited from asking or requiring a teacher who earned nonprobationary status in another district to waive portability of that status.</span></blockquote></div><div class="ldml-note ldml-note"><p data-paragraph-id="29324" class="ldml-paragraph "><sup class="ldml-superscript"></sup><a href="#note-ref-fr2" class="ldml-notemarker" id="note-fr2">2</a> <span data-paragraph-id="29324" data-sentence-id="29325" class="ldml-sentence">This waiver provision further supports our holding.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29324" data-sentence-id="29377" class="ldml-sentence">If school districts could require contractual waivers of benefits <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(like portability)</span> as a condition of employment, outside the process established by <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29377"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-2-117<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span></span></a></span>, then that statutory process would be superfluous.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29324" data-sentence-id="29601" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-entity">We</span> must avoid <span class="ldml-entity">an interpretation of <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29601"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-63-203.5</span></a></span></span> that would essentially nullify <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29601"><span class="ldml-cite">section 22-2-117<span class="ldml-parenthetical">(1)</span><span class="ldml-parenthetical">(a)</span></span></a></span>.</span> <span data-paragraph-id="29324" data-sentence-id="29711" class="ldml-sentence"><span class="ldml-referencechain"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-signal">See, e.g.</span>, </i> <span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888909510" data-vids="888909510" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29601"><i class="ldml-italics"><span class="ldml-refname">Dep't of Revenue v. Agilent Techs., Inc.</span>,</i> <span class="ldml-cite">2019 CO 41</span></a></span>, <span class="ldml-entity"><a class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="sentence_29601"><span class="ldml-cite">¶ 32</span></a></span></span>, <span class="ldml-referencechain"><span class="ldml-entity"><a href="/vid/888909510" data-vids="888909510" class="ldml-reference" data-prop-ids="embeddedsentence_29804"><span class="ldml-cite">441 P.3d 1012, 1019</span></a></span> <span class="ldml-parenthetical">(<span class="ldml-embeddedsentence">avoiding a statutory construction that would render another <span class="ldml-entity">section</span> meaningless</span>)</span></span>.</span></p></div></div></div></div>
</div>
</div>