MSI To Council: “You can’t separate the appropriation from the public policy objective."

Unicorn

Well, you can if you are on the Montgomery County Council! Our Council doesn't understand that when they are voting on an Appropriation that is the subject of the vote.  

Instead, our Council will ignore the appropriation of the money for the Churchill High School artificial turf construction and vote on unicorns or some other fantasy.  If the appropriation (hint:  that's the funding for the field) gets tied up in court, the field could be ripped up without a funding source to complete the project. That's the inherent danger of turning over public land to private entities. The Churchill High School field will now be at the mercy of private companies and litigation. 
Whatever!

-----------------

Bethesda Magazine: Amid Lawsuit, Council Committee Recommends Churchill Turf Field

...“These issues are intrinsically linked,” he said. “You can’t separate the appropriation from the public policy objective. The broad spectrum of kids are not being well-served.”
The full council is scheduled Tuesday to vote on the measure... 

...Council member Cherri Branson said those discrepancies lead her to question how school system officials conducted the procurement process.
“I understand why that partnership was chosen for the bid, but I also understand the need for an open, competitive process,” she said. “That could have avoided a lawsuit or a least any hard feelings.”...

Council Will Ignore MSI Litigation, Councilmembers Don't Understand Issue

At today's Montgomery County Council's Education Committee meeting the Education Committee members announced that they intended to ignore the MSI lawsuit against MCPS concerning the Churchill High School artificial turf project.

Council President Craig Rice says the litigation has nothing to do with the "field being constructed."

Actually, President Rice, the litigation has everything to do with the construction of the field because the field is being constructed with PRIVATE funds.

Does the Council imagine that one private club would happily pay to build the Churchill artificial turf football field and another private club could be granted the right to use it?

The MSI litigation has everything to do with the construction of the Churchill High School artificial turf field.

Maybe the Council would like to see the construction begin, and then be stopped by a Court order mid-project? How would that work out for the public school students that attend the school? A public football field closed because private parties are tied up in litigation? 

How to Remove a Member of the Montgomery County Board of Education

We've got some interesting times here in Montgomery County.

As this blog has reported, we now have several Board of Education members who have misused credit cards.  Recap - at a minimum, we have Barclay, Smondrowski, and Durso with numerous irregularities.  And the others?  We won't know until someone gives their expense reports a similar review. 

So, what happens next?  Are these legal?  Even if the expenses complied with existing policies, are the underlying policies legal?  

The Board of Education can have its members do some self-policing - a.k.a. the Ad Hoc Committee Meeting for Review of Board Processes and Guidelines on Board Expenditures, but really - that committee can't decide whether its subject to the Open Meeting Act, so they are going to do some self-reflection?  This group has convened one meeting out of the public eye - was the May 6 2014 meeting of the Ad Hoc committee a public meeting?  Its not on the calendar of BOE meetings. 

And, do the members of that Ad Hoc group come to the table with clean hands?  Not Mr. Durso, who already admitted to using his official credit card to pay for his spouse, because it is "easier" to do so.  

It's time for some serious action.

Where is the County Council and why haven't they stepped up to the plate?  We have a process in MoCo.

Under the Maryland Code, the following is the process for removing a Montgomery County Board of Education Member:

(g) Removal. --
   (1) The Montgomery County Council may remove a member of the county board for:
      (i) Immorality;
      (ii) Misconduct in office;
      (iii) Incompetency; or
      (iv) Willful neglect of duty.
   (2) Before removing a member, the County Council shall provide the member a copy of the charges against him and give him an opportunity within 10 days to request a hearing.
   (3) If the member requests a hearing within the 10-day period:
      (i) The County Council promptly shall hold a hearing, but a hearing may not be set within 10 days after the County Council sends the member a notice of the hearing; and
      (ii) The member shall have an opportunity to be heard publicly before the County Council in the member's own defense, in person or by counsel.
   (4) A member removed under this subsection has the right to a de novo review of the removal by the Circuit Court for Montgomery County.

Md. EDUCATION Code Ann. § 3-901(g). 

Will this happen?  Unlikely.  Remember that Nancy Navarro, Craig Rice, and Cherrie Branson, three of our esteemed members of the County Council, stand behind their endorsement of Chris Barclay.  So does former council member Valerie Ervin, who still thinks she is a thought leader in the county.  We don't know where they stand on Ms. Smondrowski, but chances are, you can tell who her friends are by looking through her expense reports too. 

But - even if the County Council declines to take action, shouldn't the Board of Education members who are identified as taking public funds for their own benefit resign?  Why put the citizens (and voters) in the county through this process?

Those who have been found with their hand in the public coffers need to resign and restore dignity and faith in our public officials.  Our first class county deserves first class leadership.

Councilmember Branson on Achievement Gap: "...don't see buy in..." on part of MCPS

Here is another clip of the May 5, 2014, Montgomery County Council worksession where the Council discussed another new budget item to address the achievement gap.  The County Executive has recommended that $100,000 be put into something called the "Childrens' Trust."  The Council is declining to fund this trust.
Here's more of the discussion of why the Council does not want to fund this trust at this time.
Note Superintendent Joshua Starr is seated at the table across from the Councilmembers during these statements.

Minute of video and Councilmember

Start - Craig Rice "When we are not part of the process..."

1:51 - Cherri Branson statement to Superintendent Joshua Starr on taking responsibility for achievement gap.

3:50 - Marc Elrich "This is a really agonizing discussion." "There's no plan."