Wed. Feb. 2nd Watch MD Subcommittee Discuss Bill to Allow Public to Know When Board of Education is Meeting to Hire New Superintendent.

House Bill 235 would require the Montgomery County Board of Education to disclose when they were meeting in closed session to discuss the employment or hiring of their one employee, the superintendent.  Under current law, the Board of Education can hide out in a hotel and interview candidates for superintendent without having to disclose their location or agenda.  

HB 235 would require the Board of Education to notify the public when they were meeting in a closed session to discuss hiring a new superintendent or other matters related to the employment of the superintendent. 

It's a simple addition to the Maryland Open Meetings Act to provide just a bit of sunshine to the workings of the Board of Education.

Watch the Maryland General Assembly - House Government Operations Subcommittee's discussion of this bill at this link. 

Wednesday, February 2, 2022

Government Operations and Health Facilities Subcommittee - Work Session

11:00 AM - Zoom / YouTube

 

- HBs 13, 163, 167, 235, and 246

Follow the progress of HB 235 through the legislature at this link. 

Bill To Increase Power Of Student School Board Member Suffers 11th-Hour Defeat

...Nonetheless, there were private concerns about the bill voiced among some delegation members in the wake of the intense maneuvering earlier this year over whether to extend the contract of former Montgomery County Public Schools Superintendent Joshua Starr.
While the student member of the eight-member school board already has the power to vote on a superintendent’s contract absent additional legislation, the split in the school board over Starr’s future—potentially placing the student member in a position to cast a deciding vote—raised questions about the wisdom of putting additional responsibilities and pressures on the student member. These concerns appeared to have slowed down movement on the bill as the legislative clock ticked in recent weeks...

...Meanwhile, legislative sources suggested that, in the waning hours of this year’s session, the SMOB bill may have become politically entangled with another Montgomery County “local” bill—a somewhat controversial proposal by the county’s House delegation to require special elections for unexpected school board vacancies. Out of 20 local bills put forth by the county House delegation this year, the SMOB and special election bills were the two whose fate remained unresolved in the last week of the session. And both were being considered almost simultaneously by the Senate Education, Health and Environmental Affairs panel.
Del. Al Carr, D-Kensington, the lead sponsor of the special election bill, defended it as placing the school board on the same footing as the Montgomery County Council in the event of a vacancy. At present, when a school board vacancy occurs, it is filled by the remaining members of the board. In the case of the County Council, a special election must be held if the vacancy occurs in the first three years of a four-year term.
But the school board special election bill became a point of tension between the county’s House and Senate delegation after the proposal cleared the full House on a 140-0 vote in mid-March. King, a former school board member, quickly voiced her opposition, and the current school board was said to be opposed to the legislation as well...

 http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Beat/2015/Bill-To-Increase-Power-Of-Student-School-Board-Member-Suffers-11th-Hour-Death/

Del. Carr bill to fill BOE vacancies with Special Elections

The Montgomery County Delegation will hold hearings on the following bills on Friday.  Included in those bills are three that related to the Board of Education.  

• Delegate Al Carr has introduced a bill to permit a Special Election to be held when a Board of Education seat is vacated. Under current law the sitting BOE members pick the replacement.  

• Another bill has been introduced to give the Student member of the BOE more power.  This bill has been introduced in the past and to date has always failed.

• A third bill has to do with putting BOE names on primary ballots even when those seats are not contested.  It appears that bill has not gotten very far in the legislative process. 

Montgomery County House Delegation Meeting

Friday, February 6, 2015

10:00 a.m.

Room 170 Lowe House Office Building

Annapolis, Maryland

AGENDA

(revised)

Briefing:

        Congressman John Sarbanes

Late-filed Bill Request:

          (2/3 majority vote in House Delegation needed to accept as late-filed bill and to schedule for public hearing)

• MC 29-15 (HB 316) Montgomery County - Alcoholic Beverages - Licenses in Takoma Park
  Requested by Senator Raskin & Delegates Hixson, Moon & Smith

Bill Hearings:

• MC 21-15 (HB 202) Montgomery County - Alcoholic Beverages - Wineries
  Requested by Senator Raskin & Delegates Hixson, Moon & Smith

• MC 22-15 (HB 176) Montgomery County Board of Education - Special Election to Fill a Vacancy

         Requested by Delegate Carr

Voting Session - Economic Development Committee Report (2/5/15):

• MC 6-15 (HB 85) Montgomery County - Board of Education - Primary Election Ballots
  Requested by Delegate Barkley

         Economic Development Committee - Unfavorable

• MC 7-15 (HB 86) Montgomery County Board of Education - Student Member - Voting
  Requested by Delegates Kaiser, Barkley, Barve, Cullison, Kelly, Luedtke, Moon, Morales, Reznik, Robinson, Smith, Sol-Gutiérrez & Waldstreicher

         Economic Development Committee - Favorable

• MC 18-15 (HB 89) Montgomery County - Alcoholic Beverages - Class BD-BWL License
  Requested by Delegates Barkley, Moon, Robinson & Smith

         Economic Development Committee - Favorable with amendments

Voting Session - Land Use, Transportation, and Public Safety Committee Report (2/5/15):

• MC 8-15 (HB 87) Maryland Income Tax Refunds - Montgomery County - Warrant Intercept Program
  Requested by Delegates Kaiser, Kelly, Luedtke, Miller & Reznik

         Land Use, Transportation, and Public Safety Committee - Favorable

        

*Please note that all meeting dates, times, and agendas are subject to change at the discretion of the Chair.

Super. Starr: Why are you paying $27,822 to Harvard?

Here's a budget question for Superintendent Starr. Today he said he wanted County Executive Ike Leggett to be talking to him about the MCPS budget in advance of public announcements.  Does Superintendent Starr want transparency in the County Executive's actions?

  

How about a little transparency in the MCPS budget?  Here's a charge that we find on the MCPS Funding and Transparency database.  This is a database that MCPS is required to maintain by a recent Maryland law.  Some Delegates opposed this law because they said that every check MCPS writes for over $25,000 was already discussed in open session by the BOE.  

Well, here's one we can't find in BOE minutes.  And, it's a new spending line item in this year's budget: $27,822 to Harvard College.

Easy question Superintendent Starr: What is this $27,822 for?  Does MCPS send students up to Harvard to prep for AP exams?  Is this fees to Harvard for administrator trips?  Is this club dues for Harvard alum?  Just tweet us the answer.

The President and Fellows of Harvard College  $ 27,822

Please support HB 1286 (SB 691) as a step toward a fair, right and just outcome

To:   Maryland House Ways and Means Committee

sheila.hixson@house.state.md.us, frank.turner@house.state.md.us,kathy.afzali@house.state.md.us, brian.frosh@senate.state.md.us,kumar.barve@house.state.md.us, joseph.boteler@house.state.md.us,talmadge.branch@house.state.md.us, jon.cardin@house.state.md.us,don.dwyer@house.state.md.us, mark.fisher@house.state.md.us,bill.frick@house.state.md.us, ron.george@house.state.md.us,carolyn.howard@house.state.md.us, jolene.ivey@house.state.md.us,anne.kaiser@house.state.md.us, eric.luedtke@house.state.md.us,aruna.miller@house.state.md.us, leroy.myers@house.state.md.us,andrew.serafini@house.state.md.us, melvin.stukes@house.state.md.us,michael.summers@house.state.md.us, jay.walker@house.state.md.us,alonzo.washington@house.state.md.us, ariana.kelly@house.state.md.us,susan.lee@house.state.md.us

Sent: 3/9/2013

Subj: Please support HB 1286 (SB 691) as a step toward a fair, right and just outcome

 

I am writing to ask that you support House Bill 1286, which places the burden of proof on the public agency in a due process hearing. HB 1286 is a step toward a fairer balance between the parent amateur and the professional school district staff when real controversies exist that can only be resolved by access to an impartial decisionmaker through the special education hearing procedures.

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requires States to ensure that a “free appropriate public education” is available to all children with disabilities. A “free appropriate public education” includes the special education and related services necessary to meet each child’s unique needs, as set forth in an individualized education program (IEP) developed by the local school district in consultation with the child’s parents.

The State must make available an “impartial due process hearing” to resolve disputes between parents and state or local school officials. Maryland statute does not specifically designate which party has the burden of proof in the due process hearing. HB 1286 would place the burden of proof on the public agency, which includes a local school system.

I listened to the March 6 testimony before the Ways and Means Committee on HB 1286 on the Maryland General Assembly website, and was moved by the comments of the former mayor of College Park, as well as a current delegate, who clearly understood from personal experience the critical need for this legislation.

I heard the Assistant State Superintendent assert that specifying the burden of proof would undermine “the collaborative process”. Why would this be the case? IDEA describes a collaborative process through which an IEP must be developed. 20 U.S.C. § 1414(d). At least annually, the existing IEP must be reviewed and revised by the IEP team, which consists of school district personnel and parents. If a parent and school district agree to change the IEP, the change will be incorporated into a revised IEP. It is when the parent and school district disagree with regard to any recommended change to the IEP, that IDEA provides a procedural safeguard-- for the IEP to be challenged at a due process hearing. 20 U.S.C. § 1415(b)(6) and (f)(1)(A). IDEA is silent as to the burden of proof. HB 1286 merely clarifies which party-the school district-will bear the burden of proof.

At the beginning of my daughter's junior year in high school, 12 Montgomery County Public Schools staff had a role in developing her IEP, with the help of the Director of Quality Assurance for the Maryland Office of Administrative Hearings (an administrative law judge who has a background in special education), who served as an IEP team facilitator at the request of the Maryland State Department of Education. Yet, that second quarter of her junior year in high school, I received a progress report on her IEP, on which her special education case manager and resource class teacher reported that not one of 11 short-term objectives for the six annual goals listed on the IEP had been addressed. Should I have had to bear the burden of proof in a due process hearing brought at that point?

The Assistant State Superintendent also mentioned to the Ways and Means Committee March 6 that the state complaint process is an alternative to the due process hearing, and that the state can order corrective action. But what happens when the school district fails to follow through on corrective action?

The Maryland State Department of Education issued 9 separate decisions over a period of 5 years determining that Montgomery County Public Schools denied my daughter required instruction; 

did not provide required accommodations during the school year and on the Maryland State High School Assessment; 

inaccurately measured and reported her educational progress; 

failed to provide her with required access to assistive technology; 

denied her parent access to her educational record; 

did not provide teachers the information needed to carry out their responsibilities for implementing her IEP; 

and did not fulfill its obligation to take corrective actions within the timeline required. 

The Department advised me that I had the right to initiate a due process hearing-should I have had to bear the burden of proof?

Placing the burden of proof on the public agency in a special education due process hearing is an important step toward a fair, right and just outcome for Maryland families of children with disabilities. Please support HB 1286.

Sincerely,

Kathleen Gilhooly

Safe Routes to School grant funding is available

Passing the below on from Del. Al Carr.  The grants seminar is Nov 13th, and registration deadline is Nov. 7th for the seminar.


Dear Principals and PTA presidents,

My name is Al Carr and I am a Maryland State Delegate representing the 18th Legislative District (Kensington, Chevy Chase, Wheaton, Silver Spring, Garrett Park, Bethesda and Rockville). I am also the father of three school-age boys. One of my top priorities is to promote pedestrian safety and the health and safety of our kids.

I wanted to inform you that the Maryland State Highway Administration has just announced the availability of a new round of Safe Routes to School grant funding.

This round will have more than 4 million dollars available to state and local agencies, as well as non-profits.  These projects are 100% federally funded (no matching funds required).   Safe Routes to School funds can be used for infrastructure (examples: sidewalks, crosswalks, bike racks, pedestrian beacons, ADA ramps) as well as non-infrastructure education and encouragement (examples:  project coordination, education programs and materials, special law enforcement details, safety equipment and training for crossing guards, walking school buses).

I encourage you to consider applying for these funds. Three years ago, my office worked with Kensington Parkwood Elementary and local municipalities to successfully obtain a $100K grant for sidewalk construction.

The first step is to attend a Grant Seminar on Tuesday, November 13th at 8:30am or 1pm at the State Highway Administration Office. You must register for the seminar by November 7th.

My staff and I are available to assist with information. I would be glad to meet with you or attend one of your upcoming PTA meetings. We can also connect you with an organization called the Safe Routes to School National Partnership that is available to provide technical assistance.

Feel free to share this email message with other.

Best Regards,

Al

Delegate Al Carr
Maryland's 18th Legislative District
301 858-3638 office
alfred.carr@house.state.md.us

Safe Routes 2012 Grant Seminar[1]Safe Routes to School Applicant Registration[1]

$3.8 Million AMEX Bill 6 months into fiscal year

A picture is worth a thousand words...

Click the image to see the AMEX total for FY 2012 as of January 2012.

How many MCPS staff have credit cards? 

What do they use them for?

Are lunches, dinners, staff gifts, and travel still being charged to taxpayers?

Update on MoCo Annapolis Delegation Calendar

Here is the update on the schedule for our MoCo Annapolis Delegation. Public hearings will be held
in November and December. Got a bill you would like your representatives to introduce in Annapolis this upcoming session? Want your gasoline taxes raised? Let them know. Go here to contact your representatives in the State House.

Monday, October 17, 2011 -- 2011 Special Session Convenes

Wednesday, November 2, 2011 -- Sponsor Approval Deadline for local and bi-county bills (This is the deadline for the requesting legislator to approve legislation in order to be guaranteed a hearing without the bill considered to be "late filed.")

Wednesday, November 16, 2011 -- Joint House and Senate Priorities Hearing -
7:00 p.m. - 3rd Floor Hearing Room, Stella Werner Council Office Bldg., 100 Maryland Ave., Rockville, MD 20850 - This hearing is an opportunity for the public to respond to the Road Show and to bring other issues of importance for the 2012 Session to the attention of the legislators. The Priorities Hearing will be carried live over County Cable Montgomery (Channel 6 on Comcast and Channel 30 on Verizon).
Click here to sign up to testify

Monday, December 5, 2011 -- House Hearing for local bills -
7:00 p.m. - 3rd Floor Hearing Room, Stella Werner Council Office Bldg., 100 Maryland Ave., Rockville, MD 20850 - Local bills refer to legislation affecting issues specific to Montgomery County.
Click here to sign up to testify

Wednesday, December 7, 2011 -- House Hearing for bi-county bills -
7:00 p.m. - 3rd Floor Hearing Room, Stella Werner Council Office Bldg., 100 Maryland Ave., Rockville, MD 20850 - Bi-County bills refer to legislation that requires the approval of the Montgomery County and the Prince George’s County Delegations.
Click here to sign up to testify

$22,095,384 paid to Deutsche Bank NTC for...

Well, we really don't know.
All we know is that in Fiscal Year 2010 MCPS sent over $22 million to Deutsche Bank NTC. We only know that because the legislature passed a law that required MCPS to post their payments to vendors over $25,000. There is no mention of Deutsche Bank NTC in Board of Education minutes, no authorization from the Board to make payments to this bank.

A Maryland Public Information Act request asking the Superintendent for documents related to Deutsche Bank NTC produced the documents below. But theses documents don't show what was purchased. The cover letter mentions a variety of items that could have been purchased but gives no specifics.

Were these payments just for one really big shopping spree? Exhibit A (the list of equipment), Exhibit B (schedule of Equipment Group), and Exhibit C (Acceptance Certificate) to the Master Lease shown below weren't provided in the public information act request documents from MCPS. 

The cover letter below from MCPS says the agreement that created these payments ended in June 2010.

But in Fiscal Year 2011, MCPS sent another $16,697,427 to Deutsche Bank, NTC.  Again, there are no Board of Education minutes that explain this payment to this bank.

Deutsche Bank NTC

$69,713 spent on hiring Superintendent

Remember the press release from MCPS that said the Board of Education had hired a search firm to find the next superintendent for a cost of $35,000 plus expenses?


Well those "plus expenses" are rolling in.  Total for FY11 in payments to the search firm of Hazard, Young, Attea and Associates is $69,713. 


That's $34,713 that was spent on "plus expenses" for this search. And those expenses were for...?


Thanks to the Funding and Accountability Database for that little ray of sunshine for taxpayers. 
But that doesn't tell us if that is the final total for this outside consultant. Are there more bills to be paid on this tab? 

Delegate Al Carr Rocks!

Delegate Al Carr wanted some "sunshine" in Montgomery County and today we have it! 

Back in the winter of 2009, Delegate Al Carr was pushing for legislation to require MCPS to create a searchable website of expenditures of over $10,000 to vendors.  The Parents' Coalition advocated for this legislation and supported Delegate Carr's efforts through public comment in Rockville and Annapolis.

The Board of Education lobbied the legislature to raise the expenditure threshold to $25,000 and pushed to delay the implementation of the website until January 1, 2011.  The bill passed the House and then the Senate with the changes requested by the Board of Education. 

And today, the MCPS Funding Accountability and Transparency website is live! 

Some members of the legislature did not see the need for this legislation. One Delegate said that "The information is already there. It is transparent."

Now that the website is up, let's take a look.

Let's say you want to know the annual American Express bill for the 1,400 +/- MCPS credit cards. Go to the Board of Education minutes and search for "American Express." You will come up with a July 14, 2009 Board of Education approval for an American Express contract (shown in image) but no dollar amount.

Now, with the new website you can enter "American Express" (see image at top of post) and find out that in Fiscal Year 2010, MCPS paid American Express $ 5,257,632.

That's $5.2 million in MCPS spending that was not "transparent" in the Board of Education minutes. 

Thanks Delegate Al Carr and the Montgomery County Delegation for pushing through this legislation!