‘Our current path is not sustainable’: Montgomery Co. schools superintendent, council look at challenges to school funding

Montgomery County’s Superintendent of Schools Thomas Taylor told the county council that he’s focused on the tough fiscal picture ahead for the school system that educates more than 161,500 students.

“What is clear in my examination of the budget, and as illustrated in the data that you have before you today, is that our current path is not sustainable,” Taylor said at a county council work session on Tuesday.

Taylor and Board of Education President Karla Silvestre were among the school officials at the work session on the school system’s “cost drivers” — expenses that fuel the budget.

Craig Howard, the county council’s new executive director, explained that over a period of 10 years, FYs 2015-25, the operating budget grew by 3.9% on average each year.

In June, the county council approved a $3.3 billion operating budget for FY 2025.

Noting that nearly 90% of the operating budget is spent on staffing, Taylor said, “The system must engage in a thorough reevaluation of resource allocation.”..

‘Our current path is not sustainable’: Montgomery Co. schools superintendent, council look at challenges to school funding - WTOP News

MCPS needs more than a month to produce unredacted version of correspondence with Jackson Lewis than they provided just weeks prior

The Parents' Coalition requested a copy of the Jackson Lewis contract.  Instead, we received the letter below which refers to the contract but does not include the contract.  The billing rates were also redacted on the basis that they are "trade secrets," a ridiculous assertion by Public Information Director Chris Cram.

So we asked for same letter without the redactions.  Chris Cram says that he needs more than 30 days to provide an unredacted version of the letter than he provided just weeks prior.

(Click on images to enlarge)

Happening Now: Supreme Court of Maryland to hold open meeting on proposed Maryland Rules changes dealing with electronic recordings of criminal cases

 Washington Post reporting on this hearing at this link. 

*******

Media Advisory
Supreme Court of Maryland to hold open meeting on proposed Maryland Rules changes dealing with electronic recordings of criminal cases

ANNAPOLIS, Md. – On Friday, January 6, 2023, the Supreme Court of Maryland will hold an open meeting via videoconferencing on proposed Rules changes submitted by the Standing Committee on Rules of Practice and Procedure (Rules Committee) beginning at 2:30 p.m. The meeting and proposed changes are in light of the Memorandum Opinion and Judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, entered on December 9, 2022, declaring Code, Criminal Procedure Article, § 1-201 unconstitutional as applied to lawfully obtained audio or video recordings of criminal proceedings. See Soderberg v. Carrion, Civ. No. RDB 19-1559 (D. Md.).

The Rules Committee submitted its Two Hundred and Thirteenth Report, recommending the adoption, on an interim and emergency basis, of new Rule 16-504.1 and amendments to Rules 2-804, 16-502, 16-503, 16-504, 16-901, and 16-914. Interested persons are asked to consider the committee’s report and proposed Rules changes and to forward on or before January 4, 2023, any written comments they may wish to make to rules@mdcourts.gov or to Sandra F. Haines, Esq., Reporter, Rules Committee, 580 Taylor Avenue Annapolis, Maryland 21401.

WHO:             Supreme Court of Maryland

WHAT:           Open meeting on the Two Hundred and Thirteenth Report of the Rules Committee

WHEN:           Friday, January 6, 2023, 2:30 p.m.

WHERE:         Supreme Court of Maryland
                       Open meeting via videoconferencing
                       Webcast

NOTE: Please contact the Maryland Judiciary’s Government Relations and Public Affairs office, communications@mdcourts.gov or 410-260-1488, for questions. For information about the webcast and to request permission to address the Court, contact Gregory Hilton, Clerk, Supreme Court of Maryland, 410-260-1500 or 800-926-2583.

###

CONTACT:
Bradley Tanner
Public Information Officer
bradley.tanner@mdcourts.gov
410-260-1488

Terri Charles
Asst. Public Information Officer
terri.charles@mdcourts.gov
410-260-1488
 

City school officials to ease hiring rules for applicants with criminal records

Baltimore schools to ease hiring rules to allow people with criminal records to work on school construction

State's Attorney Did Not Interview Victims, Concludes No Crime

No crime found in Rock Terrance School incident 

No criminal conduct occurred when Rock Terrace School maintained accounts without parents’ knowledge for special-education students in transition-to-work programs, the Montgomery County State’s Attorney’s Office found.

The office investigated the management of money and the accounts after some parents in 2013 discovered the school had set up bank accounts for their children to receive work stipends but the children had not received the money. The State’s Attorney’s investigation confirmed the findings of Montgomery County Public Schools’ internal investigation of mismanagement but no criminal conduct.

Chief of the Special Prosecutions Division Bryan Roslund said he could not comment on mismanagement because the investigation was focused solely on potential criminal activity.

“No acts constituted a crime ... The broader question of what went on at the school and what was being done with programs is not really for us to answer,” Roslund said.

Roslund said the investigation looked at school records and letters or comments parents had sent to the school about the issue, but did not involve interviewing parents. Lyda Astrove, a local attorney and advocate for the parents and students, said that made it a “one-sided investigation.”...

 ...MCPS has reimbursed students in 71 payments adding up to about $34,400...

 http://www.thesentinel.com/mont/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=2014:no-crime-found-in-rock-terrance-school-incident&Itemid=766

Looking for Mr. Trump

Does MCPS need to evaluate its policy on reporting and investigating allegations of child abuse?

Simple answer is NO.  

Maryland laws specify that suspected child abuse is to be reported to the local child protective services.  Educators, like health professionals, are considered mandatory reporters - that means, they are required by state law to report.

Here is the Maryland State Law concerning the obligation of educators to report suspected child abuse in the County.

MARYLAND STATUTES AND CODES

Section 5-704 - Reporting of abuse or neglect - By health practitioner, police officer, educator or human service worker.

§ 5-704. Reporting of abuse or neglect - By health practitioner, police officer, educator or human service worker. 

(a)  In general.- Notwithstanding any other provision of law, including any law on privileged communications, each health practitioner, police officer, educator, or human service worker, acting in a professional capacity in this State: 

(1) (i) who has reason to believe that a child has been subjected to abuse, shall notify the local department or the appropriate law enforcement agency; or 

(ii) who has reason to believe that a child has been subjected to neglect, shall notify the local department; and 

(2) if acting as a staff member of a hospital, public health agency, child care institution, juvenile detention center, school, or similar institution, shall immediately notify and give all information required by this section to the head of the institution or the designee of the head. 

(b)  Oral and written reports; cooperation among departments and agencies.-  

(1) An individual who notifies the appropriate authorities under subsection (a) of this section shall make: 

(i) an oral report, by telephone or direct communication, as soon as possible: 

1. to the local department or appropriate law enforcement agency if the person has reason to believe that the child has been subjected to abuse; or 

2. to the local department if the person has reason to believe that the child has been subjected to neglect; and 

(ii) a written report: 

1. to the local department not later than 48 hours after the contact, examination, attention, or treatment that caused the individual to believe that the child had been subjected to abuse or neglect; and 

2. with a copy to the local State's Attorney if the individual has reason to believe that the child has been subjected to abuse. 

(2) (i) An agency to which an oral report of suspected abuse is made under paragraph (1) of this subsection shall immediately notify the other agency. 

(ii) This paragraph does not prohibit a local department and an appropriate law enforcement agency from agreeing to cooperative arrangements. 

(c)  Contents of report.- Insofar as is reasonably possible, an individual who makes a report under this section shall include in the report the following information: 

(1) the name, age, and home address of the child; 

(2) the name and home address of the child's parent or other person who is responsible for the child's care; 

(3) the whereabouts of the child; 

(4) the nature and extent of the abuse or neglect of the child, including any evidence or information available to the reporter concerning possible previous instances of abuse or neglect; and 

(5) any other information that would help to determine: 

(i) the cause of the suspected abuse or neglect; and 

(ii) the identity of any individual responsible for the abuse or neglect. 

[1987, ch. 635, § 2; 1989, ch. 730, §§ 1, 2; 1997, chs. 367, 368; 1998, ch. 21, § 1; 2000, ch. 61, § 1; 2003, ch. 308.]  

So why is Mr. Tofig saying MCPS is reviewing their policies?   It's great to review policies, but we have a state law that obviously isn't followed in MCPS land.  This one isn't like the illegal school fees masquerading as school supplies or other laws that MCPS seems to think don't apply in Lake Wobegon on the Potomac.  Kids are getting hurt.  At New Hampshire Estates Elementary, at Kemp Mill, and at other schools throughout the county.  Even in ever-so-green Wootton Cluster, child abuse is a problem, and hiding behind a school system "policy" is bogus.

Here is the phone number for Montgomery County Child Protective Services:

Service(s):Children's Protective ServicesTarget Population:Abused Children
Information Number:240-777-4417Location(s):

• MidCounty DHHS Building
  1301 Piccard Drive, Rockville, MD 20850

News Flash.   We know that Dr. Starr and Mr. Tofig may think that state laws don't apply in Montgomery County.  You should follow the advice of the Donald, and tell your counsel:

YOU'RE FIRED!

E-Rate - too good to be true?

Is the e-rate rebate program truly "found" money? If you think this program is too good to be true, you may be correct. Before we thank Superintendent Jerry Weast for tapping into this great resource, check out what has happened to some other school systems who have found the same pot of gold.

E-rate participants have been the focus of criminal and civil investigations at the US Department of Justice and other federal agencies for several years.

Is this "old law" that doesn't apply to Montgomery County Public Schools? Think again.

In December, 2008, a businessman in Atlanta received a prison sentence of 5 years because he bribed an Atlanta school official in connection with the E-rate program.

Just last week, Federal agents requested records from the school boards in Atlantic City and Pleasantville as part of a bid-rigging investigation. Philadelphia and Camden schools are also under investigation.

Recently, a Illinois contractor was fined $3.3 million for bid rigging and procurement fraud in connection with E-rate.

Its not just the feds who are looking into this practice. Earlier this year, the Arizona Attorney General found pervasive problems with the procurement process at the Tucson Unified School District.

Want more case studies? Run your own google search.

Is the great e-rate funded Promethean promise one that will likely find our own MCPS school system under investigation? Stay tuned, but remember, unlike their friends in Arizona who settled the case and put the three individuals involved in the scandal on leave - MCPS would rather litigate than admit mistakes.

But then again, MCPS may hit the jackpot a second time, since no one, including the County Council or the MCPS Ethics Panel, has yet to demonstrate any willingness to provide meaningful oversight over the MCPS budget.