Friday, February 6, 2009

Maryland Politics Watch: Al Carr wants you to know how your schools are spending your money

Over at Maryland Politics Watch, Adam Pagnucco writes about the MCPS Funding Transparency bill.

Navarro Board of Ed. Breaks Open Meetings Law

On January 30, 2009, the State of Maryland Open Meetings Compliance Board issued an opinion that the Montgomery "County Board did violate the Act in its failure to properly complete a written statement of the reason for the closing of the meeting on September 9."

The Open Meetings Compliance Board also found that the Montgomery County Board of Education was "not correct" in their assertion that the complainant bears the burden of proof and that there is a presumption that no violation has occurred.


In response to the filing of this complaint the Montgomery County Board of Education voluntarily changed its procedure for going into a closed session. Since the filing of this complaint, members of the public can now observe the Board voting to go into closed session prior to the Board room doors being closed. The sign stating "Board members and staff only" that is at the entrance to the conference room used for closed sessions is now to be taken down to permit the public to freely enter and observe the vote of the Board to go into closed session.

The Open Meetings Compliance Board cited the MCPS Board of Education for a violation of $10-508(d)(2)(ii) of the Open Meetings Act. The Open Meetings Board opinion states that in order to close a meeting of the MCPS Board of Education, the Board must,

"not simply cite the statutory authority, but must disclose the topic of discussion in order to allow the public to access compliance by comparing the cited authority and report topic."..."Here the written statement provided the public no information except that the meeting was closed, among other reasons, for the County Board to receive legal advice. Thus, in closing the meeting of September 9, the County Board violated $10-508(d)(2)(ii)."
What did the Board of Education fail to disclose on September 9? They failed to disclose that they were going in to a Closed Session to discuss illegal Curricular Fees that are being charged to MCPS families.

Only time will tell if the MCPS Board of Education will comply with this decision. At the time of this violation the Board of Education President was Nancy Navarro. Will the current board, led by President Shirley Brandman comply with the closed meeting disclosure requirements of Maryland law?

Frieda Lacey to give Accountability talk

The Parents Coalition of Montgomery County, Maryland, encourages anyone interested in the topic of Accountability in Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) to attend an upcoming speech on the topic. This announcement is reproduced from another listserv, so please contact MCPS directly if there are questions. Dr. Frieda Lacey will be speaking as follows:

SUNDAY SCHOLARS PRESENT:
HOLDING THOSE RESPONSIBLE ACCOUNTABLE
ACCOUNTABILITY AND EDUCATION
SPEAKER: Dr. Frieda K. Lacey Deputy Superintendent of Schools For the Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

HERE IS YOUR CHANCE TO HAVE YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED

BRING A FRIEND!
February 8, 2009
Ross, Boddy Community Center (2:30pm to 4:15pm)
18529 Brooke Road
Sandy Spring, Maryland 20860

Thursday, February 5, 2009

Cost of new MSDE system could be a good proxy for the cost of implementing a searchable database of MCPS purchases

The main objection by the MCPS BOE to the MCPS spending transparency bill has been that the web-accessible database would reportedly cost at least $50,000 to implement.

In previous postings here, I've suggested that the application could be implemented for about $5,000 using existing MCPS information systems infrastructure.

Coincidentally, the Maryland State Department of Education recently put the child care provider records online in a searchable database. The new searchable child care provider database is technically very similar to the system that the MCPS spending transparency bill requires. It's a search - select - display type of application, with no complex business logic and a simple, read-only interface.

An anticipated benefit of the online child care system is that the quality of child care provider assessments will improve, just as one of the anticipated benefits of the funding transparency system is to improve the accountability of MCPS.

According to an article in the Washington Post about the new child care provider information system:

Smith, the national child-care advocate, argues that more information is better for parents. "You have to trust parents to understand a minor from a major violation," she said, noting that many states have worried about liability and whether parents will misinterpret inspection reports. "Parents understand this more than people give them credit for," she said.

Research shows that inspectors become more precise and careful in their assessments when they are posted online, Smith said. This, she said, is good for parents and providers. "Inspectors got better with their jobs," she said. "It was not that parents all of the sudden got inundated with information they didn't understand."

So how much did it cost for the MSDE to implement the new system? Was it $200,000, as some have speculated that the MCPS spending transparency system would cost? Was it $50,000, as the MCPS BOE has forecast for the spending transparency system? Or was it $5,000, the estimate that I gave for the MCPS system in my testimony to the Montgomery County delegation?

The answer is found in the last paragraph of the Washington Post article:

The state's new system was developed at virtually no cost, Grafwallner said, because it was built with software the state already uses to help parents locate child care.
In looking around the MCPS web site, it is evident that MCPS, too, has the database and web-interface structure already in place to support an application that meets the requirements of the MCPS Spending Transparency bill.

March 3rd County Council lunch with Board of Education

The Montgomery County Council's agenda shows a lunch meeting with the MCPS Board of Education on March 3rd. The Board of Education agenda has no such listing.
At a lunch between the Council and Board last year, sandwiches and sodas were provided by a caterer. As the Council looks for ways to economize, a suggestion would be that the March 3rd joint lunch be "brown bag".
In furtherance of open government it would be hoped that the Board of Education would begin to announce these meetings on their agenda.

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

Feb 23rd Council Ed Committee: Promethean Boards in MCPS classrooms - new date

This meeting of the County Council's Education Committee was originally scheduled for February 2nd. The meeting was canceled and has been rescheduled for February 23rd. Council staff has already released their analysis of this multi-million dollar MCPS purchase in the meeting packet.

ED 9:30 AM - 7CHR
Feb 23 • CIP Amendments: Montgomery College (Sherer)
CIP Amendments: Montgomery County Public Schools (Levchenko)
• Promethean boards in MCPS classrooms (McGuire)
T&

February 17th Math Forum

Parents’ Coalition invites you to a discussion of…
The TOP TEN Math Reforms For a New MCPS Superintendent
In two years Superintendent Jerry Weast will be replaced. It’s never too early to start writing a “wish list for better math instruction.” Long-time math activists Jerry Dancis ( retired University of Maryland math professor), Julie Greenberg (former MCPS math teacher, now at the National Council on Teacher Quality), and John Hoven (former co-president of the Gifted and Talented Association) will lead a discussion. Bring your questions and concerns.
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
7:30 – 9:00 pm
Town of Somerset Town Hall
4510 Cumberland Avenue, Chevy Chase, MD

Three options for parking: In the lot behind the tennis courts that are just west of the Town Hall
On Cumberland Ave (Please don’t block driveways!)
At Somerset Elementary School (Turn onto Dorset Ave. off Wisconsin, turn right on Deal Place, and left into school parking lot. The Town Hall is one block east of the school.)

Tuesday, February 3, 2009

Gazette: House delegation offers mixed views of transparency bill

In an article appearing in the online Gazette, reporter Marcus Moore writes:
Members of the county's House delegation have mixed feelings about a proposed bill to make more of the Montgomery County school system's business transactions open to the public.
If passed by the General Assembly, Del. Alfred C. Carr's bill would require the system to publish on a database details on spending of $10,000 and up.
School system leaders would have to build the database, which they estimate could cost as much as $50,000.
First of all, I'm trying to figure out exactly what MCPS has in mind for $50,000. We're talking about a static database (refreshed perhaps monthly), where people will do a search and then display a record of interest. Like this:

Search records - Display possible matches - Select Record of interest - Display record.

This not a system where the complexities of real-time updating need to be considered. There are no complex business processes in this application. This is about as simple as a computer application gets. Computer Science 101 - homework assignment 3.

I'd sure like to know how MCPS came up with the $50,000 cost estimate for this simple application.

But cost objections aside, Del. Ana Sol Gutierrez (a former MCPS BOE president) doesn't support the transparency law.
"The information is already there. It is transparent," Gutierrez (D-Dist. 18) of Chevy Chase said during the delegation meeting.

I respectfully disagree.

Four words not heard at Board table

The following is testimony delivered in Annapolis on proposed legislation MC 930-09. What documents do exist on these procurements seem to indicate that all four of these contracts were entered into by MCPS during the last two years, during the time that the MCPS Board of Education President was Nancy Navarro.

Montgomery County Delegation
January 30, 2009
Re: MD 930-09 Montgomery County Public Schools - Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2009

Good morning Chairs Madaleno and Feldman and the members of the Montgomery Delegation.
I am Janis Zink Sartucci. I grew up in Montgomery County and I am raising my children in Montgomery County. I attended Montgomery Knolls Elementary School, Eastern Junior High and graduated from Montgomery Blair High School. I am here as a member of Parents Coalition to support Louis Wilen and the Parents Coalition's request that you pass MD 930-09.
In my time before you today, I have four words for you. The four words are:

IQinVision
Promethean
EasyLobby
SmartBoard

These are four words that you will not find in Board of Education minutes approving procurements of the products from these companies. In total, I would estimate that these four words represent contracts of over $30 million in procurements. That’s over $30 million in procurements that are not reflected in MCPS Board of Education minutes. Each of these procurements represents a commitment of taxpayer dollars of well beyond $10,000.

Briefly, let me start with IQinVision. How did Montgomery County citizens discover that MCPS has contracted with this company? In a press release from IQinVision. The contract with this company is not mentioned in Board of Education minutes. Neither is their product IQEye or the consultant that obtained this contract. Rumor has this procurement cost at $9 million. Attachment A

Promethean: How did citizens discover this contract? A press release from MCPS announcing the placement of these products in classrooms. Repeated Maryland Public Information Act requests disclosed that 3,300 Promethean Boards had been purchased for MCPS classrooms, in total a commitment of over $20 million in taxpayer funds without Board of Education review. In support of this purchase, the Superintendent has produced two different versions of a June 9, 2008 memorandum to the Board of Education, purportedly to justify this purchase. Both versions of the June 9, 2008 memorandum are attached. Attachment B

EasyLobby: Citizens discovered this procurement through an article in the Gazette newspaper. This procurement is also not mentioned in Board of Education minutes. Unknown contract cost. Attachment C

SmartBoard: SmartBoards are present in schools and in MCPS headquarters. We simply see them in use but again, can not find any mention of a contract to purchase these items in Board of Education minutes. Unknown contract cost. Attachment D

Does Montgomery County need the Montgomery County Public Schools - Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2009?
Absolutely.
We don’t know what we don’t know.

With regard to funding of this Act, I will reference the recently released State Legislative Audit of Montgomery County Public Schools. In order to fund a searchable website of MCPS procurements, MCPS can cut up the 1,400 credit cards whose use is not being monitored.
From the State Audit:
"Our tests of 32 calendar year 2007 travel expenditures
charged to credit cards totaling $19,028 disclosed 30 expenditures
totaling $17,930 that were not recorded on monthly activity logs and,
therefore, were never approved."
Thank you for this opportunity to speak.

(Attachments available upon request. For each word I searched in the Board of Education minutes on their website and copied the results page. For all of the words except "Promethean" the search yielded "no results". For the Promethean search the only results were references to demonstrations, updates or curriculum but no reference to purchasing 3,300 units.)

UPDATE: EasyLobby procurement was made without a contract and without Board of Education approval.

UPDATE: IQinVision procurement was made without a contract and without Board of Education approval.



UPDATE December 2010: The legislation to create a MCPS database of vendors receiving payments over a specific amount was enacted and the database has now been posted on the MCPS website.

Monday, February 2, 2009

Education's $140 million loss

From the Baltimore Sun: Inside Ed - Education's $140 million loss Presentation to the Maryland Association of Boards of Education.

The mystery of the two Promethean Board memos

Can anyone explain why there are two different but mostly similar June 9, 2008 memos from Superintendent Jerry Weast to the Board of Education about expanding implementation of the Promethean Boards?

The first memo credits MCPS Chief Operating Officer Mr. Larry Bowers and MCPS Chief Technology Officer Mr. Sherwin Collette for their work in the implementation. Among other differences, the second memo credits BOE members Mr. Steve Abrams (now retired) and Mr. Chris Barclay for their support while also recognizing Mr. Collette's contributions to the project.

Here are the two memos:




Sunday, February 1, 2009

Promethean - Promises or Myth

With the emphasis for sunshine in the federal government, I was sorry to hear that Monday's Montgomery County Council Education Committee cancelled its meeting. I was interested in learning how how those lovely but expensive ($19 million) whiteboards with fancy egg clickers and a limited life span wound up in classrooms across Montgomery county.

While you are waiting for the County Council to weigh in, here is my analysis.

Who authorized the payments? Look at the lease dated June 16, 2008 (http://www.parentscoalitionmc.com/uploads/MPIAProm2600.pdf) - its MCPS Chief Operating Officer, Larry Bowers.

Can a Chief Operating Officer do that? Not according to the the MCPS procurement manual.

Procurement Authority

The superintendent of schools delegates' authority to the director of the Division of Procurement to enter into contracts for the procurement of goods and services as the centralized purchasing agency for MCPS. The Board shall award all contracts that exceed delegated dollar thresholds. The director of the Division of Procurement is authorized to delegate purchasing authority to procurement buyers for the purchase of specified goods and/or services.

The director of the Division of Procurement has the responsibility and authority to negotiate, place, and (when necessary) modify invitations to bids, purchase orders, or other awards granted or issued by the Board. Assigned buyers may assist the director of the Division of Procurement in discharging these responsibilities. Excepting the superintendent, no other county public school official or employee is authorized to order supplies, materials, or services; enter into purchase negotiations or contracts; or in any way obligate MCPS for any indebtedness. Any purchases ordered or contracts made that are contrary to these provisions and authorities shall be of no effect and void, and MCPS shall not be bound thereby. (Review MCPS Regulation DJA-RA, Procurement of Equipment, Supplies and Contractual Services).

Also from the Procurement manual:
20.0 Unauthorized Purchases
Whenever any officer or employee of MCPS purchases or contracts for any supplies or contractual services contrary to the provision of the MCPS Procurement Manual, such purchases or contracts shall be void and shall not be considered to be an obligation of the Montgomery County Board of Education (Review, MCPS Policy DJA, MCPS Procurement Practices).
**************
Did MCPS pull off one of the biggest freebies in educational procurement?

Here is the link to the County Council Packet: http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/content/council/pdf/agenda/cm/2009/090202/20090202_ED01.pdf

I hope that doesn't disappear too.

Saturday, January 31, 2009

Parents' Coalition members testify in support of Montgomery County Public Schools - Funding Accountability and Transparency Act - MC 930-09 (Updated)

Several members of the Parents' Coalition testified at the January 30 hearing on the Montgomery County Public Schools - Funding Accountability and Transparency Act - MC 930-09. The author of the bill, Del. Al Carr, provides background information about the bill on the 18th District blog, along with an interesting video of the MCPS BOE discussing the proposed legislation.

My testimony is below. And over at the Libes Libation, Don Libes provides his testimony and some observations.



Weast at Press Conference

Van Hollen, Hite, Jr., and Weast participated in a press conference with business and labor leaders including Anna Burger, Chair of Change to Win Labor Federation and International Secretary-Treasurer of SEIU; Dean Garfield, CEO, Information Technology Industry Council; John Sweeney, President, AFL-CIO; Safra Catz, CEO, Oracle Corp.; Ken Simonson, Chief Economist, Association of General Contractors; Terry Hatch, Director of Legislative Affairs, National Electrical Contractors Association.

http://vanhollen.house.gov/HoR/MD08/Newsroom/Press+Release+by+Date/2009/1-27-09+Van+Hollen+Edwards+Education+Business+and+Labor+Leaders+Urge+Passage+of+Economic+Recovery+Bi.htm

Promethean Boards Lease

Here is the direct link to one of the Promethean Board Leases:

http://www.parentscoalitionmc.com/uploads/MPIAProm2600.pdf

Friday, January 23, 2009

Press Release: State Audit of MCPS Confirms Parents' Coalition's concerns

PARENTS' COALITION OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY

Press Release
Contact:
Janis Sartucci
Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County
contact@parentscoalitionmc.com
http://www.parentscoalitionmc.com/

For Immediate Release
State Audit of MCPS Confirms Parents' Coalition's concerns:
1,400 MCPS credit cards need oversight
MCPS travel needs to be approved

Montgomery County, Maryland, January 23, 2009
- The Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County is pleased that today the Maryland Office of Legislative Audits has released their Financial Practices Performance Audit Report for Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS).

In the summer of 2008, a citizen obtained the list of over 1,400 MCPS employees who have been issued American Express purchasing cards (credit cards). Multiple members of the Parents' Coalition filed Maryland Public Information Act (MPIA) requests to determine how these cards were being used by specific MCPS staff. The MPIA request process was difficult and time consuming. However, eventually credit card "logs" and travel expense reports were obtained for 14 MCPS employees. In just that small sample of expenditures, Parents' Coalition members saw that many of the credit card log purchases were not approved until after the MPIA request had been made. In some cases, the date the purchase had been approved was a year after the purchase was made. In addition, that small sample of credit card logs showed numerous expenditures that seemed to be unrelated to the mission of the school system. Those MPIA requests were made available to the public on the Parents' Coalition website. The credit card logs and travel expense reports have been the most popular items viewed on the Parents' Coalition website to date.

http://www.parentscoalitionmc.com/MCPSExpenseReports.html

Today, the Parents' Coalition applauds the Maryland Office of Legislative Audits for their audit of the MCPS use of credit cards and travel expenses. The Audit confirms that MCPS oversight of credit cards has been lax and that MCPS has failed to properly monitor and control credit card expenditures and travel.

http://www.ola.state.md.us/Reports/Schools/MCPS09.pdf
Chapter 3, Pages 19-23
Included in the Legislative Audit is the following summary:
"However, we found that processes over credit cards need to be strengthened. Specifically, our review disclosed significant weaknesses in internal controls over the procurement card program. These weaknesses included (1) a lack of monitoring over card usage and credit limits, (2) the employee who requested the procurement cards also initially received the cards from the vendor and (3) employees did not always complete card transaction logs, and other logs were not reviewed and approved. We also noted certain potentially questionable credit card purchases. Finally, for certain employees, travel was not approved in advance, as required by MCPS policy.From the report:

*MCPS records indicated that its employees used credit cards to make a total of $5.6 million in purchases (including textbook purchases). According to MCPS records, during fiscal year 2007, 1,209 employees used credit cards with the monthly charges being paid directly by the school system to the credit card bank.
(Please note that as of the summer of 2008 there were 1,400 credit cards in use.)*In addition, nine of these cards had single transaction limits exceeding $7,500, MCPS’ threshold for obtaining competitive bids.

*MCPS did not ensure that credit card documentation was maintained that adequately supports all purchases and establishes proper supervisory review of every transaction. Our review of 161 calendar year 2007 transactions totaling $55,000 disclosed that 50 transactions totaling $22,800, applicable to 9 cardholders, were not included on transaction logs for subsequent review.


Of the remaining 111 transactions, there was no documented approval on the logs pertaining to 41 transactions (applicable to 6 cardholders) to indicate a supervisory review and approval of the related charges.

*For example, our review of fiscal year 2007 credit card purchases identified 512 purchases totaling $39,400 from vendors that did not appear to have an obvious relationship with the mission of MCPS.

*For example, we noted 119 purchases totaling $8,290 from department stores and 121 purchases totaling $5,571 from party supply stores.

*For example, one school spent a total of $21,000 on food (using credit cards) without obtaining such approval.

*Approximately 26 individuals (that is, upper management employees and Board members) had been issued credit cards that did not have travel-related restrictions, such as for air fare and hotel accommodations. Use of credit cards
for travel expenditures may allow cardholders to incur such expenditures without obtaining advance approval, as required by MCPS regulations. Our tests of 32 calendar year 2007 travel expenditures charged to credit cards totaling $19,028 disclosed 30 expenditures totaling $17,930 that were not recorded on monthly activity logs and, therefore, were never approved. In addition, no documentation could be located to support 10 meal expenditures totaling $2,172 that were recorded on credit card statements. According to MCPS records, during fiscal year 2007, travel expenditures totaled $2.5 million, including $80,465 charged on credit cards.

The Parents' Coalition wishes to thank its members, who through their diligence and persistence brought a small amount of sunshine to the use of public funds by Montgomery County school officials.

The Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County is a citizen network dedicated to improving the responsiveness and performance of the Montgomery County Public Schools. Drawing from education advocacy groups throughout Montgomery County, Maryland, the Parents' Coalition seeks to use the political process to achieve the goals of coherent, content-rich curriculum standards; high expectations combined with timely remediation and acceleration; a wider range of educational options for parents and children; greater transparency and accountability; and meaningful community input.

Wednesday, January 21, 2009

Where is the Board of Education?

Testimony to Montgomery County Board of Education
January 21, 2009

Good evening, I am Janis Sartucci a member of the Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County. The Parents' Coalition has a website chock full of public information for public school parents in Montgomery County. Our address is
www.parentscoalitionmc.com.

I. "The Table" -Where is the Board of Education?

This evening's testimony is on the topic of the Operating Budget; however, the testimony is not being presented to those that are "at the table" deciding what is funded in the Operating Budget and what is cut. Recently, the Superintendent has spoken about those at the table; MCPS staff, two representatives from each of the three employee unions and two representatives from MCCPTA. There is a video of the "table" participants in action on the MCPS website showing the creation of the MCPS Operating Budget. However, there is no mention of Board of Education members at the Operating Budget table, and no Board members are seen in the video.

Why are our elected representatives not at the table deciding what is to be funded and what is to be cut in the annual public school budget? We elected you to represent us and instead the vast majority of Montgomery County parents and citizens have NO representation at the MCPS Operating Budget creation table. Unless parents and citizens are a member of a union or one of the 18% of parents that are members of a PTA, Montgomery County parents and citizens have no representation at the table where the MCPS Operating Budget is created.

II. Illegal Curricular Fees - Where is the Board of Education?

Parents have also lost their representation in the discussion of the illegal curricular fees that are being imposed in our local schools. At the January 9, 2009, joint Board committee meeting we learned that the Board of Education would not be deciding what fees should be charged and what fees should be eliminated. Instead, the new rules will be created and set by Superintendent Weast. The new rules include a clause that if anyone challenges a fee, the fee can be waived without any paperwork or procedure for validation of need. Thereby anyone who knows to request a waiver of an illegal curricular fee will be granted a waiver.

The Maryland Attorney General has said, "we are safe in saying that anything directly related to a school's curriculum must be available to all without charge". Parents that know what the Attorney General has said will know they cannot be charged for curriculum related items. Only families that do not know the law will be left to pay illegal curricular fees. As a Baltimore education advocate commented to me, this amounts to taxing the ignorant. Only those that are ignorant of the law will be paying illegal curricular fees.



III. Outdoor Education - Where is the Board of Education?

Again, the question is where is the Board of Education with regard to Outdoor Education? Parents are constantly paying illegal fees for that event. On May 11, 2004, the Board of Education voted to set the fee for Outdoor Education at $76 effective July 1, 2004. But local schools are free to charge parents any amount they choose and parents are none the wiser. When parents are billed $85 for Outdoor Education they assume and trust that this is the fee set by the Board of Education. Those that are ignorant of the law have no idea that the Board of Education actually set the fee at $76. Further, parents are often ignorant of the fact that Outdoor Education is an optional activity and not curriculum based.

IV. BusRadio - Where was the Board of Education?

In December we saw yet another example of the Board of Education absent from a decision when it was revealed that MCPS had contracted with a company that piped in pre-recorded music and advertisements directed at children on MCPS buses. The Board of Education and Superintendent had been notified about the use of this product in November, but still no Board members spoke up to inquire about the use of this product during subsequent Board meetings. What else is going on in our schools that had not been approved by the Board of Education?

It is time for the elected Board of Education members to take seats at the Budget table on behalf of all of the unrepresented families and students, and participate in the budget and policy decisions that impact MCPS students.

Janis Zink Sartucci
Parents' Coalition, member

Wednesday, January 14, 2009

Farewell Appearance of the Blair HS Gym Towel - MCPS Operating Budget Testimony 1/14/2009

Testimony of
Rosanne A. Hurwitz
Before the Montgomery County Board of Education
On the MCPS Proposed Operating Budget for FY 2010
January 14, 2009

Good evening. My name is Rosanne Hurwitz. I am a parent of two children, a resident of Rockville Maryland and a founding member of the Parents Coalition. Thank you for this opportunity to address the issue of the Montgomery County Operating Budget.

The first time I testified before the Board of Education was in April, 2001. The subject was the math curriculum, and math textbooks. At the time, those of us involved thought we had won the battle when we began to see math textbooks in classrooms around the county. What we didn’t realize was that we also needed to specify who picks up the tab for these curricular expenses.

Tonight, I bring to you what I hope is the last appearance of the Blair HS Gym Towel. In this budget, and as noted in a memo last week from Dr. Weast, the BOE has finally acknowledged that expenditures for curricular items, including textbooks and this towel, are the responsibility of the school system and not parents. I welcome additional information and look forward to those amendments to the budget that will bring MCPS practice in line with the state mandate for a free public education.

I am concerned, however, whether the current budget in its proposed and amended form, will provide our children with the necessary materials they need for their education. Is the $1.5 million dollars sufficient? I can’t tell by reading the budget for two reasons: 1. The budget does not include curricular fees as a source of income/revenue to the school, so it is impossible to determine the dollar figures needed to replace the curricular fees if eliminated; and 2. We don’t have an accounting of what these fees really purchased. The Operating Budget needs to specifically provide for curricular items, such as textbooks and supplies, in a manner that the taxpaying public can comprehend.

The Maryland State Constitution and statutory authority clearly provide for a free public education, with textbooks and materials of instruction available to students free of charge. The terms are entitled to their plain meaning. We all know what a textbook is, and by now we are sufficiently familiar with online resources to identify electronic textbooks - to paraphrase Supreme Court Justice Potter Stuart - we know what it is when we see it. The categorization that some materials, like workbooks, owl eyes, and chicken wings, become the property of the student and thus the costs should be borne by the families is without merit. Whether consumed in a cooking lab or dissected in a biology lab, a chicken wing by any other name is still a chicken wing.

It is time for the Board of Education and the school system to face its obligations, make appropriate provisions to use the money they are allocated, obey the law, and fund those curricular items that are an integral part of the school program. The school system can not claim that it is justified by a tough economy. You can’t rob a bank merely because you are short of funds and want to go out to eat. If the law needs to be changed, change it, but don’t break it and hope no one will notice. Parents throughout Montgomery County teach their children to be law abiding and moral citizens; we expect no less of the public servants in charge of our school system.

Wednesday, January 7, 2009

Press Release: Returning Free Public Schools to Montgomery County

Press Release
Contact:
Janis Sartucci
Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County

For Immediate Release
Returning Free Public Schools to Montgomery County
Montgomery County, Maryland, January 7, 2009
The Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County is pleased that today Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) is acknowledging the outrageous burden placed upon families by the charging of curricular fees for many classes in our public schools. In today's announcement, MCPS recognizes that these fees were applied inconsistently and that local public schools were profiting from charges for required instructional materials. Furthermore, these assessments involved items integral to the curriculum and were clearly prohibited by the Maryland State Constitution's guarantee of a system of "Free Public Schools".
In August of 2008, members of the Parents' Coalition of Montgomery County brought the issue of the charging of curricular fees in Montgomery County Public Schools to the Maryland Attorney General. In an August 18, 2008 letter to a parent, an Assistant Attorney General stated the Attorney General's opinion that "we are safe in saying that anything directly related to a school's curriculum must be available to all without charge."
The impact of today's announcement by the MCPS Superintendent, Jerry Weast, will have state-wide implications. MCPS represents the largest and most diverse school system in the state and other Maryland public school systems will be evaluating their student fees based on the direction taken by MCPS today.
The Parents' Coalition is pleased with what appears to be a 70% reduction in curricular fees. At the same time, we plan to review the Superintendent's memorandum and the remaining fee list. We will seek additional legal advice concerning the application of the revised charges consistent with the State Constitution, as necessary. Additionally, we will continue to advocate for inclusion of all school fees within the operating budget of our school system in order for these funds to be covered under existing legislative oversight requirements.
The Parents' Coalition wishes to thank its hundreds of members, and many local and statewide supporters for their long standing effort to end onerous and illegal school fees in Montgomery County Public Schools.

Former middle school teacher to serve five years in prison on abuse charge @mcps @mocoboe