2013LegislativePlatform Final 010313.pdf

7/29/2019 2013LegislativePlatform Final 010313.pdf

1/25

Board of Education of Harford County

Legislative Platform

2013


2/25


3/25

Cassandra R. Beverley

Elected Member,

Councilmanic District B

Robert L. Frisch

Elected Member,

Councilmanic District A

Robert M. Tomback, Ph.D.

Superintendent of Schools

Panashe Mutombo

Student Representative

Board of Education of Harford County

Joseph A. Hau

Appointed Member-at-Large

Nancy Reynolds

Vice President, Appointed

Member-at-Large

Alysson L. Krchnavy


Francis F. Rick Grambo, III

President, Elected Member

Councilmanic District D

Thomas Fitzpatrick


James D. Thornton



4/25

HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATIONLEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENTS2013 GENERAL ASSEMBLY

GENERAL POSITIONS

Support local control of education policy and budget.

Support local control of appropriations and expenditures within budget categories.

Support full State and Federal funding for education.

Oppose any and all unfunded and underfunded State and Federal mandates.

OVERARCHING THEMES

Local Board Authority

Oppose any legislation which reduces the authority to local boards of education and/or superintendents to ef-fectively govern and administer public schools granted by law.

Oppose overriding the local boards authority to make nal determination in contact negotiations.

Budget and Education Funding

Support as a minimum requirement the current maintenance of effort as stipulated in the Education Article,Annotated Code of Maryland.

Support full funding of the Bridge to Excellence in Public Schools Act for Fiscal Year 2014 including increasedfunding to reect inationary increases in the cost of education.

Curriculum

Support local control of the number of minutes during the school day devoted to any subject area.

Oppose legislation requiring mandatory pre-kindergarten unless both the full operating and capital costs of theprogram are borne solely by the State of Maryland.

School Facilities

Support consistent State funding level for school construction and renovation projects

Support legislation or regulations to revise the States denition of eligible project costs to include architectural

engineering and site development costs.

Executive Summary


5/25

The 2013 Legislative Platform supports the Harford County Public Schools goals to prepare every student forsuccess in postsecondary education and a career and to encourage and monitor engagement between the schoolsystem and the community to support student achievement.

The Legislative Platform contains the legislative priorities adopted by the Board of Education of Harford County.These priorities are signicant to enhancement of public education and are likely, based on prior experiences, to

be considered during the 2013 General Assembly Session. A number of these subjects are also part of the federalgovernments education process.

Although there are signs of improvements in both the national and Maryland economic climate, it is widelyanticipated that a signicant portion of the 2013 Session will again involve the critical need to address another

challenging budgetary year. The economic downturn has continued to adversely affect tax revenues for all levels ofgovernment, resulting in the potential for less funding for public education activities and for local government aidto Marylands counties. Initial estimates indicated that the General Assembly will need to address a $638 million

structural decit for scal 2014 as indicated by the Spending Affordability Brieng (October 17, 2012). This was

the rst of three meetings to be held by the Committee, which will result in a scal policy recommendation to the

Governor and General Assembly for the scal 2014 State Budget.

Also, putting pressure on the States budget is the scal cliff which will be reached if Congress and the President

cant strike a deal by January 1, 2013 to avert a series of budget cuts in place by lawmakers and the Obamaadministration last year to resolve a standoff over the nations debt ceiling that threatened to put the nation intodefault. Through a process known as sequestration, automatic reductions would take effectcutting both military

and domestic spending. It is projected that Maryland would lose $117.6 million in Federal Funds if sequestration

takes effect according to the Maryland Department of Legislative Services (DLS). The economic impact would

be much greater. DLS warns that if the scenario known as going over the scal cliff plays out, Maryland could

lose 53,000 jobs during the budget year ending June 30 and 60,200 more next year. Therefore, the SpendingAffordability Committee and Maryland lawmakers on October 17 expressed concern that the federal problemscould throw the states plans into reverse at a time when the state economy seems to be improving and Maryland iscoming close to closing a long-term revenue shortfall.

The Harford County Board of Education and the Superintendent are committed to work diligently with Harford

Countys elected ofcials to ensure the continued delivery of excellent education opportunities for all of our

students. To enhance the education experiences in Harford County, we urge avoidance of unfunded mandates as

well as ineffective efforts to modify curriculum and instruction.

Introduction


6/25

The 2013 Legislative Program is an integral component of an overall strategy in support of Harford County PublicSchools vision, mission and goals.

VISION

Harford County Public Schools will be a community of learners in which our public schools, families, public of-cials, businesses, community organizations, and other citizens work collaboratively to prepare all of our students tosucceed academically and socially in a diverse, democratic, change-oriented, and global society.

MISSION

The mission of the Harford County Public Schools is to promote excellence in instructional leadership and teach-ing and to provide facilities and instructional materials that support teaching and learning for the 21st century. The

Harford County Board of Education will support this mission by fostering a climate for deliberate change andmonitoring progress through measurable indicators.

GOALS

GOAL 1: To prepare every student for success in postsecondary education and a career.

GOAL 2: To encourage and monitor engagement between the school system and the community to supportstudent achievement.

GOAL 3: To hire and support skilled staff who are committed to increasing student achievement.

GOAL 4: To provide safe, secure, and healthy learning environments that are conducive to effective teachingand learning.

Included in this document are legislative positions on issues signicant to public education in Harford County. We

are a goal-oriented organization, focused on increased academic rigor and increased access to challenging course

work for all children. The perspective presented herein reects this focus and is intended to assist our elected repre-sentatives during the 2013 General Assembly Session.

Individuals seeking further explanation or information are encouraged to contact Kathy Carmello, Facilitator ofGovernmental Relations, Harford County Public Schools at 410-809-6066 or [email protected].

Francis F. Grambo, III, President Robert M. Tomback, Ph.D., Superintendent of SchoolsBoard of Education of Harford County Harford County Public Schools

The Harford County Public School System does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, age, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, odisability in matters affecting employment or in providing access to programs. Inquiries related to the policies of the Board of Education of HarfordCounty should be directed to the Manager of Communications, 410-588-5203.

From the Harford County Board of Education


7/25

Compulsory Attendance ......................................................................................................................................................1

Curriculum and Assessments...............................................................................................................................................2

Federal Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act..........................................................................3

Federal Support of Public Education ..................................................................................................................................5

Funding of Excellence in Public Education ...................................... ..................................................................................7

Local School Board Authority/Governance ........................................................................................................................8

Maintenance of Effort ........................................................................................................................................................9

Parent and Community Involvement ..................................................................................................................................1

Public School Construction ................................................................................................................................................12

Retirement and Pension ....................................................................................................................................................13

School Nutrition and Health ............................................................................................................................................14

School and Student Safety .................................................................................................................................................15

Teachers and Instructional Personnel .................................................................................................................................16

Transportation .................................................................................................................................................................17

Harford County Public Schools

A.A. Roberty Building

102 S. Hickory Avenue

Bel Air, Maryland 21014

www.hcps.org

Table of Contents


8/25

After considering legislation

for more than a decade, the

Maryland General Assembly

passed Senate Bill 362

which phases in increases in

the age of compulsory school

attendance from 15 to 17

years old over a two year

period beginning with the

2015-2016 school year.

The new law furthers

requires a child under the

legal dropout age to return

to attendance at a public

school regularly during the

school year if the child is no

longer participating in GED

courses and has not obtained

a passing score on the GED

test that resulted in the

issuance of a Maryland high

school diploma.

The Harford County Board of Education is committed to providing a high-quality,world-class education that ensures success for every student through excellence inteaching and learning. A high-quality education is the fundamental right of everychild.

The decision to drop out of school can be life-changing. In our changing economy,workers need at least a high school diploma to compete in the workforce. A 2007

Maryland Task Force to Study Raising the Compulsory Public School AttendanceAge to 18 notes that students who drop out of high school face harsh futures,characterized by lower wages, disproportionate representation in prisons, and shorteroverall life spans.

While rising the compulsory age of attendance alone is not a silver bullet, it is critical

that our laws and policies limit the ease by which students can drop out of school.Additionally, any real or sustainable impact will take place only if requiring students

to stay in school beyond age 16 is accompanied by engaging instruction and personalsupports.

THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORTS:

An increased level of responsibility or duty on the behalf of the parent(s) or

legal guardian(s) for the disruptive or detrimental behavior of their student,

while acknowledging the continued responsibility of the school system to

intervene with strategies that will promote educational success.

Providing adequate supports to address the issues that cause students to leave

school.

Compulsory Attendance

1


9/25

2

Curriculum and Assessments

Maryland schools have achieved academic excellence that is nationally recognized.The program of studies in each school system is developed as a whole and islinked to State and local assessments. The authority to establish curriculum andassessments is better left with the State Board and local boards, the same entities

charged with the responsibility to research, investigate, and evaluate both thecurriculum and assessments. To seek repeatedly through legislation to interjectpiecemeal segments into the curriculum or to extract portions of the testing onlyserves to weaken the effectiveness of the entire educational program.

The Harford County Public Schools curricula is written, taught, and assessedcurricula in alignment with the Common Core State Standards and is guidedby a systemic teaching and learning framework utilizing a research-based set ofcomponents for instruction, incorporating Interstate Teacher Assessment andSupport Consortium for instructional standards.

The Harford County Board of Education believes curriculum must prepare allstudents to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Every student must have a

challenging instructional program, which is relevant and prepares each studentto enter the workforce or to continue his or her education. A school districtscurriculum should also address ethics, character and democratic principles. Theultimate decisions establishing curriculum must be made at the local level and suchcurriculum must be inclusive to educate the whole student.


Retaining decision-making authority at the local level. Maintaining the authority of local boards of education to determine educational

policy, curriculum, and administration.

THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION OPPOSES:

Any efforts by the General Assembly to legislate curriculum, rmly believing

that this role belongs to local boards of education in conjunction with the StateBoard.

Imposition of new or additional reporting requirements requiring additionalresource utilization.

In creating the State Board

and local boards of education,

the Maryland General

Assembly has delegatedto them the responsibility

for content standards and

curriculum. The State Board

establishes state standards and

the local boards adopt and

implement locally developed

programs with local funding

to ensure that these standards

are met. Local boards of

education can best balance

educational practices, availableresources, public input, and

accountability.

Currently, Maryland has

a state curriculum that all

school districts use as a guide

to developing its curriculum for

students. Legislation is often

introduced into the Maryland

Legislature as an attempt by

special interest groups to have

the content of local Maryland

public school system curriculum

mandated by state law.

Examples of this type of

legislation would be a measure

to authorize school personnel

to read or post in any public

school building specied

patriotic materials that may

contain religious references,

quotations, or illustrations.

Another example would be a

bill prohibiting a local board

of education from adopting

curricula or courses of study.


10/25

3

The Harford County Board of Education believes our students education is thesingle most important key to success for individuals and our nation in a global

economy. We have long talked about the need for equity and excellence in educationbut we have yet to live up to our rhetoric. In todays world, our ability to educateevery child to high standards is moral, democratic, and economic imperative. TheESEA reauthorization represents a great opportunity for a new vision and approachto achieve educational excellence and equity. We need to move beyond the importantyet narrow goal of No Child Left Behind to a goal of every child a graduateprepared with the knowledge and skills necessary to succeed in college andcareer as productive citizens of our diverse interconnected society and a globally-interconnected world.

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), also known as No

Child Left Behind (NCLB) has stalled in Congress. Both the House and Senate

committees that oversee education have passed legislation to reauthorize ESEA,and although not perfect, is a step in the right direction. However, because of thepartisan differences, the bills have not been brought to the oor.

Although the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) has issued waivers to 36

states, those waivers come with new requirements from DOE. The longer thereauthorization is delayed, the more those conditions will be locally phased-in,meaning that a delayed change of policy direction or priorities in the reauthorizationwill increasingly create unnecessary costs and confusion at the local level.

In the event the reauthorization will not be completed before the 112th Congressadjourns then the Board urges Congress, as an alternative, to enact legislation that

would provide temporary relief from the costly and burdensome sanctions againstschools and school districts. With the continued delays in reauthorizing ESEA, the

performance bar continues to riseresulting in more schools being subject to therestructuring sanctions that impose costly implementation problems. Not only arethe requirements unsound educationally, but also nanciallyat a time when school

districts are severely cutting their budgets.


Providing full funding, along with other federal assistance.

Programs critical to successfully achieving the goals of the law. State and local efforts to provide students with an education that is

appropriately focused on the skills and uses of knowledge needed for successin the global and technological world of the 21st century by funding multiple

education entities, including regional education entities, to develop modelstandards for voluntary adoption for those purposes.

The Congressional leadership

in both the U.S. House

of Representatives and the

U.S. Senate are beginning

the legislative process to

reauthorize the Elementary

and Secondary Education Act

(ESEA).

ESEA began in 1965 as

part of the War on Poverty,

providing additional funding to

states and districts to enhance

educational opportunities fordisadvantaged students. With

the Improving Americas

Schools Act of 1994, ESEA

transitioned toward promoting

standards-based reforms.

In 2002, the passage of

the No Child Left Behind

(NCLB) Act accelerated that

effort, establishing detailed

requirements for standards,

assessments, accountabilitydeterminations, school

improvement, data reporting,

and other areas, which apply

similarly across all states

and (in general) to all public

schools within the states.

Today, a new ESEA is

needed to encourage local

innovations in developing

effective policies that can

dramatically improve student

achievement and close

achievement gapsso that all

children graduate from high

school ready for college and

career.

Federal Reauthorization of the Elementary and SecondaryEducation Act (ESEA)


11/25

4

Increased investments in supports for disadvantaged students, as well as core foundations of standards-basedreform such as improved data systems and assessments, access to highly effective teachers and leaders, andsupports for underperforming districts and schools.

Investing heavily in improving teachers and leaders and evaluating the profession by funding ongoing qualityimprovement across the continuum of educator policiesfrom recruitment to preparation to induction toprofessional development to career pathways, etc.

Create a new literacy initiative formula program that spans birth through graduation and supports stateand school-based literacy efforts. Federal law should further fund corresponding high-quality professionaldevelopment of teachers aligned to this new initiative.

Enhance other core investments, including increased support for extended learning time and response tointervention, integration of community and student support services, increased use of technology to driveinnovative practices in teaching and learning, and increased access to effective curriculum and instruction,

including the expansion of broadband access. Facilitating strategic interventions that are designed at the local level and are targeted to students and schools

most in need, rather than impose ineffective and costly sanctions.

Investing in new models that keep students safe, supported, and healthy both in and out of school.

Providing assistance to states for the purpose of supporting local school districts in implementing commonstandards, such as support for professional development, curriculum alignment and course materials.

Focusing on teacher and leader effectiveness in improving student outcomes.

Strengthening pathways into teaching and school leadership positions in high-needs schools.

Requiring NCLB testing and reporting for non-public schools for students receiving Title I services.

Expanding access to and funding for high-quality, voluntary pre-kindergarten programs for all three andfour year olds by creating a new federal grant program, such as the Early Learning Challenge Fund, that willdevelop, expand, and enhance the quality of voluntary preschool programs.

ESEA continued...


12/25

5

Education programs face an

estimated cut of 7.8 percent

or more on January 1, 2013,

unless Congress takes action tocancel the budget cuts. These cuts

are scheduled to occur through

a process called sequestration.

Sequestration is dened as the

automatic, across-the-board

cancellation of budgetary

resources. It was put into place

as a government wide effort to cut

overall federal spending without

concern for priority investments

like education that are crucialto the long term success of the

nation, but are inconsequential in

relation to the federal budget.

SEQUESTRATION

Sequestration is a product of the Budget Control Act of 2011 that was enactedin August of 2011 as the result of negotiations between Congress and the

Administration to raise the national debt limit. In exchange for raising the nationaldebt limit, the law created a Joint Select Committee on Decit Reduction (called

the Supercommittee) that was tasked with developing a plan to produce a savings in

expenditures of $1.2 trillion by November 23, 2011. However, the Supercommitteewas unable to reach an agreement on how to enact the $1.2 trillion in cuts.Therefore, the Budget Control Act includes a provision stating that in lieu of anagreement or congressional passage of legislation by the Supercommittee, a series of

across-the-board budget cuts (also called sequestration) to both defense programs

and domestic programs, including education, will occur instead.

The Harford County Board of Education urges Congress to rescind sequestrationas these cuts would affect every school district and the millions of students they

educate. Many school systems have already implemented cuts commensurate tostate and local budget conditions. Any further cuts would result in larger class sizes,narrowing of the curriculum, and staff lay-offs. Ultimately, Congress can intervene

now and rescind the sequestration provision of the Budget Control Act before it isscheduled to become effective on January 2, 2013.

Apart from sequestration, Congress is considering the regular appropriations billwhich would determine the amount from which sequestration would be applied ifleft to stand.

HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION BELIEVES:

Congress should develop a balanced budget that protects education investmentsin lieu of the across-the-board cuts, also called sequestration, that are scheduledto occur in January because of the Budget Control Act. These cuts wouldaffect almost every school district and the millions of students they educate.Specically, the resulting $1.2 billion cut to Title I could mean denying funding

to nearly 4,000 schools serving more than 1.6 million disadvantaged students,based on estimates by the U.S. Department of Education.

Congress should not mandate school districts to implement specic

assessments, instruction, personnel policies or other requirements usingor asa condition of receivingfederal funds.

Federal Support of Public Education


13/25

6

Congress should increase and certainly preserve funding levels for special education (IDEA) and Title I grantsfor disadvantaged students. Reductions in these programs would be detrimental to our school districts andcommunities that are already experiencing severe budgetary challenges because of local and state economies.Further cuts to our public schools will further erode our efforts to close achievement gaps.

Any new responsibilities that result in unfunded or underfunded mandates will inevitably result in the loss ofprograms, jobs, or both at the local level. Every dollar in unfunded mandates must come from somewhere

else in the educational system, and could result in layoffs, larger class sizes, narrowing of the curriculum,elimination of after-school programs, and cuts to other program areas including areas of school food serviceitself.

Federal Support of Public Education continued...


14/25

7

Marylands Public Schools

are ranked Number One in

the nation. The Bridge to

Excellence in Public SchoolsAct of 2002 (BTE) represents

the resources invested to support

this achievement. Full funding

and reinstatement of the annual

ination factor is needed to

sustain successful programs and

services for our students.

The Harford County Board of Education is committed to improving student perfor-mance and closing the achievement gap. The 2013 session of the General Assemblywill consider numerous issues of profound importance to Marylands public schoolstudents and to the school employees who deliver the promise of a high quality pub-

lic education.

As required in the Bridge to Excellence Act, the target per pupil allocation was to

have been adjusted annually to reect changes in the Implicit Price Deator (IPD).

However, during the 2007 special session of the General Assembly the Governor

elected to remove the IPD in favor of at funding for school systems. This at

funding will continue as State budget language allows for no more than a 1% in-crease in the foundation formula.


Full commitment to the funding incorporated in the Bridge to Excellence Act

for Fiscal Year 2013 (Thornton Funding) including resumption of the annual

ination adjustment.

Additional funding to support efforts in special education, multi-cultural, giftedand talented and the arts.


Additional state mandates, unless accompanied by sufcient and ongoingstate

funding.

Unfunded mandates which diminish the ability of local school systems torespond to the unique needs and circumstances.

Reduction to the maintenance of effort provision.

Any further attempts to increase the local share of tuition for special educationstudents served in nonpublic schools.

Average Daily Attendance for calculation of education funding.

Funding of Excellence in Public Education


15/25

8

A basic premise of our nations

system of public education is that

public schools should be governed

locally. Nearly a century ago,the General Assembly through

statute, created 24 local boards

of education (one for each county

and the City of Baltimore),

the State Board of Education,

and the ofce of the State

Superintendent of Schools.

Maryland statute provides that

educational matters that affect

the counties shall be under the

control of a county board ofeducation and that local boards

determine, with the advice of

the county superintendent, the

educational policies of the county

school system. (4-101 and

4-108, Education Article).

While the General Assembly

has from time to time enacted

signicant education-related

legislation and funding initiatives,it has consistently delegated

the regular oversight of public

education to the State Board

and local boards of education

established specically to make

educational policy decisions.

The Harford County Board of Education believes effective reform takes place best

through cooperative planning within the local community rather than through top-down decisions. As decisions are made on the local level, local boards of educationreceive and rely on public input. The connection between neighborhoods and localpublic schools encourages participation by parents and other community membersin the education process so that everyone feels a responsibility for an ownershipof public education. By retaining decision-making authority at the local level, localboards of education can best balance educational practices, available resources toimplement those practices, public input, and accountability.

The Harford County Board of Education honors its legal duties and maintains anindependent and highly effective working relationship with the Superintendent, whoby law and operationally, must be appropriately enabled to manage the operationsof our school system. Our Board members are committed to continuing the effec-tive public dialog regarding all educational matters with all stakeholder groups andto ensure that the decision-making process considers all stakeholders input. Boardmembers communicate on a daily basis with citizens and other stakeholders by tele-phone, e-mails, and letters. Board members regularly attend numerous school and

community events that provide opportunities for regular dialogue with the public.


Local control of educational policy, curriculum, and administration.


Any legislative initiatives that have the effect of reducing or circumscribing localboard authority or which create unfunded mandates.

Any effort to change the appointment authority for local superintendents ofschools.

Local School Board Authority/Governance


16/25

9

Currently, more than 50%

of the funding for Marylands

public schools is provided by

local governments, requiring

school boards to rely heavily on

local governments to fund the

increasing costs of education.

State law requires that local

governments maintain their

education funding effort

from year to year on a per

pupil basis. This minimum

maintenance of effort

provision helps to ensure the

provision of a minimum localgovernment investment in

public schools.

The Harford County Board of Education believes that maintenance of effort is thecommitment that the local government makes to education.

The General Assembly provided for maintenance of effort (MOE) funding ofedu-

cation by local governments so as to ensure that all students receive the base fundingneeded for their education, irrespective of the economic situation, consistent withthe obligation to provide free and adequate public education under the Constitutionof Maryland.

Additionally, as stated in a 2009 Opinion of the Attorney General, by requiring aminimum level of local funding, the MOE requirement ensures that State policy

decisions to improve public education through enhanced nancial support are not

defeated by local funding decisions.

In 1996, the General Assembly amended the law to allow the State Board of Educa-tion to grant waivers of the maintenance of effort requirement to local governmentsThe new law also permitted local governments to exclude non-recurring costs fromthe maintenance of effort calculation or a one-time expenditure such as technologyequipment or textbooks.

In 2002, the General Assembly enacted the Bridge to Excellence in Public Schools

Act, which requires a signicant increase in state funding without modifying the

minimum maintenance of effort requirement for county governments. The Com-mission on Education, Finance, Equity and Excellence, which had proposed theBridge to Excellence Act, concluded in its report that meeting adequacy goalswillrequire that counties continue to exceed maintenance of effort. The Commission

report further stated that if counties provide increases in education funding compa-rable to the increases [in state funding], most school systems would meet or exceedadequacy goals

In 2005, a Maintenance of Effort Commission (the Commission) was established to

review the efforts of local governments in meeting and exceeding maintenance ofeffort requirements. The Commission reviewed the maintenance of effort formulato determine whether any modications should be made. In the nal report issued

in March 2007, the commission did not recommend any major changes to the cur-rent formula, although there was debate over what should be considered as a non-recurring cost.

With the economic climate in FY2009 and FY2010, local governments lost large

revenue. This caused the counties of Prince Georges, Montgomery, and Wicomico

to seek a waiver of maintenance of effort. The Maryland State Board of Educationdenied all of the waiver requests in 2009.

In 2010, Montgomery County and Wicomico County again sought maintenance of

effort waivers. This year, the State Board granted their waiver requests. However, theState Board ruling called for changes in the law and local boards of educations agree.

Maintenance of Effort (MOE)


17/25

10

In 2011, the BRFA limited the amount of any maintenance of effort penalty by providing that the penalty may not

be more than the net increase in State aid over scal year 2011, regardless of the fund source.

The BRFA also amended the Education Article to clarify that the minimum amount of education funding that may

be provided by a county is the local share of the foundation program, and that this amount is not subject to waiver.The BRFA also claried that maintenance of effort is not the minimum funding amount, but is the amount required

for a county to receive the annual increase in state education aid.

During the 2012 Legislative Session, the General Assembly enacted legislation to strengthen and enhance therequired local government funding level. This legislation eliminated the penalty that would have been imposedin FY2013 for failure to meet MOE funding for three counties, excludes debt service from the MOE calculation,

modied the waiver process and authorizes the State to withhold any MOE deciency amount from a Countys lo-cal income tax revenues, thereby ensuring the annual MOE funding level as a oor for the Countys appropriation to

the local Board.


Continuation of the current MOE processes and required local funding level, retaining the MOE level as the

local funding oor.

The Boards continued cooperative work with County Government to enhance local k-12 public educationfunding that is consistent with the adequacy goals involving a thorough and efcient education as incorporated

into the Thornton Commission Report.

A request for a waiver from MOE funding level should be the last resort for a local government to considerbecause of the potential for damaging the outstanding progress that has been made in K-12 education inHarford County.


Any legislation that would allow local governments to fund school systems in any manner that would beinconsistent with MOE requirements.

Any effort to diminish the enhancements made to the MOE process during the 2012 General AssemblySession.

MOE continued...


18/25

11

Te No Child Let BehindAct o 2001 requires thatparents are to be aordedsubstantial and meaningulopportunities to participatein the education o theirchildren.

While the Maryland StateBoard o Education setsbroad statewide policiesand mandates throughits regulations, it is theresponsibility o the localboard o education toestablish specic policies

and procedures or thepublic schools within itsjurisdiction. As decisionsare made at the locallevel, local school boardsreceive and rely on publicinput, on the premise thateective reorm takes placein a spirit o cooperativeplanning throughout thelocal community, ratherthan through top-downdecision making processes.

The Harford County Board of Education believes that meaningful parentinvolvement and the development of collaborative relationships between home

and school are critical to success for all students. When teachers and parents

communicate and share similar high and realistic expectations for student

achievement and behavior, students can be expected to learn more and performbetter in school.

The Harford County Board of Education recognizes that parent involvementsignicantly contributes to the achievement of academic standards by students

participating in district programs. The Board views the education of students asa cooperative effort among school, parents, and community. The Board furtherrecognizes that parents play an important role in a childs education. In recognizingthat role, the Board respects parents as partners in the decision-making process for

their childrens education.

Therefore, the Harford County Board of Education views the education ofstudents as a cooperative effort among school, parents, and community.


A comprehensive and effective system of parent and community involvementin its schools, the educational environment and education, generally.

Working with parents to become informed decision makers and effective

advocates for children.

The promotion and encouragement of meaningful partnerships among

schools, parents, families and communities so as to increase involvement andparticipation by all in promoting social, emotional and educational growth ofHCPS students.

Seeking and utilizing community resources so as to strengthen schools,families and student learning.

Parent and Community Involvement


19/25

12

Each year, the Harford County Board of Education, school staff, and community,review and analyze the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) for the Board to

establish priorities as it secures future funding. This review includes the status of

County and State funding levels from the previous scal year, the volume and status

of current approved capital projects, an analysis of enrollments and capacities, anda study of population growth within Harford County. In addition, informationobtained from system-wide building evaluations, a review of project categories, andthe infusion of technology into our facilities are considered.

The Harford County Board of Education Fiscal Year 2014 Capital Budget request of$62,169,168 provides funding for 44 projects.

The Fiscal Year 2014 Capital Budget requests $25,563,056 from the State, and

$36,606,112 from Harford County Government.

The State request for Fiscal Year 2014 includes $6,594,048 for the Youths Benet

Elementary School replacement. Local Planning is requested for Havre de GraceHigh School replacement.

In addition, the State request for Fiscal Year 2014 includes the following systemicprojects:

Magnolia Middle School HVAC, $2,649,000; North Harford Elementary SchoolHVAC, $1,098,390; Norrisville Elementary School HVAC, $1,736,000; George D.

Lisby Elementary School Roof Replacement, $434,000; Fallston High School HVAC$5,056,000; Joppatowne High School HVAC and other projects, $6,273,000; and the

Energy Efciency Initiative, $3,389,000.


Construction funding be increased, including special funding for aging schools,until the infrastructure needs of school systems are met.


Any further reduction to the State and local cost share formula.

The Public School

Construction Program was

created by the General

Assembly in 1971 to increase

the State participation in

school construction costs and

to equalize public school

facilities throughout the

State. The program of public

school construction has been

very successful, helping school

systems renovate and/or

replace older school buildings

and to build new schools to

address increases in studentenrollment.

The Harford County Public

Schools Department of

Planning and Construction

develops school facilities that

meet student population

and educational program

requirements.

Public School Construction


20/25

13

During the regular 2012

session, which ended on April

9, the General Assembly

passed the operating Budget

Bill (SB 150) but did not

pass the two remaining revenue

and budget reconciliation bills

that constituted the 2012

scal package even though

consensus had been reached by

Senate and House conference

committees on both bills.

The failure of SB 152

(Budget Reconciliation and

Financing Act of 2012) andSB 523(State and Local

Revenue Financing Act of

2012) triggered more than

$436.3 million in reductions

specied in the Budget Bill for

scal 2013, which had been

characterized earlier as the

doomsday budget without the

passage of the two remaining

scal bills.

Therefore, on Wednesday,

May 9, 2012, under

Article II, Section 16 of

the Maryland Constitution,

Governor Martin OMalley

issued Executive Order

01.01.2012.10. The

executive order called for a

special session of the General

Assembly to begin on Monday,

May 14, 2012 for the purposeof passing legislation to

address Marylands scal year

2013 budget.

In 2006, Maryland improved its teacher pension benets in order to be more

competitive nationally. Pension benets were improved retroactively on an

assumption of available funding. Subsequent decisions to fund this increase usingthe corridor method, coupled with the current economic downturn, have resulted in

pension system liabilities signicantly outpacing assets.

In 2011, the Governor and General Assembly made sweeping changes to the Stateteacher retirement system for all current and future employees, from increasingpension contributions by an additional 2%, effective July 1, 2011; to revising onesaverage nal retirement computation; to changing the time period to vest for

retirement; to revising cost-of-living adjustments, among other signicant changes.

However, the 2012 rst special session of the Maryland General Assembly saw

the passage of SB 1301 (Budget Reconciliation and Financing Act-BRFA) which

changed mandated spending formulas, increased revenues and the transfer of

employer costs for school employee pensions to the boards of education. TheBRFA transfers the employers normal share of the pension costs for public schoolemployees from the State to the school boards over four years, with the countiesrequired maintenance of effort (MOE) amount increasing each year by the additiona

pension costs during the phase-in period. The State will continue to maintainresponsibility for unfunded liabilities.


Any further change in funding responsibility for teacher retirement costs

that reduces teacher retirement payouts and increasing individual teacherresponsibility for retirement costs.

Any legislation that reduces funds available for pension funding.

Retirement and Pension


21/25

14

School Nutrition and Health

School nutrition is vitally

important in fostering a

healthy and positive learning

environment for children to

achieve their full potential.

The issue of nutritional health

and wellness has attracted

considerable attention in

the General Assembly as

well as Congress in recent

years, particularly as the

rate of childhood obesity has

increased. As a result, there

have been numerous attempts

at the state as well as thefederal level regulating the

types of foods sold in schools

to increase physical education

requirements.

The Harford County Board of Education believes in the importance of developinghealthy school environments, which includes meeting the nutritional needs ofstudents. Current federal laws already prohibit the sale of foods of minimalnutritional value during lunch periods. The Maryland State Department of

Education policies further enforce the federal requirements and, in addition,prohibit access to all vending machines until after the last lunch period. These stateand federal requirements, in conjunction with locally developed and implementedpolicies, appropriately ensure that public schools meet the nutritional needs ofstudents. The Maryland Meals for Achievement in-classroom breakfast program hasbeen credited with improving academics, behavior, and the well-being of students.


The state and federal requirements, in conjunction with locally developed and

implemented policies, in ensuring that public schools meet the nutritional needsof the students.

The continued funding of the Maryland Meals for Achievement Program.

The responsibility of implementing a physical education and wellness policy atthe local level so that the individual needs of each district can be addressed.

A physical education program aligned with the National Association for Sportand Physical Education (NASPE) standards.


Limiting the number of eligible schools from participation in Maryland Mealsfor Achievement.


22/25

15

School and Student Safety

Safety in public schools has

become increasingly important

to local boards of education

as threats to national and

community security have

taken on new meaning in

recent years. Educational

leaders must be included in

the continuing development

of a homeland security

plan. The pursuit of a safe

environment must be tempered

by a balanced emphasis on

the protection of individual

student rights.

Schools are among the most

important vehicles, together

with families, for providing

all children with an effective

educational opportunity and

supporting the growth and

development of every child.

Schools must seek to enhance

student learning by addressing

the intellectual, emotional

and physical safety needs

of students and staff. All

students deserve a quality

education that incorporates the

teaching of respect for others

and self, integrity, citizenship

and sense of commitment

and obligation to the school

and community. These

responsibilities are critical

components for developing

a safe and productive

environment in which all

students can learn and for

contributing to the vitality of

modern society.

The Harford County Board of Education believes all school personnel, boardmembers, parents, students and community agencies share a role in creating a safeand nurturing learning environment for all students and helping to raise a generationof youth who are respectful and responsible not only to themselves, but to others

within their school and community. Local boards of education must be vigilant indeveloping policies and procedures that assist teachers and administrators in creatinga safe learning environment that addresses every childs needs, and that embody thebelief that schools are designed to educate all young people.


Innovative initiatives and funding that speak to strategies that ensure a safeand secure learning and working environment for students and staff, includingthose that address gang prevention and involvement and promote targeted

interventions to reduce gang activity. State and local sharing or state assumption of costs associated with school

building alarms, cameras, and security technology in order to free school systemresources to address their core missionstudent achievement.

Incentive funding for local school systems to ensure safe and orderly school

environments through effective programs such as peer mediation, conict

resolution, character education, positive behavior intervention supports (PBIS),

and other proactive initiatives appropriate at the local school level.

A safe learning environment as the goal, but also recognizing that local boardsof education must identify and address the unique safety issues in their

jurisdictions.

Local exibility in creating and enforcing consistent and fair disciplinary

standards in handling infractions of the rules committed by individual students.

Continued cooperation among levels of government and across jurisdictionsaddressing the problems related to gang activity in Maryland.


Legislation which attempts to address student safety concerns and creates

unfunded mandates on local boards of education. Any legislation that would prohibit certain disciplinary actions, such as student

suspensions, thereby limiting the local boards authority to ensure the safety ofall students and staff.


23/25

16

The Harford County Board of Education believes that the quality of education isdirectly dependent on the quality of the teaching force. It is the goal of the elemen-tary and secondary public school system in Maryland to provide a high-quality educa-tion to every student. To do so requires an adequate supply of competent individuals

who are willing and able to serve as teachers. Districts and schools are constantly en-gaged in activities related to the recruitment and retention of their instructional staff.In the face of a growing school aged population, schools and districts must struggleto maintain standards for teaching quality while continuously recruiting bright newteachers and seeking to retain their most effective existing teachers.


Programs emphasizing competitive salaries and professional work environments

to attract and retain highly qualied teachers.

The goal of a highly qualied teacher in every classroom and exibility toestablish alternative entry routes into teaching to provide localities exibility in

hiring qualied persons, including career-changers, not formally prepared for

teaching careers.

Te dual goals o recruiting

and retaining eective

teachers are oten difcult

to realize because oinsufcient and sometimes

dwindling resources.

Current U.S. economic

conditions are causing

many states to roll back

their expenditures on public

education. Te people who

dispense ederal, state, and

local unds to education

will be hard-pressed to

determine which programsraise the quality o teaching

in the most cost-eective

manner.

Teachers and Instructional Personnel


24/25

17

Local boards of education

are responsible for funding

transportation provided to

students within the school

systems. Local school

systems responsibilities for

transporting students have

signicantly expanded due

to additional costs associated

with the transporting of

special education students.

Operational expenses

associated with fuel costs and

labor shortages have also

contributed to this increasedcost.

Harford County Public Schools provides both County owned and contracted busservice of nearly 40,000 miles per day. Additional mandates and specialized program

responsibilities for transporting students have signicantly expanded and as a result,

there are additional costs associated with the transporting of both special education

and other special program students.

THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF HARFORD COUNTY SUPPORTS:

Full funding for the student transportation provisions of the Bridge toExcellence Act so that increases in public school transportation costs do notprevent local boards from meeting other funding responsibilities.

State and local funding for student transportation sufcient to support any

expanded student transportation responsibilities and costs arising from thefederal No Child Left Behind Acts various student transfer options.

THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF HARFORD COUNTY OPPOSES:

Legislation proposing new unfunded safety mandates, focusing instead onsecuring adequate funding to enable local school systems to ensure maximumstudent safety according to industry standards.

Transportation


25/25

Documents

2013LegislativePlatform Final 010313.pdf