Board of Education of Harford County

Legislative Platform

2013

Board of Education of Harford County

Francis F. Rick Grambo, III

President, Elected Member Councilmanic District D

Nancy Reynolds
Vice President, Appointed Member-at-Large

Alysson L. Krchnavy
Appointed Member-at-Large

Joseph A. Hau
Appointed Member-at-Large

Thomas Fitzpatrick
Appointed Member-at-Large

James D. Thornton
Appointed Member-at-Large

Robert L. Frisch
Elected Member, Councilmanic District A

Cassandra R. Beverley
Elected Member, Councilmanic District B

Panashe Mutombo
Student Representative

Robert M. Tomback, Ph.D.

Superintendent of Schools

Executive Summary
HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION LEGISLATIVE POSITION STATEMENTS 2013 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 effectively govern and administer public schools granted by law. Oppose overriding the local boards authority to make final 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 increased funding to reflect inflationary 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 the program 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 definition of eligible project costs to include architectural, engineering and site development costs.

Introduction
The 2013 Legislative Platform supports the Harford County Public Schools goals to prepare every student for success in postsecondary education and a career and to encourage and monitor engagement between the school system 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 significant 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 federal governments education process. Although there are signs of improvements in both the national and Maryland economic climate, it is widely anticipated that a significant 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 of government, resulting in the potential for less funding for public education activities and for local government aid to Marylands counties. Initial estimates indicated that the General Assembly will need to address a $638 million structural deficit for fiscal 2014 as indicated by the Spending Affordability Briefing (October 17, 2012). This was the first of three meetings to be held by the Committee, which will result in a fiscal policy recommendation to the Governor and General Assembly for the fiscal 2014 State Budget. Also, putting pressure on the States budget is the fiscal 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 Obama administration last year to resolve a standoff over the nations debt ceiling that threatened to put the nation into default. 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 fiscal cliff plays out, Maryland could lose 53,000 jobs during the budget year ending June 30 and 60,200 more next year. Therefore, the Spending Affordability Committee and Maryland lawmakers on October 17 expressed concern that the federal problems could throw the states plans into reverse at a time when the state economy seems to be improving and Maryland is coming 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 officials 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.

From the Harford County Board of Education

The 2013 Legislative Program is an integral component of an overall strategy in support of Harford County Public Schools vision, mission and goals. VISION Harford County Public Schools will be a community of learners in which our public schools, families, public officials, businesses, community organizations, and other citizens work collaboratively to prepare all of our students to succeed 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 teaching 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 and monitoring 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 support student 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 teaching and learning. Included in this document are legislative positions on issues significant 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 reflects this focus and is intended to assist our elected representatives during the 2013 General Assembly Session. Individuals seeking further explanation or information are encouraged to contact Kathy Carmello, Facilitator of Governmental Relations, Harford County Public Schools at 410-809-6066 or Kathy.Carmello@hcps.org.

Francis F. Grambo, III, President Board of Education of Harford County

Robert M. Tomback, Ph.D., Superintendent of Schools 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, or disability in matters affecting employment or in providing access to programs. Inquiries related to the policies of the Board of Education of Harford County should be directed to the Manager of Communications, 410-588-5203.

Table of Contents
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 ..................................................................................................................................11 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

Compulsory Attendance
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 in teaching and learning. A high-quality education is the fundamental right of every child. 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 Attendance Age to 18 notes that students who drop out of high school face harsh futures, characterized by lower wages, disproportionate representation in prisons, and shorter overall 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 personal supports. 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.

Curriculum and Assessments

In creating the State Board and local boards of education, the Maryland General Assembly has delegated to 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, available resources, 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 specified 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.

Maryland schools have achieved academic excellence that is nationally recognized. The program of studies in each school system is developed as a whole and is linked to State and local assessments. The authority to establish curriculum and assessments is better left with the State Board and local boards, the same entities charged with the responsibility to research, investigate, and evaluate both the curriculum and assessments. To seek repeatedly through legislation to interject piecemeal segments into the curriculum or to extract portions of the testing only serves to weaken the effectiveness of the entire educational program. The Harford County Public Schools curricula is written, taught, and assessed curricula in alignment with the Common Core State Standards and is guided by a systemic teaching and learning framework utilizing a research-based set of components for instruction, incorporating Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium for instructional standards. The Harford County Board of Education believes curriculum must prepare all students to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Every student must have a challenging instructional program, which is relevant and prepares each student to enter the workforce or to continue his or her education. A school districts curriculum should also address ethics, character and democratic principles. The ultimate decisions establishing curriculum must be made at the local level and such curriculum must be inclusive to educate the whole student. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORTS: 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, firmly believing that this role belongs to local boards of education in conjunction with the State Board. Imposition of new or additional reporting requirements requiring additional resource utilization.

Federal Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)

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 for disadvantaged 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, accountability determinations, 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.

The Harford County Board of Education believes our students education is the single 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 education, but we have yet to live up to our rhetoric. In todays world, our ability to educate every child to high standards is moral, democratic, and economic imperative. The ESEA reauthorization represents a great opportunity for a new vision and approach to achieve educational excellence and equity. We need to move beyond the important yet narrow goal of No Child Left Behind to a goal of every child a graduate prepared with the knowledge and skills necessary to succeed in college and career as productive citizens of our diverse interconnected society and a globallyinterconnected 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 the partisan differences, the bills have not been brought to the floor. Although the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) has issued waivers to 36 states, those waivers come with new requirements from DOE. The longer the reauthorization is delayed, the more those conditions will be locally phased-in, meaning that a delayed change of policy direction or priorities in the reauthorization will increasingly create unnecessary costs and confusion at the local level. In the event the reauthorization will not be completed before the 112th Congress adjourns then the Board urges Congress, as an alternative, to enact legislation that would provide temporary relief from the costly and burdensome sanctions against schools and school districts. With the continued delays in reauthorizing ESEA, the performance bar continues to riseresulting in more schools being subject to the restructuring sanctions that impose costly implementation problems. Not only are the requirements unsound educationally, but also financiallyat a time when school districts are severely cutting their budgets. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORTS: 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 success in the global and technological world of the 21st century by funding multiple education entities, including regional education entities, to develop model standards for voluntary adoption for those purposes.

ESEA continued...

Increased investments in supports for disadvantaged students, as well as core foundations of standards-based reform such as improved data systems and assessments, access to highly effective teachers and leaders, and supports for underperforming districts and schools. Investing heavily in improving teachers and leaders and evaluating the profession by funding ongoing quality improvement across the continuum of educator policiesfrom recruitment to preparation to induction to professional development to career pathways, etc. Create a new literacy initiative formula program that spans birth through graduation and supports state and school-based literacy efforts. Federal law should further fund corresponding high-quality professional development of teachers aligned to this new initiative. Enhance other core investments, including increased support for extended learning time and response to intervention, integration of community and student support services, increased use of technology to drive innovative 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 common standards, 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 and four year olds by creating a new federal grant program, such as the Early Learning Challenge Fund, that will develop, expand, and enhance the quality of voluntary preschool programs.

Federal Support of Public Education

Education programs face an estimated cut of 7.8 percent or more on January 1, 2013, unless Congress takes action to cancel the budget cuts. These cuts are scheduled to occur through a process called sequestration. Sequestration is defined 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 crucial to 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 enacted in August of 2011 as the result of negotiations between Congress and the Administration to raise the national debt limit. In exchange for raising the national debt limit, the law created a Joint Select Committee on Deficit 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 Supercommittee was 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 an agreement 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 sequestration as these cuts would affect every school district and the millions of students they educate. Many school systems have already implemented cuts commensurate to state 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 is scheduled to become effective on January 2, 2013. Apart from sequestration, Congress is considering the regular appropriations bill which would determine the amount from which sequestration would be applied if left to stand. HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION BELIEVES: Congress should develop a balanced budget that protects education investments, in lieu of the across-the-board cuts, also called sequestration, that are scheduled to occur in January because of the Budget Control Act. These cuts would affect almost every school district and the millions of students they educate. Specifically, 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 specific assessments, instruction, personnel policies or other requirements usingor as a condition of receivingfederal funds.

Federal Support of Public Education continued...

Congress should increase and certainly preserve funding levels for special education (IDEA) and Title I grants for disadvantaged students. Reductions in these programs would be detrimental to our school districts and communities 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 of programs, 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 service itself.

Funding of Excellence in Public Education

Marylands Public Schools are ranked Number One in the nation. The Bridge to Excellence in Public Schools Act of 2002 (BTE) represents the resources invested to support this achievement. Full funding and reinstatement of the annual inflation factor is needed to sustain successful programs and services for our students.

The Harford County Board of Education is committed to improving student performance and closing the achievement gap. The 2013 session of the General Assembly will consider numerous issues of profound importance to Marylands public school students and to the school employees who deliver the promise of a high quality public education. As required in the Bridge to Excellence Act, the target per pupil allocation was to have been adjusted annually to reflect changes in the Implicit Price Deflator (IPD). However, during the 2007 special session of the General Assembly the Governor elected to remove the IPD in favor of flat funding for school systems. This flat funding will continue as State budget language allows for no more than a 1% increase in the foundation formula. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORTS: Full commitment to the funding incorporated in the Bridge to Excellence Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Thornton Funding) including resumption of the annual inflation adjustment. Additional funding to support efforts in special education, multi-cultural, gifted and talented and the arts. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION OPPOSES: Additional state mandates, unless accompanied by sufficient and ongoing state funding. Unfunded mandates which diminish the ability of local school systems to respond 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 education students served in nonpublic schools. Average Daily Attendance for calculation of education funding.

Local School Board Authority/Governance

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 office 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 of education 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 significant 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 specifically 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 topdown decisions. As decisions are made on the local level, local boards of education receive and rely on public input. The connection between neighborhoods and local public schools encourages participation by parents and other community members in the education process so that everyone feels a responsibility for an ownership of public education. By retaining decision-making authority at the local level, local boards of education can best balance educational practices, available resources to implement those practices, public input, and accountability. The Harford County Board of Education honors its legal duties and maintains an independent and highly effective working relationship with the Superintendent, who by law and operationally, must be appropriately enabled to manage the operations of our school system. Our Board members are committed to continuing the effective public dialog regarding all educational matters with all stakeholder groups and to ensure that the decision-making process considers all stakeholders input. Board members communicate on a daily basis with citizens and other stakeholders by telephone, e-mails, and letters. Board members regularly attend numerous school and community events that provide opportunities for regular dialogue with the public. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORTS: Local control of educational policy, curriculum, and administration. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION OPPOSES: Any legislative initiatives that have the effect of reducing or circumscribing local board authority or which create unfunded mandates. Any effort to change the appointment authority for local superintendents of schools.

Maintenance of Effort (MOE)

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 local government investment in public schools.

The Harford County Board of Education believes that maintenance of effort is the commitment that the local government makes to education. The General Assembly provided for maintenance of effort (MOE) funding of education by local governments so as to ensure that all students receive the base funding needed for their education, irrespective of the economic situation, consistent with the obligation to provide free and adequate public education under the Constitution of Maryland. Additionally, as stated in a 2009 Opinion of the Attorney General, by requiring a minimum level of local funding, the MOE requirement ensures that State policy decisions to improve public education through enhanced financial support are not defeated by local funding decisions. In 1996, the General Assembly amended the law to allow the State Board of Education to grant waivers of the maintenance of effort requirement to local governments. The new law also permitted local governments to exclude non-recurring costs from the maintenance of effort calculation or a one-time expenditure such as technology equipment or textbooks. In 2002, the General Assembly enacted the Bridge to Excellence in Public Schools Act, which requires a significant increase in state funding without modifying the minimum maintenance of effort requirement for county governments. The Commission on Education, Finance, Equity and Excellence, which had proposed the Bridge to Excellence Act, concluded in its report that meeting adequacy goalswill require that counties continue to exceed maintenance of effort. The Commission report further stated that if counties provide increases in education funding comparable to the increases [in state funding], most school systems would meet or exceed adequacy goals In 2005, a Maintenance of Effort Commission (the Commission) was established to review the efforts of local governments in meeting and exceeding maintenance of effort requirements. The Commission reviewed the maintenance of effort formula to determine whether any modifications should be made. In the final report issued in March 2007, the commission did not recommend any major changes to the current formula, although there was debate over what should be considered as a nonrecurring 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 Education denied 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, the State Board ruling called for changes in the law and local boards of educations agree.

MOE continued...
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 fiscal 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 clarified 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 the required local government funding level. This legislation eliminated the penalty that would have been imposed in FY2013 for failure to meet MOE funding for three counties, excludes debt service from the MOE calculation, modified the waiver process and authorizes the State to withhold any MOE deficiency amount from a Countys local income tax revenues, thereby ensuring the annual MOE funding level as a floor for the Countys appropriation to the local Board. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORTS: Continuation of the current MOE processes and required local funding level, retaining the MOE level as the local funding floor. The Boards continued cooperative work with County Government to enhance local k-12 public education funding that is consistent with the adequacy goals involving a thorough and efficient 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 consider because of the potential for damaging the outstanding progress that has been made in K-12 education in Harford County. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION OPPOSES: Any legislation that would allow local governments to fund school systems in any manner that would be inconsistent with MOE requirements. Any effort to diminish the enhancements made to the MOE process during the 2012 General Assembly Session.

10

Parent and Community Involvement

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 requires that parents are to be afforded substantial and meaningful opportunities to participate in the education of their children. While the Maryland State Board of Education sets broad statewide policies and mandates through its regulations, it is the responsibility of the local board of education to establish specific policies and procedures for the public schools within its jurisdiction. As decisions are made at the local level, local school boards receive and rely on public input, on the premise that effective reform takes place in a spirit of cooperative planning throughout the local community, rather than through top-down decision making processes.

The Harford County Board of Education believes that meaningful parent involvement 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 perform better in school. The Harford County Board of Education recognizes that parent involvement significantly contributes to the achievement of academic standards by students participating in district programs. The Board views the education of students as a cooperative effort among school, parents, and community. The Board further recognizes that parents play an important role in a childs education. In recognizing that 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 of students as a cooperative effort among school, parents, and community. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORTS: A comprehensive and effective system of parent and community involvement in 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 and participation by all in promoting social, emotional and educational growth of HCPS students. Seeking and utilizing community resources so as to strengthen schools, families and student learning.

11

Public School Construction

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 student enrollment. The Harford County Public Schools Department of Planning and Construction develops school facilities that meet student population and educational program requirements.

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 fiscal year, the volume and status of current approved capital projects, an analysis of enrollments and capacities, and a study of population growth within Harford County. In addition, information obtained from system-wide building evaluations, a review of project categories, and the 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 Benefit Elementary School replacement. Local Planning is requested for Havre de Grace High School replacement. In addition, the State request for Fiscal Year 2014 includes the following systemic projects: Magnolia Middle School HVAC, $2,649,000; North Harford Elementary School HVAC, $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 Efficiency Initiative, $3,389,000. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORTS: Construction funding be increased, including special funding for aging schools, until the infrastructure needs of school systems are met. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION OPPOSES: Any further reduction to the State and local cost share formula.

12

Retirement and Pension

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 fiscal 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) and SB 523(State and Local Revenue Financing Act of 2012) triggered more than $436.3 million in reductions specified in the Budget Bill for fiscal 2013, which had been characterized earlier as the doomsday budget without the passage of the two remaining fiscal 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 purpose of passing legislation to address Marylands fiscal year 2013 budget.

In 2006, Maryland improved its teacher pension benefits in order to be more competitive nationally. Pension benefits were improved retroactively on an assumption of available funding. Subsequent decisions to fund this increase using the corridor method, coupled with the current economic downturn, have resulted in pension system liabilities significantly outpacing assets. In 2011, the Governor and General Assembly made sweeping changes to the State teacher retirement system for all current and future employees, from increasing pension contributions by an additional 2%, effective July 1, 2011; to revising ones average final retirement computation; to changing the time period to vest for retirement; to revising cost-of-living adjustments, among other significant changes. However, the 2012 first 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. The BRFA transfers the employers normal share of the pension costs for public school employees from the State to the school boards over four years, with the counties required maintenance of effort (MOE) amount increasing each year by the additional pension costs during the phase-in period. The State will continue to maintain responsibility for unfunded liabilities. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION OPPOSES: Any further change in funding responsibility for teacher retirement costs that reduces teacher retirement payouts and increasing individual teacher responsibility for retirement costs. Any legislation that reduces funds available for pension funding.

13

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 the federal 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 developing healthy school environments, which includes meeting the nutritional needs of students. Current federal laws already prohibit the sale of foods of minimal nutritional 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 state and federal requirements, in conjunction with locally developed and implemented policies, appropriately ensure that public schools meet the nutritional needs of students. The Maryland Meals for Achievement in-classroom breakfast program has been credited with improving academics, behavior, and the well-being of students. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORTS: The state and federal requirements, in conjunction with locally developed and implemented policies, in ensuring that public schools meet the nutritional needs of the students. The continued funding of the Maryland Meals for Achievement Program. The responsibility of implementing a physical education and wellness policy at the local level so that the individual needs of each district can be addressed. A physical education program aligned with the National Association for Sport and Physical Education (NASPE) standards. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION OPPOSES: Limiting the number of eligible schools from participation in Maryland Meals for Achievement.

14

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, board members, parents, students and community agencies share a role in creating a safe and nurturing learning environment for all students and helping to raise a generation of 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 in developing policies and procedures that assist teachers and administrators in creating a safe learning environment that addresses every childs needs, and that embody the belief that schools are designed to educate all young people. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORTS: Innovative initiatives and funding that speak to strategies that ensure a safe and secure learning and working environment for students and staff, including those 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 system resources 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, conflict 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 boards of education must identify and address the unique safety issues in their jurisdictions. Local flexibility 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 jurisdictions addressing the problems related to gang activity in Maryland. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION OPPOSES: 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 of all students and staff.

15

Teachers and Instructional Personnel

The dual goals of recruiting and retaining effective teachers are often difficult to realize because of insufficient and sometimes dwindling resources. Current U.S. economic conditions are causing many states to roll back their expenditures on public education. The people who dispense federal, state, and local funds to education will be hard-pressed to determine which programs raise the quality of teaching in the most cost-effective manner.

The Harford County Board of Education believes that the quality of education is directly dependent on the quality of the teaching force. It is the goal of the elementary and secondary public school system in Maryland to provide a high-quality education 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 engaged 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 struggle to maintain standards for teaching quality while continuously recruiting bright new teachers and seeking to retain their most effective existing teachers. THE HARFORD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORTS: Programs emphasizing competitive salaries and professional work environments to attract and retain highly qualified teachers. The goal of a highly qualified teacher in every classroom and flexibility to establish alternative entry routes into teaching to provide localities flexibility in hiring qualified persons, including career-changers, not formally prepared for teaching careers.

16

Transportation
Local boards of education are responsible for funding transportation provided to students within the school systems. Local school systems responsibilities for transporting students have significantly 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 increased cost.

Harford County Public Schools provides both County owned and contracted bus service of nearly 40,000 miles per day. Additional mandates and specialized program responsibilities for transporting students have significantly 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 to Excellence Act so that increases in public school transportation costs do not prevent local boards from meeting other funding responsibilities. State and local funding for student transportation sufficient to support any expanded student transportation responsibilities and costs arising from the federal 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 on securing adequate funding to enable local school systems to ensure maximum student safety according to industry standards.

17