Dec 18th: FY 2026 Recommended Operating Budget

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a lot of disproportion in the resources that are allotted to special ed programs. Bridge programs typically have advocates and litigious parents with money, and therefore, get more staffing and smaller class sizes. They also have an exclusive RTSE for their program even though the total amount of students in HS Bridge programs is less than 50. Compare that to SCB and LFI - they share a RTSE with LAD. It’s not fair and no one listens when teachers voice their concerns.

Programs like Bridge work BECAUSE they have more staffing and smaller class sizes. I say that as a parent who tried and failed to get my kid into that program.

Well good for Bridge students and their families! What about students in LFI, SCB, Classic Autism who are understaffed and struggling? Why don’t they get the same ratios that Bridge students receive?

[Anonymous]

Curious to know if school-level budgets are public information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Expensive benefits? You are living in the past! Teachers now have crappy Kaiser or crappy Cigna, and pay more for either than ever before. And, pensions are significantly less- have to do the old 401ks just like everybody else. Sure, once you hit 15/20 years and pay for your own Masters it isn't too bad, but have you seen the numbers of how many new teachers don't even make it to give years? Teaching is in crisis

What's wrong with Cigna PPO? Cigna has a pretty good network and the copays are pretty low.

What's exceptional, though, is the employee cost care. It's rare for the empployer to pay 83-88% of the premiums. That includes paying for 83% of vision and dental coverage. You're not going to see that many places. Feds, for instance, don't get subsidized dental or vision coverage. There are group plans, but employees have to pay the full premiums.

Dental and vision are much worse than before. Just had an eye exam (in network). I need glasses (progressives) for the first time in my life. I chose the cheapest frame and still had to pay $390. I am a para, have been with MCPS for five years and, after taxes and insurance premiums, my weekly take home pay is about $320-$375 depending on how many no work no pay days and unpaid holidays we have (teachers get paid but paras do not). At my school, all paras except one have Bachelor’s degrees and many have Master’s. We work with (babysit) students with extreme behavior needs, many of whom need more support than possible in a regular classroom setting but MCPS refuses these students alternative placements (throwing chairs, flipping desks, hitting adults and classmates, cussing out staff). It’s not uncommon to find out as we walk in the building that we are needed to cover classes because there are no subs but still have to work our regular lunch and recess duty schedule (unlike a traditional sub, we don’t get a “break” when the kids go to specials and lunch/recess), and deal with what has become a Lord of the Flies situation during recess. 90% of the paras at my school collectively spend SO MUCH emotional energy encouraging and empowering our students, mitigating unsafe behaviors, and making sure kids feel safe and loved (the other 10% do their job but do not go above and beyond)…all for a couple hundred dollars a week.

I am a former teacher and would love to go back into teaching if I wouldn’t have to start at the bottom of the salary scale. The highest paid teachers at my school do the least amount of work. At my Title 1 school, the teachers making the least amount of money (based on MCPS service years) are the most enthusiastic, energetic, creative, and go above and beyond for the kids. These are not just young teachers but also career changers.

I agree compensation needs to be reevaluated but more needs to be included other than simply years of service within Montgomery County. The insurance / benefits were great my first two years with the county but now I believe the health insurance is average and the dental and vision are much worse. And yes, with my experience and qualifications, I could get another job that pays more (and likely will need to if the system doesn’t change), but I have stayed because I do believe the work I am doing makes a difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where in the budget are they listed? I didn’t see anything specific - meaning broken down into which programs and which level (ES, MS, HS, or special program). The budget did not look specific to me.

Many SPED positions, especially paras legally needed for one to one, follow student needs. If a school has incoming SPED students whose IEP calls for 1 to 1 para support, the para is needed at that school at that grade. Right now there are so few paras that this legal need is not being met. MCPS is dodging being sued by stating they are trying and unable to fill these legally required positions and so should not be liable. But, this excuse will only last so many years. Please ask questions about this on the SPED forum if you are unfamiliar with the issue, it is shameful.

Instead of just thinking of SPED classrooms and programs, where yes the need for a certain number of teachers and paras is linked to school/grade, think of mainstreamed SPED kids who are in regular classes for either all or a part of their day. This is where the bulk of the para hires are needed. If you think of the number of schools in MCPS then the number of hires is actually low. And again, currently SPED kids whose IEPs (legally required accommodations) call for 1 to 1 para support, are going without and the excuse provided being no paras are available despite MCPS hiring for these positions. So, yes something needs to be done to attract staff to these legally required positions.

Also, currently MCPS is having trouble staffing with SPED teachers its programs and is having to pay for expensive outsourcing to private schools. Part of the issue at MCPS is retention. Having more paras in the SPED classrooms to support teachers would lower the burden on SPED teachers. Again please go on SPED forums to see the extent of this issue.

Agree with the PP and want to add that MCPS has denied approving 1:1 para support for MANY of our students who clearly need this to function in a mainstream classroom. We have several low functioning autistic students, some needing toileting and some who have limited verbal communication abilities. Central office specialists have stated these elementary school students are likely unable to obtain a hs degree and can strive towards a completion certificate BUT ARE FINE REMAINING IN A GENERAL ED CLASSROOM without 1:1 support.

As a result, admin is forced to unofficially allocate a regular para position as a 1:1 in order for the teacher to be able to simply teach. This reduces the number of paras able to support the support the teacher as designed, which in turn means students who need academic support or lower levels of behavior support are not getting the help they need to thrive. I’ll be the first to acknowledge it’s ridiculous that MSDE has dinged MCPS for having too many SpEd students in self contained classrooms but MCPS absolutely needs to do more advocating against this stipulation. You can’t arbitrarily designate a number or percentage of students who need or don’t need to be in a self-contained classroom - you need to look at the individual needs of the students and look at the absurd amount of data we are forced to collect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Expensive benefits? You are living in the past! Teachers now have crappy Kaiser or crappy Cigna, and pay more for either than ever before. And, pensions are significantly less- have to do the old 401ks just like everybody else. Sure, once you hit 15/20 years and pay for your own Masters it isn't too bad, but have you seen the numbers of how many new teachers don't even make it to give years? Teaching is in crisis

What's wrong with Cigna PPO? Cigna has a pretty good network and the copays are pretty low.

What's exceptional, though, is the employee cost care. It's rare for the empployer to pay 83-88% of the premiums. That includes paying for 83% of vision and dental coverage. You're not going to see that many places. Feds, for instance, don't get subsidized dental or vision coverage. There are group plans, but employees have to pay the full premiums.

Dental and vision are much worse than before. Just had an eye exam (in network). I need glasses (progressives) for the first time in my life. I chose the cheapest frame and still had to pay $390. I am a para, have been with MCPS for five years and, after taxes and insurance premiums, my weekly take home pay is about $320-$375 depending on how many no work no pay days and unpaid holidays we have (teachers get paid but paras do not). At my school, all paras except one have Bachelor’s degrees and many have Master’s. We work with (babysit) students with extreme behavior needs, many of whom need more support than possible in a regular classroom setting but MCPS refuses these students alternative placements (throwing chairs, flipping desks, hitting adults and classmates, cussing out staff). It’s not uncommon to find out as we walk in the building that we are needed to cover classes because there are no subs but still have to work our regular lunch and recess duty schedule (unlike a traditional sub, we don’t get a “break” when the kids go to specials and lunch/recess), and deal with what has become a Lord of the Flies situation during recess. 90% of the paras at my school collectively spend SO MUCH emotional energy encouraging and empowering our students, mitigating unsafe behaviors, and making sure kids feel safe and loved (the other 10% do their job but do not go above and beyond)…all for a couple hundred dollars a week.

I am a former teacher and would love to go back into teaching if I wouldn’t have to start at the bottom of the salary scale. The highest paid teachers at my school do the least amount of work. At my Title 1 school, the teachers making the least amount of money (based on MCPS service years) are the most enthusiastic, energetic, creative, and go above and beyond for the kids. These are not just young teachers but also career changers.

I agree compensation needs to be reevaluated but more needs to be included other than simply years of service within Montgomery County. The insurance / benefits were great my first two years with the county but now I believe the health insurance is average and the dental and vision are much worse. And yes, with my experience and qualifications, I could get another job that pays more (and likely will need to if the system doesn’t change), but I have stayed because I do believe the work I am doing makes a difference.

Costco and a few other places take vision insurance and are much cheaper for progressives.

What they pay para's is appalling! We had a para (who was great and better than the teacher) teach for a few months when they couldn't get a sub and we wished we could have kept her all year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where in the budget are they listed? I didn’t see anything specific - meaning broken down into which programs and which level (ES, MS, HS, or special program). The budget did not look specific to me.

Many SPED positions, especially paras legally needed for one to one, follow student needs. If a school has incoming SPED students whose IEP calls for 1 to 1 para support, the para is needed at that school at that grade. Right now there are so few paras that this legal need is not being met. MCPS is dodging being sued by stating they are trying and unable to fill these legally required positions and so should not be liable. But, this excuse will only last so many years. Please ask questions about this on the SPED forum if you are unfamiliar with the issue, it is shameful.

Instead of just thinking of SPED classrooms and programs, where yes the need for a certain number of teachers and paras is linked to school/grade, think of mainstreamed SPED kids who are in regular classes for either all or a part of their day. This is where the bulk of the para hires are needed. If you think of the number of schools in MCPS then the number of hires is actually low. And again, currently SPED kids whose IEPs (legally required accommodations) call for 1 to 1 para support, are going without and the excuse provided being no paras are available despite MCPS hiring for these positions. So, yes something needs to be done to attract staff to these legally required positions.

Also, currently MCPS is having trouble staffing with SPED teachers its programs and is having to pay for expensive outsourcing to private schools. Part of the issue at MCPS is retention. Having more paras in the SPED classrooms to support teachers would lower the burden on SPED teachers. Again please go on SPED forums to see the extent of this issue.

Agree with the PP and want to add that MCPS has denied approving 1:1 para support for MANY of our students who clearly need this to function in a mainstream classroom. We have several low functioning autistic students, some needing toileting and some who have limited verbal communication abilities. Central office specialists have stated these elementary school students are likely unable to obtain a hs degree and can strive towards a completion certificate BUT ARE FINE REMAINING IN A GENERAL ED CLASSROOM without 1:1 support.

As a result, admin is forced to unofficially allocate a regular para position as a 1:1 in order for the teacher to be able to simply teach. This reduces the number of paras able to support the support the teacher as designed, which in turn means students who need academic support or lower levels of behavior support are not getting the help they need to thrive. I’ll be the first to acknowledge it’s ridiculous that MSDE has dinged MCPS for having too many SpEd students in self contained classrooms but MCPS absolutely needs to do more advocating against this stipulation. You can’t arbitrarily designate a number or percentage of students who need or don’t need to be in a self-contained classroom - you need to look at the individual needs of the students and look at the absurd amount of data we are forced to collect.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Curious to know if school-level budgets are public information.

Super included them in his materials for the proposed budget.

[Anonymous]

What part of the budget includes weapons detection systems?