Why can't MCPS get it together like the other MD school districts?

[Anonymous]

As Hogan vetos the starting before Labor Day, all the MCPS families seem to have such issue with this. It seems like MCPS makes the bigger deal of this and is always complaining to the state. Not just about this, but snow days in previous years, and of course the funding. It just seems to be a thing with MCPS residents.

How can a county that is so against the lack of increased state funding, be so against increasing the economy in tourist areas like OCMD, Deep Creek, Inner Harbor, etc.. by delaying school until after Labor Day.

How come they never mention that state funding (which is only 23% of budget) has increased to MCPS more than their own county funding (which is 67% of budget.) A county who overbuilds, overtaxes with piggyback taxes and increases residential taxes, but yet never can seem to find the money to build more schools or help the over populated schools. Always blaming the state, yet has no issue with building brand new schools in Potomac like Beverly Farms, Potomac, and Wayside. All which are under 80% enrolled and projections to be under 70% enrolled in 5 years. Cold Spring ES is under 75% enrolled and that is with the gifted program in it. Yet, the Rockville district about a mile up the street are at capacity and will be going over capacity again in the next 5 years. And will Crown ever be built? I am not holding my breath. Poolesville HS is dilapidated, literally. No one seems to care they have filthy broken bathrooms out of order, leaks and electrical issues all over the school. It hasn't been modernized in over 40 years. Tell me why again, these Potomac ES need these huge brand new schools again? Why are we blaming the state again for our financial and budget issues?

Other districts have no issue getting snow waivers in previous years as they showed the state the attempts they made to change their calendar. MCPS does nothing to change the calendar and then whines on all local news stations how stingy the state is being with snow waivers. And all the MCPS jump on the bandwagon. Not mad that their own idiotic school board can not figure out other means of snow make-up days, but that the state didn't give the same waivers to the only district that didn't try anything else but whining.

And as for the calendar everyone is complaining about. That is also the work of your idiotic board. Trying to manipulate pity among families and trying to rip apart our county by placing blame on "Jewish holidays or Spring Break." And once again, everyone jumps in so upset about Hogan not letting our school district make all their decisions. I for one am glad our board doesn't have final say. In 2016, they were going to start 2 WEEKS before Labor Day to get in every darn day they wanted off. Basically 4 days a week of school more than half the year. No care that families have to work and one day daycare multiple times a month, is much more expensive than 1 week extra of summer care.

And why can FCPS easily switch an early dismissal to a late start or vice versa if need be, but MCPS has their hands tied?

Why can PG county still have a full Spring break this calendar year, but we can not.

How can Frederick and Howard both have calendars that go to June 20th, but we can not.


It just seems that all MCPS does is complain. They seem incapable of change, incapable of working WITH the state. Incapable of funding their own county and keeping all kids in safe schools. Not just the rich ones. They have no problem overbuilding and overtaxing, but never seem to have enough money for the schools.

Isn't it time we stop pointing to the state for our issues and start looking at our own county as the problem?

[Anonymous]

Yeah. They need to get it together like Baltimore City. Oh, wait.

[Anonymous]

If you have so many ideas, maybe you should run for BOE.

[Anonymous]

The bill passed the General Assembly with a veto-proof majority. Montgomery County didn't do that by itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The bill passed the General Assembly with a veto-proof majority. Montgomery County didn't do that by itself.

Exactly.

[Anonymous]

I think you have the "grass is always greener on the other side" mentality. Not saying MCPS doesn't have issues, and I'm annoyed by the short spring break, too, or that parents shouldn't demand better, but the "how come they can..." attitude is not looking at the whole picture.

How come HCPS can rezone every couple of years but mcps can't? How come HoCo and PGC can have higher property taxes than MoCo?

See? We can play the "how come" game all day.

[Anonymous]

OP, there are so many things wrong with your post, I don't even know where to begin. Do you have any evidence that the post-Labor day start time is improving the Maryland economy? My impression is that it's simply lining the pockets of a tiny set of businesses who are reliable Hogan donors. Why are those businesses so much more important than other Maryland businesses that the school calendar is designed around them? How do you balance any potential benefit to the Maryland economy (for which there is no evidence that I've seen) against the lack of instructional time high school students get relative to their peers across the country who start school in August, yet take the same AP exams in May (and roughly 75% of high school students in MoCo do take at least 1 AP exam?) Why don't you provide some actual proof that the schedule constraints that Hogan places that you're so passionate about are actually beneficial?

[Anonymous]

Why did other counties get the waiver and mcps didn’t? Did you see the letter hogan wrote in response? It was obnoxious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, there are so many things wrong with your post, I don't even know where to begin. Do you have any evidence that the post-Labor day start time is improving the Maryland economy? My impression is that it's simply lining the pockets of a tiny set of businesses who are reliable Hogan donors. Why are those businesses so much more important than other Maryland businesses that the school calendar is designed around them? How do you balance any potential benefit to the Maryland economy (for which there is no evidence that I've seen) against the lack of instructional time high school students get relative to their peers across the country who start school in August, yet take the same AP exams in May (and roughly 75% of high school students in MoCo do take at least 1 AP exam?) Why don't you provide some actual proof that the schedule constraints that Hogan places that you're so passionate about are actually beneficial?

But those potential classroom benefits come into conflict with the economic realities of states like Michigan, where the later start date has meant a boost of over $20 million in tourism dollars, according to a 2016 analysis by the Anderson Economic Group. In addition to added revenue from things like hotel rooms, many of the businesses catering to tourists rely on high-school students to pick up the slack, according to the study. Those same businesses are left short-staffed when classes resume prior to the busy Labor Day weekend, the study concluded.

For a 2012 study, researchers at the University of Minnesota looked at school calendars in five states, and concluded that starting classes after Labor Day meant a 50 percent bump in families taking at least one trip—quantified as two nights or more away from home—in the months of August or September.

Worcester County, for example, recently completed a more than $40 million renovation of Snow Hill High School, a project that simply would not have been possible without the support of taxes generated in Ocean City. Tourism and education in Maryland are now, and always have been, partners.

A 2013 report by the comptroller’s office, completed before Governor Hogan took office, estimated a post-Labor Day school start would generate an “additional $74.3 million in direct economic activity, including $3.7 million in new wages and a separate $7.7 million in state and local revenue.” The positive impact on Maryland’s economy is undeniable, and that’s a good thing.But, and this is critical, no matter how good it may be for the economy, Maryland’s tourism community would never support this or any policy if it was found to be detrimental to the educational outcomes in our schools. The tourism community firmly believes education should be among our state's highest priorities. In 2013 a bipartisan task force appointed by then Gov. Martin O’Malley overwhelmingly favored statewide post-Labor Day school after carefully studying the issue for many months. They concluded that such a policy would not hurt Maryland students, and so far, no statistical data has proven otherwise. Despite a few anecdotal stories, the negative impact predicted by those who opposed post-Labor Day school has not materialized.

Starting school after Labor Day is reasonable public policy that strengthens our economy without negatively impacting the quality of our educational system. It is supported by nearly 70 percent of Marylanders, according to 2016 polling.

Katie Hellebush, the director of government relations for the Virginia Hospitality and Travel Association (VHTA) in 2012, also justified efforts to start school after Labor Day, saying, "We have conducted studies, and we do anticipate that there would be a significant loss in terms of $369 million, which would include more than $104 million in wages and benefits lost." That loss of revenue includes not tourist dollars, but dollars (and tax dollars) targeted to teen jobs. Hellebush noted that while tourist dollars suffer with an earlier school start date, education test scores did not decline with a later school start date.

Michigan also touts tourism as the reason for a later start date. In 2012, the Michigan Lodging and Tourism Association (MLTA) reported that tourism dollars have increased each year since a new school start date policy took effect in 2006.

In my state of Pennsylvania, a 2006 push to make school start dates later failed. In a state heavily dependent on travel and tourism (it generates more than $40 billion each year and supports nearly half a million jobs), a later school start date should equal more revenue. A 2013 study found that Pennsylvania would benefit by $378 million in direct net revenue from moving the school start date to after Labor Day.

Robert Scott, Texas education commissioner from 2007 to 2012, said a later school start in his state has not compromised education excellence. “Since the fourth Monday in August became law, we were seeing better student performance,” Scott said. “Dropout rates improved. Graduation rates were at an all-time high. Texas students outperformed the ACT national average in math and science scores, and K-12 calendars were better aligned with college and university calendars. This allowed more high school students to take college-level courses, simultaneously earning both high school and college level credits.”

The 10 states recording the highest ACT scores all begin school the last week of August or later, he said.


Ohioans also want greater uniformity in school start dates across the state. The variance in starting dates creates hardships for extended and divided families to plan time together. Comments also expressed that lack of uniformity is confusing for both drivers and truancy officers.Other top reasons for support of a later school start included:

Inability for students to secure summer jobs and internships over the summer
More family time
Lower school utility costs
Inability for teachers to pursue advanced degrees and additional training over the summer.

In the short-term there are legitimate concerns over protecting a community’s economic engine, something he sees play out in his southern Maine hometown, where the bulk of many families’ annual earnings take place in the summer months when tourism is in full swing. When school resumes, local restaurants have long lines outside and empty tables inside because of a lack of help, Tucker said.

In 2016, the start date was August 22nd. In 2017, the start date will be August 28th. The law, which took e?ect with the beginning of the 2007-2008 school year, restored approximately three weeks to the summer vacation period that had been lost when many schools were starting their school years earlier and earlier, some as early as the ?rst week in August. In addition to restoring a more traditional, family summer vacation period, research* conducted by noted economist Dr. Ray Perryman shows, should the school start date be moved up, even by one week, the impacts to Texas' economy will be devastating and result in a loss of:

5,872 permanent jobs
$42 million in state tax revenues
$16.3 million in local tax revenues
$805 million in total expenditures
$432 million in gross state product
$261 million in personal income

[Anonymous]

Source, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, there are so many things wrong with your post, I don't even know where to begin. Do you have any evidence that the post-Labor day start time is improving the Maryland economy? My impression is that it's simply lining the pockets of a tiny set of businesses who are reliable Hogan donors. Why are those businesses so much more important than other Maryland businesses that the school calendar is designed around them? How do you balance any potential benefit to the Maryland economy (for which there is no evidence that I've seen) against the lack of instructional time high school students get relative to their peers across the country who start school in August, yet take the same AP exams in May (and roughly 75% of high school students in MoCo do take at least 1 AP exam?) Why don't you provide some actual proof that the schedule constraints that Hogan places that you're so passionate about are actually beneficial?

But those potential classroom benefits come into conflict with the economic realities of states like Michigan, where the later start date has meant a boost of over $20 million in tourism dollars, according to a 2016 analysis by the Anderson Economic Group. In addition to added revenue from things like hotel rooms, many of the businesses catering to tourists rely on high-school students to pick up the slack, according to the study. Those same businesses are left short-staffed when classes resume prior to the busy Labor Day weekend, the study concluded.

For a 2012 study, researchers at the University of Minnesota looked at school calendars in five states, and concluded that starting classes after Labor Day meant a 50 percent bump in families taking at least one trip—quantified as two nights or more away from home—in the months of August or September.

Worcester County, for example, recently completed a more than $40 million renovation of Snow Hill High School, a project that simply would not have been possible without the support of taxes generated in Ocean City. Tourism and education in Maryland are now, and always have been, partners.

A 2013 report by the comptroller’s office, completed before Governor Hogan took office, estimated a post-Labor Day school start would generate an “additional $74.3 million in direct economic activity, including $3.7 million in new wages and a separate $7.7 million in state and local revenue.” The positive impact on Maryland’s economy is undeniable, and that’s a good thing.But, and this is critical, no matter how good it may be for the economy, Maryland’s tourism community would never support this or any policy if it was found to be detrimental to the educational outcomes in our schools. The tourism community firmly believes education should be among our state's highest priorities. In 2013 a bipartisan task force appointed by then Gov. Martin O’Malley overwhelmingly favored statewide post-Labor Day school after carefully studying the issue for many months. They concluded that such a policy would not hurt Maryland students, and so far, no statistical data has proven otherwise. Despite a few anecdotal stories, the negative impact predicted by those who opposed post-Labor Day school has not materialized.

Starting school after Labor Day is reasonable public policy that strengthens our economy without negatively impacting the quality of our educational system. It is supported by nearly 70 percent of Marylanders, according to 2016 polling.

Katie Hellebush, the director of government relations for the Virginia Hospitality and Travel Association (VHTA) in 2012, also justified efforts to start school after Labor Day, saying, "We have conducted studies, and we do anticipate that there would be a significant loss in terms of $369 million, which would include more than $104 million in wages and benefits lost." That loss of revenue includes not tourist dollars, but dollars (and tax dollars) targeted to teen jobs. Hellebush noted that while tourist dollars suffer with an earlier school start date, education test scores did not decline with a later school start date.

Michigan also touts tourism as the reason for a later start date. In 2012, the Michigan Lodging and Tourism Association (MLTA) reported that tourism dollars have increased each year since a new school start date policy took effect in 2006.

In my state of Pennsylvania, a 2006 push to make school start dates later failed. In a state heavily dependent on travel and tourism (it generates more than $40 billion each year and supports nearly half a million jobs), a later school start date should equal more revenue. A 2013 study found that Pennsylvania would benefit by $378 million in direct net revenue from moving the school start date to after Labor Day.

Robert Scott, Texas education commissioner from 2007 to 2012, said a later school start in his state has not compromised education excellence. “Since the fourth Monday in August became law, we were seeing better student performance,” Scott said. “Dropout rates improved. Graduation rates were at an all-time high. Texas students outperformed the ACT national average in math and science scores, and K-12 calendars were better aligned with college and university calendars. This allowed more high school students to take college-level courses, simultaneously earning both high school and college level credits.”

The 10 states recording the highest ACT scores all begin school the last week of August or later, he said.


Ohioans also want greater uniformity in school start dates across the state. The variance in starting dates creates hardships for extended and divided families to plan time together. Comments also expressed that lack of uniformity is confusing for both drivers and truancy officers.Other top reasons for support of a later school start included:

Inability for students to secure summer jobs and internships over the summer
More family time
Lower school utility costs
Inability for teachers to pursue advanced degrees and additional training over the summer.

In the short-term there are legitimate concerns over protecting a community’s economic engine, something he sees play out in his southern Maine hometown, where the bulk of many families’ annual earnings take place in the summer months when tourism is in full swing. When school resumes, local restaurants have long lines outside and empty tables inside because of a lack of help, Tucker said.

In 2016, the start date was August 22nd. In 2017, the start date will be August 28th. The law, which took e?ect with the beginning of the 2007-2008 school year, restored approximately three weeks to the summer vacation period that had been lost when many schools were starting their school years earlier and earlier, some as early as the ?rst week in August. In addition to restoring a more traditional, family summer vacation period, research* conducted by noted economist Dr. Ray Perryman shows, should the school start date be moved up, even by one week, the impacts to Texas' economy will be devastating and result in a loss of:

5,872 permanent jobs
$42 million in state tax revenues
$16.3 million in local tax revenues
$805 million in total expenditures
$432 million in gross state product
$261 million in personal income

Try reading the material you post. You've not shown any evidence that the policy has had a positive change in Maryland, just some random estimates from Hogan hoping that revenues will go up and some random non-peer reviewed studies from other states. And if you're quoting Texas noted economist Dr. Ray Perryman, you should check out his website, which makes it clear that he's an economist for hire for lobbying groups.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, there are so many things wrong with your post, I don't even know where to begin. Do you have any evidence that the post-Labor day start time is improving the Maryland economy? My impression is that it's simply lining the pockets of a tiny set of businesses who are reliable Hogan donors. Why are those businesses so much more important than other Maryland businesses that the school calendar is designed around them? How do you balance any potential benefit to the Maryland economy (for which there is no evidence that I've seen) against the lack of instructional time high school students get relative to their peers across the country who start school in August, yet take the same AP exams in May (and roughly 75% of high school students in MoCo do take at least 1 AP exam?) Why don't you provide some actual proof that the schedule constraints that Hogan places that you're so passionate about are actually beneficial?

But those potential classroom benefits come into conflict with the economic realities of states like Michigan, where the later start date has meant a boost of over $20 million in tourism dollars, according to a 2016 analysis by the Anderson Economic Group. In addition to added revenue from things like hotel rooms, many of the businesses catering to tourists rely on high-school students to pick up the slack, according to the study. Those same businesses are left short-staffed when classes resume prior to the busy Labor Day weekend, the study concluded.

For a 2012 study, researchers at the University of Minnesota looked at school calendars in five states, and concluded that starting classes after Labor Day meant a 50 percent bump in families taking at least one trip—quantified as two nights or more away from home—in the months of August or September.

Worcester County, for example, recently completed a more than $40 million renovation of Snow Hill High School, a project that simply would not have been possible without the support of taxes generated in Ocean City. Tourism and education in Maryland are now, and always have been, partners.

A 2013 report by the comptroller’s office, completed before Governor Hogan took office, estimated a post-Labor Day school start would generate an “additional $74.3 million in direct economic activity, including $3.7 million in new wages and a separate $7.7 million in state and local revenue.” The positive impact on Maryland’s economy is undeniable, and that’s a good thing.But, and this is critical, no matter how good it may be for the economy, Maryland’s tourism community would never support this or any policy if it was found to be detrimental to the educational outcomes in our schools. The tourism community firmly believes education should be among our state's highest priorities. In 2013 a bipartisan task force appointed by then Gov. Martin O’Malley overwhelmingly favored statewide post-Labor Day school after carefully studying the issue for many months. They concluded that such a policy would not hurt Maryland students, and so far, no statistical data has proven otherwise. Despite a few anecdotal stories, the negative impact predicted by those who opposed post-Labor Day school has not materialized.

Starting school after Labor Day is reasonable public policy that strengthens our economy without negatively impacting the quality of our educational system. It is supported by nearly 70 percent of Marylanders, according to 2016 polling.

Katie Hellebush, the director of government relations for the Virginia Hospitality and Travel Association (VHTA) in 2012, also justified efforts to start school after Labor Day, saying, "We have conducted studies, and we do anticipate that there would be a significant loss in terms of $369 million, which would include more than $104 million in wages and benefits lost." That loss of revenue includes not tourist dollars, but dollars (and tax dollars) targeted to teen jobs. Hellebush noted that while tourist dollars suffer with an earlier school start date, education test scores did not decline with a later school start date.

Michigan also touts tourism as the reason for a later start date. In 2012, the Michigan Lodging and Tourism Association (MLTA) reported that tourism dollars have increased each year since a new school start date policy took effect in 2006.

In my state of Pennsylvania, a 2006 push to make school start dates later failed. In a state heavily dependent on travel and tourism (it generates more than $40 billion each year and supports nearly half a million jobs), a later school start date should equal more revenue. A 2013 study found that Pennsylvania would benefit by $378 million in direct net revenue from moving the school start date to after Labor Day.

Robert Scott, Texas education commissioner from 2007 to 2012, said a later school start in his state has not compromised education excellence. “Since the fourth Monday in August became law, we were seeing better student performance,” Scott said. “Dropout rates improved. Graduation rates were at an all-time high. Texas students outperformed the ACT national average in math and science scores, and K-12 calendars were better aligned with college and university calendars. This allowed more high school students to take college-level courses, simultaneously earning both high school and college level credits.”

The 10 states recording the highest ACT scores all begin school the last week of August or later, he said.


Ohioans also want greater uniformity in school start dates across the state. The variance in starting dates creates hardships for extended and divided families to plan time together. Comments also expressed that lack of uniformity is confusing for both drivers and truancy officers.Other top reasons for support of a later school start included:

Inability for students to secure summer jobs and internships over the summer
More family time
Lower school utility costs
Inability for teachers to pursue advanced degrees and additional training over the summer.

In the short-term there are legitimate concerns over protecting a community’s economic engine, something he sees play out in his southern Maine hometown, where the bulk of many families’ annual earnings take place in the summer months when tourism is in full swing. When school resumes, local restaurants have long lines outside and empty tables inside because of a lack of help, Tucker said.

In 2016, the start date was August 22nd. In 2017, the start date will be August 28th. The law, which took e?ect with the beginning of the 2007-2008 school year, restored approximately three weeks to the summer vacation period that had been lost when many schools were starting their school years earlier and earlier, some as early as the ?rst week in August. In addition to restoring a more traditional, family summer vacation period, research* conducted by noted economist Dr. Ray Perryman shows, should the school start date be moved up, even by one week, the impacts to Texas' economy will be devastating and result in a loss of:

5,872 permanent jobs
$42 million in state tax revenues
$16.3 million in local tax revenues
$805 million in total expenditures
$432 million in gross state product
$261 million in personal income

Try reading the material you post. You've not shown any evidence that the policy has had a positive change in Maryland, just some random estimates from Hogan hoping that revenues will go up and some random non-peer reviewed studies from other states. And if you're quoting Texas noted economist Dr. Ray Perryman, you should check out his website, which makes it clear that he's an economist for hire for lobbying groups.

+1 And note the poster carefully deleted the part in the article that talked about the academic benefits of an earlier start date.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, there are so many things wrong with your post, I don't even know where to begin. Do you have any evidence that the post-Labor day start time is improving the Maryland economy? My impression is that it's simply lining the pockets of a tiny set of businesses who are reliable Hogan donors. Why are those businesses so much more important than other Maryland businesses that the school calendar is designed around them? How do you balance any potential benefit to the Maryland economy (for which there is no evidence that I've seen) against the lack of instructional time high school students get relative to their peers across the country who start school in August, yet take the same AP exams in May (and roughly 75% of high school students in MoCo do take at least 1 AP exam?) Why don't you provide some actual proof that the schedule constraints that Hogan places that you're so passionate about are actually beneficial?

But those potential classroom benefits come into conflict with the economic realities of states like Michigan, where the later start date has meant a boost of over $20 million in tourism dollars, according to a 2016 analysis by the Anderson Economic Group. In addition to added revenue from things like hotel rooms, many of the businesses catering to tourists rely on high-school students to pick up the slack, according to the study. Those same businesses are left short-staffed when classes resume prior to the busy Labor Day weekend, the study concluded.

For a 2012 study, researchers at the University of Minnesota looked at school calendars in five states, and concluded that starting classes after Labor Day meant a 50 percent bump in families taking at least one trip—quantified as two nights or more away from home—in the months of August or September.

Worcester County, for example, recently completed a more than $40 million renovation of Snow Hill High School, a project that simply would not have been possible without the support of taxes generated in Ocean City. Tourism and education in Maryland are now, and always have been, partners.

A 2013 report by the comptroller’s office, completed before Governor Hogan took office, estimated a post-Labor Day school start would generate an “additional $74.3 million in direct economic activity, including $3.7 million in new wages and a separate $7.7 million in state and local revenue.” The positive impact on Maryland’s economy is undeniable, and that’s a good thing.But, and this is critical, no matter how good it may be for the economy, Maryland’s tourism community would never support this or any policy if it was found to be detrimental to the educational outcomes in our schools. The tourism community firmly believes education should be among our state's highest priorities. In 2013 a bipartisan task force appointed by then Gov. Martin O’Malley overwhelmingly favored statewide post-Labor Day school after carefully studying the issue for many months. They concluded that such a policy would not hurt Maryland students, and so far, no statistical data has proven otherwise. Despite a few anecdotal stories, the negative impact predicted by those who opposed post-Labor Day school has not materialized.

Starting school after Labor Day is reasonable public policy that strengthens our economy without negatively impacting the quality of our educational system. It is supported by nearly 70 percent of Marylanders, according to 2016 polling.

Katie Hellebush, the director of government relations for the Virginia Hospitality and Travel Association (VHTA) in 2012, also justified efforts to start school after Labor Day, saying, "We have conducted studies, and we do anticipate that there would be a significant loss in terms of $369 million, which would include more than $104 million in wages and benefits lost." That loss of revenue includes not tourist dollars, but dollars (and tax dollars) targeted to teen jobs. Hellebush noted that while tourist dollars suffer with an earlier school start date, education test scores did not decline with a later school start date.

Michigan also touts tourism as the reason for a later start date. In 2012, the Michigan Lodging and Tourism Association (MLTA) reported that tourism dollars have increased each year since a new school start date policy took effect in 2006.

In my state of Pennsylvania, a 2006 push to make school start dates later failed. In a state heavily dependent on travel and tourism (it generates more than $40 billion each year and supports nearly half a million jobs), a later school start date should equal more revenue. A 2013 study found that Pennsylvania would benefit by $378 million in direct net revenue from moving the school start date to after Labor Day.

Robert Scott, Texas education commissioner from 2007 to 2012, said a later school start in his state has not compromised education excellence. “Since the fourth Monday in August became law, we were seeing better student performance,” Scott said. “Dropout rates improved. Graduation rates were at an all-time high. Texas students outperformed the ACT national average in math and science scores, and K-12 calendars were better aligned with college and university calendars. This allowed more high school students to take college-level courses, simultaneously earning both high school and college level credits.”

The 10 states recording the highest ACT scores all begin school the last week of August or later, he said.


Ohioans also want greater uniformity in school start dates across the state. The variance in starting dates creates hardships for extended and divided families to plan time together. Comments also expressed that lack of uniformity is confusing for both drivers and truancy officers.Other top reasons for support of a later school start included:

Inability for students to secure summer jobs and internships over the summer
More family time
Lower school utility costs
Inability for teachers to pursue advanced degrees and additional training over the summer.

In the short-term there are legitimate concerns over protecting a community’s economic engine, something he sees play out in his southern Maine hometown, where the bulk of many families’ annual earnings take place in the summer months when tourism is in full swing. When school resumes, local restaurants have long lines outside and empty tables inside because of a lack of help, Tucker said.

In 2016, the start date was August 22nd. In 2017, the start date will be August 28th. The law, which took e?ect with the beginning of the 2007-2008 school year, restored approximately three weeks to the summer vacation period that had been lost when many schools were starting their school years earlier and earlier, some as early as the ?rst week in August. In addition to restoring a more traditional, family summer vacation period, research* conducted by noted economist Dr. Ray Perryman shows, should the school start date be moved up, even by one week, the impacts to Texas' economy will be devastating and result in a loss of:

5,872 permanent jobs
$42 million in state tax revenues
$16.3 million in local tax revenues
$805 million in total expenditures
$432 million in gross state product
$261 million in personal income

Try reading the material you post. You've not shown any evidence that the policy has had a positive change in Maryland, just some random estimates from Hogan hoping that revenues will go up and some random non-peer reviewed studies from other states. And if you're quoting Texas noted economist Dr. Ray Perryman, you should check out his website, which makes it clear that he's an economist for hire for lobbying groups.

+1 And note the poster carefully deleted the part in the article that talked about the academic benefits of an earlier start date.

We don’t even know the source because the Pp didn’t post it. It could be from a tourism lobbying group magazine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, there are so many things wrong with your post, I don't even know where to begin. Do you have any evidence that the post-Labor day start time is improving the Maryland economy? My impression is that it's simply lining the pockets of a tiny set of businesses who are reliable Hogan donors. Why are those businesses so much more important than other Maryland businesses that the school calendar is designed around them? How do you balance any potential benefit to the Maryland economy (for which there is no evidence that I've seen) against the lack of instructional time high school students get relative to their peers across the country who start school in August, yet take the same AP exams in May (and roughly 75% of high school students in MoCo do take at least 1 AP exam?) Why don't you provide some actual proof that the schedule constraints that Hogan places that you're so passionate about are actually beneficial?

But those potential classroom benefits come into conflict with the economic realities of states like Michigan, where the later start date has meant a boost of over $20 million in tourism dollars, according to a 2016 analysis by the Anderson Economic Group. In addition to added revenue from things like hotel rooms, many of the businesses catering to tourists rely on high-school students to pick up the slack, according to the study. Those same businesses are left short-staffed when classes resume prior to the busy Labor Day weekend, the study concluded.

For a 2012 study, researchers at the University of Minnesota looked at school calendars in five states, and concluded that starting classes after Labor Day meant a 50 percent bump in families taking at least one trip—quantified as two nights or more away from home—in the months of August or September.

Worcester County, for example, recently completed a more than $40 million renovation of Snow Hill High School, a project that simply would not have been possible without the support of taxes generated in Ocean City. Tourism and education in Maryland are now, and always have been, partners.

A 2013 report by the comptroller’s office, completed before Governor Hogan took office, estimated a post-Labor Day school start would generate an “additional $74.3 million in direct economic activity, including $3.7 million in new wages and a separate $7.7 million in state and local revenue.” The positive impact on Maryland’s economy is undeniable, and that’s a good thing.But, and this is critical, no matter how good it may be for the economy, Maryland’s tourism community would never support this or any policy if it was found to be detrimental to the educational outcomes in our schools. The tourism community firmly believes education should be among our state's highest priorities. In 2013 a bipartisan task force appointed by then Gov. Martin O’Malley overwhelmingly favored statewide post-Labor Day school after carefully studying the issue for many months. They concluded that such a policy would not hurt Maryland students, and so far, no statistical data has proven otherwise. Despite a few anecdotal stories, the negative impact predicted by those who opposed post-Labor Day school has not materialized.

Starting school after Labor Day is reasonable public policy that strengthens our economy without negatively impacting the quality of our educational system. It is supported by nearly 70 percent of Marylanders, according to 2016 polling.

Katie Hellebush, the director of government relations for the Virginia Hospitality and Travel Association (VHTA) in 2012, also justified efforts to start school after Labor Day, saying, "We have conducted studies, and we do anticipate that there would be a significant loss in terms of $369 million, which would include more than $104 million in wages and benefits lost." That loss of revenue includes not tourist dollars, but dollars (and tax dollars) targeted to teen jobs. Hellebush noted that while tourist dollars suffer with an earlier school start date, education test scores did not decline with a later school start date.

Michigan also touts tourism as the reason for a later start date. In 2012, the Michigan Lodging and Tourism Association (MLTA) reported that tourism dollars have increased each year since a new school start date policy took effect in 2006.

In my state of Pennsylvania, a 2006 push to make school start dates later failed. In a state heavily dependent on travel and tourism (it generates more than $40 billion each year and supports nearly half a million jobs), a later school start date should equal more revenue. A 2013 study found that Pennsylvania would benefit by $378 million in direct net revenue from moving the school start date to after Labor Day.

Robert Scott, Texas education commissioner from 2007 to 2012, said a later school start in his state has not compromised education excellence. “Since the fourth Monday in August became law, we were seeing better student performance,” Scott said. “Dropout rates improved. Graduation rates were at an all-time high. Texas students outperformed the ACT national average in math and science scores, and K-12 calendars were better aligned with college and university calendars. This allowed more high school students to take college-level courses, simultaneously earning both high school and college level credits.”

The 10 states recording the highest ACT scores all begin school the last week of August or later, he said.


Ohioans also want greater uniformity in school start dates across the state. The variance in starting dates creates hardships for extended and divided families to plan time together. Comments also expressed that lack of uniformity is confusing for both drivers and truancy officers.Other top reasons for support of a later school start included:

Inability for students to secure summer jobs and internships over the summer
More family time
Lower school utility costs
Inability for teachers to pursue advanced degrees and additional training over the summer.

In the short-term there are legitimate concerns over protecting a community’s economic engine, something he sees play out in his southern Maine hometown, where the bulk of many families’ annual earnings take place in the summer months when tourism is in full swing. When school resumes, local restaurants have long lines outside and empty tables inside because of a lack of help, Tucker said.

In 2016, the start date was August 22nd. In 2017, the start date will be August 28th. The law, which took e?ect with the beginning of the 2007-2008 school year, restored approximately three weeks to the summer vacation period that had been lost when many schools were starting their school years earlier and earlier, some as early as the ?rst week in August. In addition to restoring a more traditional, family summer vacation period, research* conducted by noted economist Dr. Ray Perryman shows, should the school start date be moved up, even by one week, the impacts to Texas' economy will be devastating and result in a loss of:

5,872 permanent jobs
$42 million in state tax revenues
$16.3 million in local tax revenues
$805 million in total expenditures
$432 million in gross state product
$261 million in personal income

Try reading the material you post. You've not shown any evidence that the policy has had a positive change in Maryland, just some random estimates from Hogan hoping that revenues will go up and some random non-peer reviewed studies from other states. And if you're quoting Texas noted economist Dr. Ray Perryman, you should check out his website, which makes it clear that he's an economist for hire for lobbying groups.

+1 And note the poster carefully deleted the part in the article that talked about the academic benefits of an earlier start date.

So I couldn't help myself; I looked up the PP's very long quote -- it's from an article in The Atlantic titled: Why School Still Starts After Labor Day in Michigan: The calendar is designed to bolster the economy—but some worry it hurts kids. As might be expected from the title, the article focuses on both the economic arguments some have made for later school starts/longer summer breaks and arguments that longer school year is better for student learning. (there is also a significant exploration of communities/schools seeking waivers to mandated post-Labor starts).

And interestingly, the article closes with the following three paragraphs about Maryland:

In Maryland, Governor Larry Hogan’s new directive that schools start after Labor Day—beginning with the forthcoming academic year—was
intended to be a boost to both the local economy and the environment (by cutting down on use of air-conditioning in schools). But it was
also met with criticism that it usurped local control over public education.

Silva, who’s conducted extensive research into how schools use learning time, said Maryland’s new policy will make it tougher for many
districts that don’t have waivers to meet the state’s existing requirement for 180 school days, each with more than six hours of instruction.

“Now it's just going to be crammed into a smaller window with shorter breaks, fewer planning days for teachers, and working parents more
desperate for summer child care,” said Silva, a Maryland resident. “Parents complain about too much homework and testing but part of this
is because schools and teachers are pressured into fitting too much into a small box. Broaden the box, spread it out, and there will be more
space for real learning to happen.”

My take-away, is that it is all about which you prioritize the most.

- MCPS parent, and economist

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, there are so many things wrong with your post, I don't even know where to begin. Do you have any evidence that the post-Labor day start time is improving the Maryland economy? My impression is that it's simply lining the pockets of a tiny set of businesses who are reliable Hogan donors. Why are those businesses so much more important than other Maryland businesses that the school calendar is designed around them? How do you balance any potential benefit to the Maryland economy (for which there is no evidence that I've seen) against the lack of instructional time high school students get relative to their peers across the country who start school in August, yet take the same AP exams in May (and roughly 75% of high school students in MoCo do take at least 1 AP exam?) Why don't you provide some actual proof that the schedule constraints that Hogan places that you're so passionate about are actually beneficial?

But those potential classroom benefits come into conflict with the economic realities of states like Michigan, where the later start date has meant a boost of over $20 million in tourism dollars, according to a 2016 analysis by the Anderson Economic Group. In addition to added revenue from things like hotel rooms, many of the businesses catering to tourists rely on high-school students to pick up the slack, according to the study. Those same businesses are left short-staffed when classes resume prior to the busy Labor Day weekend, the study concluded.

For a 2012 study, researchers at the University of Minnesota looked at school calendars in five states, and concluded that starting classes after Labor Day meant a 50 percent bump in families taking at least one trip—quantified as two nights or more away from home—in the months of August or September.

Worcester County, for example, recently completed a more than $40 million renovation of Snow Hill High School, a project that simply would not have been possible without the support of taxes generated in Ocean City. Tourism and education in Maryland are now, and always have been, partners.

A 2013 report by the comptroller’s office, completed before Governor Hogan took office, estimated a post-Labor Day school start would generate an “additional $74.3 million in direct economic activity, including $3.7 million in new wages and a separate $7.7 million in state and local revenue.” The positive impact on Maryland’s economy is undeniable, and that’s a good thing.But, and this is critical, no matter how good it may be for the economy, Maryland’s tourism community would never support this or any policy if it was found to be detrimental to the educational outcomes in our schools. The tourism community firmly believes education should be among our state's highest priorities. In 2013 a bipartisan task force appointed by then Gov. Martin O’Malley overwhelmingly favored statewide post-Labor Day school after carefully studying the issue for many months. They concluded that such a policy would not hurt Maryland students, and so far, no statistical data has proven otherwise. Despite a few anecdotal stories, the negative impact predicted by those who opposed post-Labor Day school has not materialized.

Starting school after Labor Day is reasonable public policy that strengthens our economy without negatively impacting the quality of our educational system. It is supported by nearly 70 percent of Marylanders, according to 2016 polling.

Katie Hellebush, the director of government relations for the Virginia Hospitality and Travel Association (VHTA) in 2012, also justified efforts to start school after Labor Day, saying, "We have conducted studies, and we do anticipate that there would be a significant loss in terms of $369 million, which would include more than $104 million in wages and benefits lost." That loss of revenue includes not tourist dollars, but dollars (and tax dollars) targeted to teen jobs. Hellebush noted that while tourist dollars suffer with an earlier school start date, education test scores did not decline with a later school start date.

Michigan also touts tourism as the reason for a later start date. In 2012, the Michigan Lodging and Tourism Association (MLTA) reported that tourism dollars have increased each year since a new school start date policy took effect in 2006.

In my state of Pennsylvania, a 2006 push to make school start dates later failed. In a state heavily dependent on travel and tourism (it generates more than $40 billion each year and supports nearly half a million jobs), a later school start date should equal more revenue. A 2013 study found that Pennsylvania would benefit by $378 million in direct net revenue from moving the school start date to after Labor Day.

Robert Scott, Texas education commissioner from 2007 to 2012, said a later school start in his state has not compromised education excellence. “Since the fourth Monday in August became law, we were seeing better student performance,” Scott said. “Dropout rates improved. Graduation rates were at an all-time high. Texas students outperformed the ACT national average in math and science scores, and K-12 calendars were better aligned with college and university calendars. This allowed more high school students to take college-level courses, simultaneously earning both high school and college level credits.”

The 10 states recording the highest ACT scores all begin school the last week of August or later, he said.


Ohioans also want greater uniformity in school start dates across the state. The variance in starting dates creates hardships for extended and divided families to plan time together. Comments also expressed that lack of uniformity is confusing for both drivers and truancy officers.Other top reasons for support of a later school start included:

Inability for students to secure summer jobs and internships over the summer
More family time
Lower school utility costs
Inability for teachers to pursue advanced degrees and additional training over the summer.

In the short-term there are legitimate concerns over protecting a community’s economic engine, something he sees play out in his southern Maine hometown, where the bulk of many families’ annual earnings take place in the summer months when tourism is in full swing. When school resumes, local restaurants have long lines outside and empty tables inside because of a lack of help, Tucker said.

In 2016, the start date was August 22nd. In 2017, the start date will be August 28th. The law, which took e?ect with the beginning of the 2007-2008 school year, restored approximately three weeks to the summer vacation period that had been lost when many schools were starting their school years earlier and earlier, some as early as the ?rst week in August. In addition to restoring a more traditional, family summer vacation period, research* conducted by noted economist Dr. Ray Perryman shows, should the school start date be moved up, even by one week, the impacts to Texas' economy will be devastating and result in a loss of:

5,872 permanent jobs
$42 million in state tax revenues
$16.3 million in local tax revenues
$805 million in total expenditures
$432 million in gross state product
$261 million in personal income

Try reading the material you post. You've not shown any evidence that the policy has had a positive change in Maryland, just some random estimates from Hogan hoping that revenues will go up and some random non-peer reviewed studies from other states. And if you're quoting Texas noted economist Dr. Ray Perryman, you should check out his website, which makes it clear that he's an economist for hire for lobbying groups.

+1 And note the poster carefully deleted the part in the article that talked about the academic benefits of an earlier start date.

So I couldn't help myself; I looked up the PP's very long quote -- it's from an article in The Atlantic titled: Why School Still Starts After Labor Day in Michigan: The calendar is designed to bolster the economy—but some worry it hurts kids. As might be expected from the title, the article focuses on both the economic arguments some have made for later school starts/longer summer breaks and arguments that longer school year is better for student learning. (there is also a significant exploration of communities/schools seeking waivers to mandated post-Labor starts).

And interestingly, the article closes with the following three paragraphs about Maryland:

In Maryland, Governor Larry Hogan’s new directive that schools start after Labor Day—beginning with the forthcoming academic year—was
intended to be a boost to both the local economy and the environment (by cutting down on use of air-conditioning in schools). But it was
also met with criticism that it usurped local control over public education.

Silva, who’s conducted extensive research into how schools use learning time, said Maryland’s new policy will make it tougher for many
districts that don’t have waivers to meet the state’s existing requirement for 180 school days, each with more than six hours of instruction.

“Now it's just going to be crammed into a smaller window with shorter breaks, fewer planning days for teachers, and working parents more
desperate for summer child care,” said Silva, a Maryland resident. “Parents complain about too much homework and testing but part of this
is because schools and teachers are pressured into fitting too much into a small box. Broaden the box, spread it out, and there will be more
space for real learning to happen.”

My take-away, is that it is all about which you prioritize the most.

- MCPS parent, and economist

+1 Governor Hogan is prioritizing a small swath of coastal business owners over our kids' education. That, OP, if you actually care to learn, is why people are so pissed.