Reply to Council hearing on MCPS

Forum Index » Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)

Reply to "Council hearing on MCPS"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Glass: BOE requires full-time status. They need to be paid more than $25K per year - it's not a living wage. A 2019 recommendation recommended $60 K.  We need the BOE to succeed in overseeing a $3.2 billion budget and we need adequate resources for this.[/quote]

I’m all for a full-time board if they also get the authority to determine the schools portion of the property tax. Then the council won’t be able to claim they’re funding schools when they’re actually raising taxes for something else and people will take BOE elections more seriously. [/quote]

That is not going to happen. It's not how local government in Maryland is structured. So does that mean you oppose a full-time board?[/quote]

If they’re not going to have full responsibility it doesn’t need to be a full-time job. [b]I don’t need to pay for them to get more briefings on the minutiae of third-grade math curriculum. [/b]

There’s no reason government has to keep the same structure. This isn’t working. [/quote]

DP.  Right.  Because approving a good curriculum isn't important and we should keep them to rubber-stamping whatever MCPS puts in front of them. :roll:

Have you watched many BOE meetings?  Noticed how much gets dumped into presentations, there, but how many key pieces of information are left out?  Seen the breadth of concern in public testimony that they rarely have time to discuss? 
Realized that that is a fraction of the public's desired interaction because of a 2-minute limit and limited signup slots (that tend to get booked within hours of their being available)? Extrapolated the time it would take to make properly informed decisions?

It would be at least a full time professional's job (not talking just 40 hours, here) to do what we expect them to be able to do.  That's if they had a full staff.  And without the additional work of a taxing authority, though I don't think your idea, there, isn't worthy of consideration.

$25k is insulting versus the expectation and $60k is little better.  If we want them to do an amount of work similar to that performed by the Council, pay them like it.[/quote]

Do you really want elected individuals making detailed decisions about what the school teaches rather than professionals? Have you seen the sort of people that get elected to the BoE? Or even the county council?
[/quote]

We need a teacher on the board. If there can be a student there can be a teacher and enough of the conflict of interest bs, it’s time [/quote]

Students aren't employees of the organization the Board oversees. That's a ridiculous suggestion. MCEA has far too much power as it is.[/quote]

There is that stupid conflict of interest argument. You can’t tell me [b]there’s a simple way to ensure an active teacher is on the board[/b]?

And who says we have to listen to mcea if we are onthere any more than any other member [/quote]

You want someone with a FT job as a teacher to also be on the BOE?  And when there are daytime Board meetings, do you want them to skip their role on the Board, or skip teaching their classes?🤦‍♀️[/quote]

That’s one option. Another is a release from the clarssroom for the length of their term. Once again, not that hard. Just different.

And sure, someone who is a parent can serve too.

This is what happens at the state level. Not that hard[/quote]

They're elected positions. I guess I wouldn't have a problem with MCPS letting a teacher take a leave of absence, similar to FMLA, to serve on the Board, if elected. But I think most people know that creates a horrible conflict of interest and wouldn't vote for such a candidate.[/quote]

It would be fine to have a teacher on the board as long as they recused themselves from participating in any matter in which they had a financial ot other personal interest. [b]Not just abstaining from voting. Recusing from participating. That’s how government ethics should work[/b]. [/quote]

That’s just silly and not how government works. Do all of the county council members who own homes in moco (all of them) have to decline participating in setting real estate tax percentages in the county because it affects them? Do members of congress not get to vote on federal income tax rates because it impacts them financially?

The kinds of budget or financial decisions a teacher member of the board would participate in are so widely aggregated that it would not be improper at all for them to participate. Sure, have them recused from negotiations and ratification of teachers union contracts etc. but they could do 95% of what BOE members are expected to do. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics