Anonymous wrote:The school system produced a budget request.

The County Executive suggested funding it below the request level.

The County Council inquired what would be cut if the County Executive's recommendation were to be followed.

The school system produced a view of those possible cuts. ("non-recommended reductions")

Some residents asked the County Council to fund enough not to let those cuts happen.

The County Council came part way to that.

The higher funding, still below the request (as it has been for decades, resulting in the school system being ever-increasingly behind objectives) is to be used in a manner consistent with the original budget request.

The Superintendent will present options and a recommendation to the BOE for which of the non-recommended reductions will be kept in the budget, whole or modified, and which will be abandoned. This, in all likelihood, will be consistent with the wishes expressed by the County Council when they determined the final amount of the allocation (as has generally been the case when such allocations over the County Executive's recommended budget have been afforded).

As the budget is a collection of estimates, the ultimate costs will present savings or overages across a large number of spending categories, and the Superintendent will periodically propose re-allocation among those categories to the BOE to try to make ends meet.

The County Council can call hearings on these matters, influencing, but not controlling, via the power of the purse, plays related to school land allocation, bus service and the like, and, presumably, pursuit of some kind of impeachment-like mechanism with the state, which employs the BOE.

The upshot? Your concern appears to lie with the BOE and its oversight function. Maybe that could work if, similar to the County Council, they were compensated to dedicate full-time-plus effort to this and were allocated a reasonably sized direct staff for the purpose. It is half the county budget, after all, and having the County Council continuously hold hearings to try to do, in effect, the BOE's job makes little sense, but would be horrendously inefficient (if not ineffective, as well).

PS -- I don't like blank checks either (unless given to me!), and would like much more responsive, effective oversight to ensure better school system performance vs. community expectation. I don't think the article provided new ideas for how to get that done, instead suggesting things that would generate additional cost or that indicate a poor understanding of certain programs/initiatives.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adam Pagnucco asks a pretty common sense and obvious question that I think we, as taxpayers, need to demand an answer for.

SOURCE: https://montgomeryperspective.com/2024/05/06/will-the-council-ever-impose-accountability-on-mcps/

In return for that, what did the Education Committee get? Read their press release. Can you find anything other than vague hopeful statements? I can’t. I also can’t locate a specific commitment MCPS had to make in order to get the money.

In any other industry – real estate, finance, health care, IT, you name it – when someone agrees to give you $49.5 million, you have to agree to give them something – a BIG something – in return.

Why can’t it work that way in county government?

Look, MCPS deserves robust funding. Its success is critical to the success of the county and right now its performance is in question. But there should be no blank checks for them or anyone else. Subject to the constraints of state law, the county council is the ultimate funding authority for county agencies. And before sending extra taxpayer money to the school system that is permanently baked into its budget via the state’s maintenance of effort law, the council should insist on accountability with that money.

I agree with Adam's POV wholeheartedly. I'm fine with giving MCPS the additional money it's asking for, but that money must come with hooks and requirements attached. Stop giving people who've abused funds and privilege a blank check.

The council is correct. It doesn't have line-item authority. If you don't like this, work with the state to change this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adam Pagnucco asks a pretty common sense and obvious question that I think we, as taxpayers, need to demand an answer for.

SOURCE: https://montgomeryperspective.com/2024/05/06/will-the-council-ever-impose-accountability-on-mcps/

In return for that, what did the Education Committee get? Read their press release. Can you find anything other than vague hopeful statements? I can’t. I also can’t locate a specific commitment MCPS had to make in order to get the money.

In any other industry – real estate, finance, health care, IT, you name it – when someone agrees to give you $49.5 million, you have to agree to give them something – a BIG something – in return.

Why can’t it work that way in county government?

Look, MCPS deserves robust funding. Its success is critical to the success of the county and right now its performance is in question. But there should be no blank checks for them or anyone else. Subject to the constraints of state law, the county council is the ultimate funding authority for county agencies. And before sending extra taxpayer money to the school system that is permanently baked into its budget via the state’s maintenance of effort law, the council should insist on accountability with that money.

I agree with Adam's POV wholeheartedly. I'm fine with giving MCPS the additional money it's asking for, but that money must come with hooks and requirements attached. Stop giving people who've abused funds and privilege a blank check.

The council is correct. It doesn't have line-item authority. If you don't like this, work with the state to change this.

Clearly you didn’t even read the article which was all about how even without the line-item authority, they could still use their leverage to demand specific improvements.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adam Pagnucco asks a pretty common sense and obvious question that I think we, as taxpayers, need to demand an answer for.

SOURCE: https://montgomeryperspective.com/2024/05/06/will-the-council-ever-impose-accountability-on-mcps/

In return for that, what did the Education Committee get? Read their press release. Can you find anything other than vague hopeful statements? I can’t. I also can’t locate a specific commitment MCPS had to make in order to get the money.

In any other industry – real estate, finance, health care, IT, you name it – when someone agrees to give you $49.5 million, you have to agree to give them something – a BIG something – in return.

Why can’t it work that way in county government?

Look, MCPS deserves robust funding. Its success is critical to the success of the county and right now its performance is in question. But there should be no blank checks for them or anyone else. Subject to the constraints of state law, the county council is the ultimate funding authority for county agencies. And before sending extra taxpayer money to the school system that is permanently baked into its budget via the state’s maintenance of effort law, the council should insist on accountability with that money.

I agree with Adam's POV wholeheartedly. I'm fine with giving MCPS the additional money it's asking for, but that money must come with hooks and requirements attached. Stop giving people who've abused funds and privilege a blank check.

The council is correct. It doesn't have line-item authority. If you don't like this, work with the state to change this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Adam Pagnucco asks a pretty common sense and obvious question that I think we, as taxpayers, need to demand an answer for.

SOURCE: https://montgomeryperspective.com/2024/05/06/will-the-council-ever-impose-accountability-on-mcps/

In return for that, what did the Education Committee get? Read their press release. Can you find anything other than vague hopeful statements? I can’t. I also can’t locate a specific commitment MCPS had to make in order to get the money.

In any other industry – real estate, finance, health care, IT, you name it – when someone agrees to give you $49.5 million, you have to agree to give them something – a BIG something – in return.

Why can’t it work that way in county government?

Look, MCPS deserves robust funding. Its success is critical to the success of the county and right now its performance is in question. But there should be no blank checks for them or anyone else. Subject to the constraints of state law, the county council is the ultimate funding authority for county agencies. And before sending extra taxpayer money to the school system that is permanently baked into its budget via the state’s maintenance of effort law, the council should insist on accountability with that money.

I agree with Adam's POV wholeheartedly. I'm fine with giving MCPS the additional money it's asking for, but that money must come with hooks and requirements attached. Stop giving people who've abused funds and privilege a blank check.

The council is correct. It doesn't have line-item authority. If you don't like this, work with the state to change this.

Anonymous wrote:Adam Pagnucco asks a pretty common sense and obvious question that I think we, as taxpayers, need to demand an answer for.

SOURCE: https://montgomeryperspective.com/2024/05/06/will-the-council-ever-impose-accountability-on-mcps/

In return for that, what did the Education Committee get? Read their press release. Can you find anything other than vague hopeful statements? I can’t. I also can’t locate a specific commitment MCPS had to make in order to get the money.

In any other industry – real estate, finance, health care, IT, you name it – when someone agrees to give you $49.5 million, you have to agree to give them something – a BIG something – in return.

Why can’t it work that way in county government?

Look, MCPS deserves robust funding. Its success is critical to the success of the county and right now its performance is in question. But there should be no blank checks for them or anyone else. Subject to the constraints of state law, the county council is the ultimate funding authority for county agencies. And before sending extra taxpayer money to the school system that is permanently baked into its budget via the state’s maintenance of effort law, the council should insist on accountability with that money.

I agree with Adam's POV wholeheartedly. I'm fine with giving MCPS the additional money it's asking for, but that money must come with hooks and requirements attached. Stop giving people who've abused funds and privilege a blank check.

In return for that, what did the Education Committee get? Read their press release. Can you find anything other than vague hopeful statements? I can’t. I also can’t locate a specific commitment MCPS had to make in order to get the money.

In any other industry – real estate, finance, health care, IT, you name it – when someone agrees to give you $49.5 million, you have to agree to give them something – a BIG something – in return.

Why can’t it work that way in county government?

Look, MCPS deserves robust funding. Its success is critical to the success of the county and right now its performance is in question. But there should be no blank checks for them or anyone else. Subject to the constraints of state law, the county council is the ultimate funding authority for county agencies. And before sending extra taxpayer money to the school system that is permanently baked into its budget via the state’s maintenance of effort law, the council should insist on accountability with that money.