Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 07:54     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


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?


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

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


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.

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.


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?


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


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


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

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


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?🤦‍♀️


Sure why not? Half my kids teachers are on personal leave for one thing or another about 25% of the time anyway.
Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 07:54     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Employee 5 is probably the current QO principal that sexually harassed Beidleman back in 2012.



I hope there are complaints against this principal that they haven't lost the paperwork on. I hope the county council has this name so they can push for investigation and dismissal. I have heard this name continually and still..crickets.


This is the first I have heard about the current QO principal being part of this mess. Can anyone provide more specifics?
Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 07:50     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Employee 5 is probably the current QO principal that sexually harassed Beidleman back in 2012.



I hope there are complaints against this principal that they haven't lost the paperwork on. I hope the county council has this name so they can push for investigation and dismissal. I have heard this name continually and still..crickets.


Kimball had the paperwork on this one.



^^THIS^^
Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 07:48     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Employee 5 is probably the current QO principal that sexually harassed Beidleman back in 2012.



I hope there are complaints against this principal that they haven't lost the paperwork on. I hope the county council has this name so they can push for investigation and dismissal. I have heard this name continually and still..crickets.


Kimball had the paperwork on this one.

Sorry, I don't understand. Why would Kimball have the paperwork? Her latest job was acting chief in the Office of School Support and Well-Being.


In 2021, Title IX investigations of sexual harassment, including those of employees, was moved to MCPS Student Welfare and Compliance (SWC) unit. DCI focuses on employee misconduct while SWC focuses on students' experiences where an employee was not involved. HOWEVER, MCPS regulation ACI-RA, investigation of Title IX Sexual Harassment of MCPS Employees, designates the director of SWC as MCPS Title IX coordinator.. Title IX violations involving employees are supposed to be referred to DCI. (referencing the Jackson Lewis Report here, page 1)

It sounds like Kimball didn't complete the process for referral/referrals.

Silvestre referenced the weaknesses in the organizational construct of splitting off Title IX compliance into SWC and the effect of this regarding employee complaints at the council hearing. Council members emphasized the need to ensure ALL outstanding complaints are investigated, which should include those currently sitting in Kimball's old office. I hope that happens. At the council hearing, MCPS could not quantify the current number of outstanding complaints.

This entire matter is far from completed.

Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 07:36     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


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?


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

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


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.

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.


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?


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


There are two former teachers on the board (Harris and Yang).
Then parents should get a seat at the table as well.


I think all of the adult board members are parents or grandparents of current or former students.


DP. I'd imagine that the idea is that, with most of those more or less directly being affected by BOE decisions being families with children who are going through or coming into the system and who do not have the potentially conflicting interests of being professional educators of one sort or another, there might be a reason to have such a person on the BOE representing that "rest of us."
Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 05:31     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


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?


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

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


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.

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.


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?


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


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


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

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


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?🤦‍♀️


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


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.


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. Not just abstaining from voting. Recusing from participating. That’s how government ethics should work.
Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 05:07     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


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?


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

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


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.

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.


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?


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


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


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

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


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?🤦‍♀️


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


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.
Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 05:02     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


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?


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

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


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.

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.


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?


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


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


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

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


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?🤦‍♀️


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


There are former teachers as well as former/currrent parents on the board.
Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 05:00     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


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?


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

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


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.

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.


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?


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


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


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

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


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?🤦‍♀️


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


Teachers can not be on the board and emoloyeed at same time. They have to resign first before serving.
Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 04:29     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


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?


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

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


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.

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.


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?


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


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


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

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


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?🤦‍♀️


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
Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 01:20     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


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?


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

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


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.

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.


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?


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


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


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

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


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?🤦‍♀️
Anonymous
Post 02/09/2024 00:42     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


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?


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

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


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.

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.


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?


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


There are two former teachers on the board (Harris and Yang).
Then parents should get a seat at the table as well.


I think all of the adult board members are parents or grandparents of current or former students.
Anonymous
Post 02/08/2024 23:48     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


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?


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

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


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.

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.


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?


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


There are two former teachers on the board (Harris and Yang).
Then parents should get a seat at the table as well.
Anonymous
Post 02/08/2024 23:40     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Sayles: Is the Damascus HS principal and football coach still employed by MCPS, during the time period when the assault case occurred, for which $10 million was awarded to the affected football players and families.


Answer: Yes, they are still employed by MCPS.


They should have both been fired but they were white. Case closed!


This is the one point McKnight and her supporters have a point on. MCPS let a lot of admin and staff get away with murder, so you can see why she thought she’d be extended the same grace as her predecessors.

The Damascus principal and coach need to be fired.


Why didn’t McKnight fire them?


Smith was superintendent at the time.


Until last week? Oh, no. McKnight not only kept them on, she gave them special assignments. That was her choice. All her choice.
Anonymous
Post 02/08/2024 22:50     Subject: Council hearing on MCPS

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:Sayles: Is the Damascus HS principal and football coach still employed by MCPS, during the time period when the assault case occurred, for which $10 million was awarded to the affected football players and families.


Answer: Yes, they are still employed by MCPS.


They should have both been fired but they were white. Case closed!


This is the one point McKnight and her supporters have a point on. MCPS let a lot of admin and staff get away with murder, so you can see why she thought she’d be extended the same grace as her predecessors.

The Damascus principal and coach need to be fired.


Why didn’t McKnight fire them?


Smith was superintendent at the time.