The Montgomery County school board is opposing state legislation designed to curb student bullying, saying the bills, along with a litany of others, threaten the board’s local control.
“The prohibition of bullying, harassment and intimidation is addressed through our policies, regulations and procedures,” said the board’s analysis of the bills, echoing the common theme that Montgomery County’s systems are one step ahead.
The board supported only six of 32 recently proposed laws concerning education. Although it has no voting power, its input carries weight with the 32-member Montgomery County delegation.
The county’s Annapolis representatives, however, face the challenge of balancing county and statewide needs.
“We’re doing this, but other counties like Baltimore City or Prince George’s aren’t,” said Sen. Nancy King, D-Montgomery, who served on the school board from 1994 to 2002 and supports the bullying legislation. “Counties that aren’t doing it need a boost to get them there.”
The school board also opposed two Republican-sponsored bills it said amounted to voucher programs. The bills would provide noncollegiate scholarships for foster children and disabled students to attend private or out-of-county schools.
Even a bill mandating “green” cleaning products that would seem an easy sell in the traditionally liberal county was rejected. The district already uses environmentally friendly products, the analysis said, adding the bill would not address the cost of realigning state and federal safety standards.
“We have not been effective in teaching our delegation how this all works,” said Superintendent Jerry Weast, explaining the challenge of “operationalizing” state mandates for programs already covered by the county’s schools.
Sharon Cox, chairwoman of the school board’s policy committee, said the ideal role of the legislature is to determine funding levels using the information it collects on a district’s wealth, special needs and school performance, not to reach into the schools’ daily operations.
“There is a bright line in terms of roles, responsibilities and accountability, and we have to be mindful of that bright line,” Cox said. “How can [the board] be held accountable for the system when we can’t make those decisions ourselves?”
