DRAFT REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Transcription

1 DRAFT REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS of the MONTGOMERY COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD COMPOSITION TASK FORCE JUNE 2001

2 Table of Contents Background Page 1 Executive Summary 3 Size of the Montgomery County Board of Education 5 How School Board Districts Are Drawn 7 Authority of the Student Board Member 8 Compensation of Board Members 11 Recommended Education Article Amendments 15

3 Background The Montgomery County Delegation to the Maryland General Assembly approved the introduction of a bill (House Bill 803) during the 2000 legislative session to establish a Montgomery County School Board Composition Task Force that would study the authority, size, composition, and responsibilities of the board. The bill specified the membership and a deadline of December 31, 2001, for submitting a report. HB 803 was adopted by the Maryland General Assembly and signed by the Governor, becoming Chapter 156 of the 2000 Laws of Maryland. The bill required the appointment of a task force of 16 members, as follows:! Two Montgomery County Senators, appointed by the President of the Senate! Two Montgomery County Delegates, appointed by the Speaker of the House and the following persons to be appointed by the Montgomery County Executive:! Two members of the Montgomery County Council! Two members of the Montgomery County Board of Education! One member from the Montgomery County Education Association! One member from the Montgomery County Council of Supporting Services Employees! One member from the Montgomery County Association of Administrative and Supervisory Personnel! One member from the Montgomery County Regional Student Governments! One member from the Montgomery County Council of Parent Teacher Associations! and three members from the General Public. In August 2000, Montgomery County Executive Douglas Duncan appointed the following persons to the Montgomery County Board of Education Composition Task Force: Senator Jennie Forehand, District 17 Senator Patrick J. Hogan, District 39 Delegate Paul Carlson, District 39 Delegate Henry Heller, District 19 Councilmember Michael Subin Councilmember Blair Ewing Board of Education member Patricia O Neill Page 1

4 Board of Education member Kermit Burnett MCEA President Mark Simon MCCSSE President Stephen Poor MCAASP President Kennon Evans MCR President Dustin Jeter MCCPTA President Linna Barnes and three public members: Kenneth Muir, who was named chair Eugene Thirolf Bethsaida Wong County Executive Duncan charged the task force to focus on the following four issues: (11) The size of the Montgomery County Board of Education - other Maryland county boards with over 100,000 students are to have nine members; we have eight, including a student member. (12) How school board districts are drawn - the issue of whether school board districts should be co-terminus with Councilmanic districts; the expense of running countywide. These are timely issues with the census redistricting coming up. (13) The authority of the student member - currently, the student member does not vote on capital and operating budgets; school boundaries, closings and reopenings; collective bargaining; and negative teacher personnel actions. (14) The compensation of board members - since November 1986, this has been $12,000 per year with the president getting $14,000. There is no cap on reimbursement for expenses, however. This compensation should be compared to other counties. Any change would have to be passed by the State Legislature (Sec of the Education Article, Annotated Code of Maryland). The Task Force held its first meeting on September 11, 2000 and subsequent meetings on October 2, October 23, November 13, December 18, May 14 and May 31, discussing in detail the four issues laid out by the county executive. At the December 18 meeting, the members agreed that the chair would attempt to develop a consensus report, based on those discussions, for review at a meeting in the spring after county budget development and adjournment of the 2001 Maryland General Assembly session. The consensus report was discussed on May 14 and 31, and after several changes that are reflected in this report, was adopted by a 12-0 vote. A public hearing for citizen comment on the report was scheduled for June Page 2

5 Executive Summary The Montgomery County School Board Composition Task Force was created by an act of the Maryland General Assembly Chapter 156 of the 2000 Laws of Maryland to study the size of the Montgomery County Board of Education, how school board districts are drawn, the authority of the student member, and board member compensation. The 16 Task Force members were appointed by County Executive Douglas Duncan in August, The Task Force held five meetings in Fall 2000, before taking a break for the 2001 Maryland General Assembly session and the Montgomery County operating and capital budget processes. Two additional meetings were held in May and a public hearing in June Size of the Board of Education The Task Force made no recommendation to change the size of the Board or its composition, but it agreed to recommend different wording in Section 3-903(c) of the Education Article with respect to what is a majority vote for the Board to adopt a motion. Previously, the law required an affirmative vote of five members if the issue was one on which the student member could vote; four members if the student couldn t vote on the issue. Our recommendation is that an affirmative vote shall be 4 elected members, except that a tie vote of the members present and voting is not an affirmative vote. How School Board Districts Are Drawn The Task Force affirmed that the Board of Education should continue to have school board residence districts separate from those of the County Council. It did suggest as a goal that Board of Education districts should encompass the geographical area of several high school clusters. Authority of the Student Member The Task Force felt that the student member should continue to have a vote on most issues. However, it was concerned that the student member s involvement with the hiring, disciplining or termination of employees is not uniform under existing law. It chose to resolve that matter by forbidding the student member s vote on Page 3

6 the employment, disciplining or termination of any employee of the school district. In addition, it restricted to high school students the right to vote for the student member. Compensation of Board Members The Task Force made four recommendations with respect to compensation: 1. Increase annual compensation to $18,500 for elected members and $22,500 for the president; 2. Provide a pension plan, health benefit plan, and group life insurance comparable to that for Montgomery County public school employees. 3. Provide a $2,500 scholarship to a student board member who serves a full term; and 4. Make these changes effective at the same time for all members, not waiting for the beginning of each member s new term of office. Page 4

7 Size of the Board of Education Many years ago, the Maryland Legislature directed that the number of county board of education members should be based on various ranges of student population. The Education Article calls for districts with student populations in excess of 100,000 to have nine board members. Prior to this enactment, however, Montgomery County had more than 100,000 students but only seven board members. The law did not require Montgomery County to change, and there was no impetus from the county to do so. Later, when a student member was added to the Montgomery County Board of Education, the number of board members was increased to eight. There was discussion among the task force about whether some larger number of board members would be beneficial. Some task force members felt that having a larger number of members on the board of education would make it easier for the board to do much of its preliminary work in committees, as the County Council and Legislature do. The Montgomery County Board of Education has several committees for specific purposes, but most of the Board s deliberation is done as a committee of the whole. No task force member suggested changing state law to require the Board to work through committees; the Board could do that for itself by policy. Some task force members felt that a larger number of Board members would help reduce the members workload, but others suggested that more voices at the Board table would increase the length of its discussions. Another aspect of this issue that was considered is the current arrangement of five elected members who run from residence districts and two who run at-large. The residence districts were created to ensure that there was geographical representation on the Board from all parts of the county. But all county voters have the opportunity to vote for all seven elected members. Page 5

8 This arrangement has the effect, insofar as the effort and cost of running for a board seat, of an at-large race. There was some task force discussion of whether members running from districts should be voted on only by the voters in those districts, as is done in County Council races, but there was no sentiment to change the current system. Some task force members expressed concern that members elected only by voters in their district, rather than countywide, could lead to parochialism. A motion to increase the number of elected members by two (one from a district, one at-large) was defeated by a 4 to 7 vote. Another matter raised was that an even number of members (including the student) could create tie votes on issues on which the student member can vote. That has occurred in some cases, but some noted that this situation is little different than if two members are absent, leaving a quorum but also the possibility of a tie vote. The declaration of what is an affirmative vote or majority of the Board of Education is dealt with in Section 3-903(c) of the Education Article, which states: The affirmative vote of the members of the County Board for the passage of a motion by the County Board shall be: (1) 5 members when the student member is voting; or (2) 4 members when the student member is not voting. Some task force members found that wording troubling because the absence of one or more elected members on a motion on which the student may vote, requires, in effect, a supermajority. To eliminate this problem, the task force recommends the following change in wording in Section 3-903(c): (c) The affirmative vote of the members of the County Board for the passage of a motion by the County Board shall be: 4 ELECTED MEMBERS, EXCEPT THAT A TIE VOTE OF THE MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING ON A MOTION IS NOT AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE. (1) 5 members when the student member is voting; or (2) 4 members when the student member is not voting. Page 6

9 How School Board Districts are Drawn When school board residence districts were established in the mid-80s, there was debate over whether they should have the same boundaries as the election districts for the Montgomery County Council. The concern expressed at the time was that this would put the County Council, a partisan body, in control of decennial redistricting, perhaps to the disadvantage of members of the Board of Education. The Maryland General Assembly established separate board of education residence districts in The current residence districts are a result of the redistricting which followed the 1990 United States Census. Section 3-901(f)(3)(iii through viii), specifies the state election districts and precincts for each board of education district. In discussing school board residence districts, there was broad agreement among task force members that: 5. The school board residence districts should continue to be drawn by the Maryland General Assembly, separate from County Council election districts; and 6. A goal would be for each of the five school board residence districts to include the entire area encompassed by several high school clusters. Page 7

10 Authority of the Student Member A student member on the Montgomery County Board of Education was authorized by the Maryland General Assembly in This statute specified a method for electing the student member, a term and an alternate in case the student elected could not finish the term, and specifications regarding the student s attendance at certain Board discussions in executive session. In 1989, students were successful in persuading the General Assembly to allow the student member to vote on certain Board decisions. Subsequently, these areas were modified. Currently, Sections 3-901(5) through (7) state that the student member: 7. May not attend an executive session of the Board dealing with the discipline of a teacher, or collective bargaining, unless a majority of the Board invites him or her to attend; and 8. May not vote on matters relating to disciplining a teacher; collective bargaining; capital and operating budgets; and school closings, reopenings, and boundaries. Montgomery County was one of the first school boards in the state to have a student member. Now, the State Board of Education and most county boards have student members, although their voting powers vary considerably. This trend toward student members over a quarter century suggests that most Maryland counties feel that input from a student on the board that makes school policy is a good idea. One issue considered was that the student member has only a one-year term while elected members serve four-year terms. Some noted that this means there is a period of adjustment every year while the student member masters background and becomes acclimated to Board procedures and dynamics. If a student is to be represented on the school board, the task force didn t see any way to resolve this concern. Most students seem to handle it well. Whether the student member should have a vote, and if so on what, was perhaps the most controversial issue to engage the task force. There was discussion of whether a single, special Page 8

11 population students should have a representative and vote on the board. Task force members noted that while teachers, principals and supporting staff may vote for seven Board members, the student member is the only one for whom the other major component of the school community students can vote. Other task force members noted the excellent jobs done by past student members. Specific concerns included the problem of what is an affirmative vote (which the task force dealt with on page 5 of this report) and the issues on which the student member should vote. There was consensus that having a voting student member has worked out well and should be continued, but the issues on which he or she can cast a vote should be clarified. Some task force members were concerned that the student was able to vote on hiring the superintendent of schools, and in fact during the most recent selection process, the student member had a crucial role. Others pointed out an inconsistency in current law that forbids a student member from voting on any teacher disciplinary actions (the reference in the law to 6-202(a)), but that he or she can vote on disciplinary actions for supporting personnel. While there were diverse opinions among task force members, there was consensus that the student member should not vote on the hiring, disciplining or termination of any school employee, including the superintendent of schools. Another issue that emerged was whether middle school students should vote for the student member. Initially, only students in Grades 9-11 were eligible to vote for the student board member. That was later expanded to Grades Subsequently, when the middle school organization pattern was adopted, sixth graders won the vote. Some task force members questioned whether most middle school students had the maturity to vote for the student member, contending that it would be a popularity contest for many. Others noted that there is a structure for political involvement in the high schools that is missing in middle schools. A motion to restrict eligibility to vote for the student member only to high school students was adopted by a 9 to 1 vote. To carry these points into action requires amendments to Sections 3-901(e)(2), (5) and (6) of the Education Article, as follows: (2) The nomination and election process shall be as agreed on by the County Board and the Montgomery County region of the Maryland Association of Student Councils. This agreement shall include a process by which to replace one or both of the final candidates if they are unable to proceed in the election. Any student enrolled in a middle or high school in the Montgomery County public HIGH schools may: (i) Nominate a student member candidate; Page 9

12 (ii) Vote for delegates from the student s school, who in turn, vote in a nominating convention to reduce to 2 the number of candidates for student Board member if there are 3 or more candidates; and (iii) Vote directly for 1 of the 2 remaining student Board member candidates. (5) Unless invited to attend by the affirmative vote of a majority of the County Board, the student member may not attend an executive session that relates to: (i) Hearings held under 6-202(a) of this article REGARDING DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT; or (ii) Collective bargaining. (6) As provided in paragraph (7) of this subsection, the student member shall vote on all matters except those relating to: (i) 6-202(a) of this article THE EMPLOYMENT, DISCIPLINING OR TERMINATION OF ANY EMPLOYEE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT; (ii) Collective bargaining; (iii) Capital and operating budgets; and (iv) School closings, reopenings, and boundaries. The Task Force did not endorse or recommend any changes in the voting restrictions that are imposed on the student member by Section 3-901(6)(ii), (iii), or (iv). Page 10

13 Compensation of Board Members There has been no increase in the compensation of Montgomery County school board members since Yet, during the 15 years since that salary increase, the county s population and the number of MCPS students and staff have increased dramatically. The problems and issues that the Board deals with have increased in complexity, and communication by telephone, fax, , and the MCPS First-Class messaging system also has expanded tremendously. The current Board of Education is responsible for setting policy for a $1.6 billion dollar corporation. There was widespread consensus in the Task Force s discussion of this issue that salaries of Board of Education members should be comparable to those of other county boards and commissions. Task Force members received copies of the August 1, 2000 Report and Recommendations of a Task Force to Study Salaries of the Boards of Appeals, Electrical Examiners, License Commissioners, Merit System Protection, and Planning Board; as well as the Fire and Rescue, Washington Suburban Sanitary, and Washington Suburban Transit Commissions; and the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. Some topics that the Task Force discussed included: " The opportunity for any citizen, regardless of employment or income to be able to run for the Board; " Many employed persons have to use most or all of their annual leave to attend the 12 allday Board meetings and other day functions such as school visits, conferences, and high school graduations; " The need for some benefits (i.e., health insurance and/or flexible spending accounts) in addition to salary for members who may not otherwise have access to benefits; " Eligibility for a pension after completing a four-year term, similar to the pensions that are provided for County Council members and state legislators; " Some compensation for the student member, since the time required to prepare for and attend meetings is such that he or she is unlikely to be able to hold a job; Page 11

14 A subcommittee of the Task Force put together the following proposal, which the Task Force members accepted. 1. Board member compensation should be increased to $18,500 annually for elected members and $22,500 for the President. These amounts would make school board members compensation comparable to that of members of the Montgomery County Planning Board. 2. Board members should be given access to a pension plan that vests in five years, and to a flexible spending account or health benefit plan, and to group life insurance with coverages comparable to those of MCPS employees. A Board member could choose to accept any or all of these benefits during their term of office. This would make school board members fringe benefits comparable to other countywide elected officials such as Montgomery County Council members. 3. A student member who completes a full term on the Board should be given a one-time scholarship of $2, These compensation changes should become available to all Board members on a single effective date, as opposed to the beginning of their next terms of office, especially since Board members terms are staggered. This aspect of the Task Force s recommendation may be problematic, however. The Maryland Constitution, Article III, Section 35, states in part that... nor may the salary or compensation of any public officer be increased or diminished during his term of office... The Task Force understands the basis for this provision for those public officers, such as members of the legislature, county councils and county commissioners, who have the power to change their compensation. Members of boards of education, however, are in a different situation since their compensation is changed only by an act of the legislature, signed by the governor. The Task Force hopes that, when these recommendations are proposed in bill form, an opinion will be sought from the Attorney General of Maryland regarding the applicability of this constitutional provision to members of county boards of education. To implement these recommendations, the following changes are necessary in Section of the Education Article: (a) An elected member of the County Board who is serving a term of office that began before November 30, 1978 may not receive compensation for his Page 12

15 services but is entitled to an allowance of $6,000 annually or any larger sum REIMBURSEMENT for travel and other expenses as provided by the Montgomery County Council. (b) (1) An elected member of the County Board whose current full term of office began on or after November 30, 1986 is entitled to receive $12,000 $18,500 annually as compensation instead of allowances and the President of the County Board if entitled to compensation under this subjection is entitled to an additional $2,000 $4,000 annually as compensation. (2) A member receiving annual compensation also is entitled to reimbursement for expenses as approved by the Montgomery County Council IS ENTITLED TO HEALTH INSURANCE AND TO OTHER FRINGE BENEFITS REGULARLY PROVIDED TO EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION. (c) (1) The student member may not receive compensation but, after submitting expense vouchers, may be reimbursed, but only for out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with official duties. (2) A STUDENT MEMBER WHO COMPLETES A FULL TERM ON THE BOARD SHALL BE GRANTED A SCHOLARSHIP OF $2,500 TO BE APPLIED TOWARD HIGHER EDUCATION. The amendments in Section 3-902(a) and (b) eliminate some antiquated language; provide for the first compensation increase for Board members in 15 years, at a level that is comparable to the Montgomery County Planning Board; and provides for a program of fringe benefits for Board members that is taken from a similar section relating to the Washington County Board of Education (Section (a)(2)). Section 3-902(c)(2) provides for the $2,500 scholarship for the student Board member. Page 13

16 Page 14

17 Summary of Recommended Education Article Amendments Proposed Amendments to Sections 3-901(2), (5) and (6): (2) The nomination and election process shall be as agreed on by the County Board and the Montgomery County region of the Maryland Association of Student Councils. This agreement shall include a process by which to replace one or both of the final candidates if they are unable to proceed in the election. Any student enrolled in a middle or high school in the Montgomery County public HIGH schools may: (i) Nominate a student member candidate; (ii) Vote for delegates from the student s school, who in turn, vote in a nominating convention to reduce to 2 the number of candidates for student Board member if there are 3 or more candidates; and (iii) Vote directly for 1 of the 2 remaining student Board member candidates. (5) Unless invited to attend by the affirmative vote of a majority of the County Board, the student member may not attend an executive session that relates to: (i) Hearings held under 6-202(a) of this article REGARDING DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST ANY EMPLOYEE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT; or (ii) Collective bargaining. (6) As provided in paragraph (7) of this subsection, the student member shall vote on all matters except those relating to: (i) 6-202(a) of this article THE EMPLOYMENT, DISCIPLINING OR TERMINATION OF ANY EMPLOYEE OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICT; Page 15

18 Proposed Amendments to Section 3-902: (ii) Collective bargaining; (iii) Capital and operating budgets; and (iv) School closings, reopenings, and boundaries. (a) An elected member of the County Board who is serving a term of office that began before November 30, 1978 may not receive compensation for his services but is entitled to an allowance of $6,000 annually or any larger sum REIMBURSEMENT for travel and other expenses as provided by the Montgomery County Council. (b) (1) An elected member of the County Board whose current full term of office began on or after November 30, 1986 is entitled to receive $12,000 $18,500 annually as compensation instead of allowances and the President of the County Board if entitled to compensation under this subjection is entitled to an additional $2,000 $4,000 annually as compensation. (2) A member receiving annual compensation also is entitled to reimbursement for expenses as approved by the Montgomery County Council IS ENTITLED TO HEALTH INSURANCE AND TO OTHER FRINGE BENEFITS REGULARLY PROVIDED TO EMPLOYEES OF THE BOARD OF EDUCATION. (c) (1) The student member may not receive compensation but, after submitting expense vouchers, may be reimbursed, but only for out-of-pocket expenses incurred in connection with official duties. (2) A STUDENT MEMBER WHO COMPLETES A FULL TERM ON THE BOARD SHALL BE GRANTED A SCHOLARSHIP OF $2,500 TO BE APPLIED TOWARD HIGHER EDUCATION. Proposed amendment to Section 3-903(c): (c) The affirmative vote of the members of the County Board for the passage of a motion by the County Board shall be: 4 ELECTED MEMBERS, EXCEPT THAT A TIE VOTE OF THE MEMBERS PRESENT AND VOTING ON A MOTION IS NOT AN AFFIRMATIVE VOTE. (1) 5 members when the student member is voting; or (2) 4 members when the student member is not voting. Page 16