Search Results

BILL: HB 763 TITLE: Education - Sexual Abuse and Assault Awareness and Prevention Program  - Human and Sex Trafficking DATE: February 25, 2025 POSITION: Oppose COMMITTEE: House Ways & Means Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four local school superintendents  opposes House Bill 763.  This bill requires that the State Board and each nonpublic school in the State shall develop and implement a program of age-appropriate education on the awareness and prevention of sexual abuse and assault. The program shall be taught by a teacher who is trained to provide instruction on the awareness of sexual abuse and assault and be incorporated into the health curriculum of each county board and each nonpublic school. It also includes for students in grades 6 through 8, material promoting the awareness and prevention of human and sex trafficking. This act shall take effect July 1, 2025. Local superintendents strongly support robust and comprehensive instruction in age-appropriate health education, including topics covered in this legislation, and believe that the intent of this bill is already being met.  According to the MSDE, comprehensive health education has been a feature of Maryland education regulation since 1970. In this framework, concepts and skills related to family life and human sexuality must be age-appropriate and taught by teachers who have had additional preparation in the content and teaching methods of the material. New health education standards were adopted by the Maryland State Board of Education in December 2019 and the Maryland State Framework for Comprehensive Health Education was revised based on those standards. This framework was created by the State Board and MSDE in partnership with the Maryland Department of Health, LEAs, national experts, and stakeholders to rigorously review, revise, and adopt standards, frameworks, and curricular resources. The updated grade 7 standards require students to analyze laws, policies, and consequences related to sexual mistreatment, grooming, harassment, abuse, assault, exploitation, and human trafficking that are designed to protect young people. Further, while the grade 6 and 8 indicators do not explicitly reference "human and sex trafficking," terms such as sexual mistreatment, grooming, harassment, abuse, assault, exploitation, and boundary violations were intentionally chosen to provide age-appropriate instruction on these issues.  Some local school districts have incorporated the topics mentioned above in curricula at all three levels and have included human trafficking specifically in middle school curriculum for several years. Rather than imposing mandates on the teaching of human and sex trafficking awareness, local superintendents support program guidance from the MSDE. Again, while we appreciate the bill’s good intention, we ask the Committee to continue to honor the well-established and balanced relationship between the state and local education experts on the creation of standards, and implementation of local curriculum. For these reasons, PSSAM opposes House Bill 763 and kindly requests an unfavorable  report.

BILL: HB 688 TITLE: Education - High School Graduation Requirements - Financial Aid  Application DATE: February 25, 2025 POSITION: Oppose COMMITTEE: House Ways & Means Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four local school superintendents  opposes House Bill 688.  This bill requires each public high school student beginning in the 2026-2027 school year to complete and submit the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) to the U.S. Department of Education or The Maryland State Financial Aid Application (MFSAA) to the Maryland Higher Education Commission as a requirement for graduation. In place of completing the FAFSA or MFSAA, a student or the parent or legal guardian of a minor student may submit to the county board a form stating that the student understands the requirement and declines to complete or submit FAFSA or MSFAA. This act shall take effect October 1, 2025.  Maryland superintendents recognize that completion of FAFSA and MFSAA are important tools for access to higher education, especially for low-income students and families. However, we oppose this legislation for the following reasons:  Requiring the completion, or waiver acknowledging an attempt to complete, these documents is wholly inappropriate as a graduation requirement . Graduation requirements should be student-focused and academic-focused only. No child’s diploma should be at risk due to the inability for an adult in their life to file taxes or fail to submit paperwork.  The underlying premise of this legislation is that all students are college bound  – a policy clearly not embraced by this Legislature with its heavy investments in College and Career Readiness opportunities through the Blueprint. Operational considerations - the legislation imposes significant fiscal and operational mandates  on local school systems, especially with the current shortages of school counselors.  The fiscal note also clearly explains the state and local investments that will be needed to meet the bill’s requirements to verify that submission has been completed, particularly for the MFSAA.   This legislation requires the school districts to delve into the individual family dynamics to navigate the reasons why they have not completed the FAFSA or signed a waiver. In the current national political climate, we are not comfortable approaching our potentially undocumented families to ask them to sign what may be interpreted as threatening “government” paperwork,   causing unnecessary anxiety.  School systems are heavily engaged in initiatives at both the local and state levels to improve financial aid application completion rates. High school counselors assist students and their families maneuver these applications through one-on-one counseling, parent nights, and evening sessions. Additionally, the Maryland College Application Campaign (MCAC) - a partnership between the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE), the Maryland Higher Education Commission, and College Goal Maryland - supports students in filling out the FAFSA and provides materials and support to schools and districts.  Mandating FAFSA or MSFAA completion and submission for every student would impose significant financial and operational burdens on schools. Implementation costs will vary significantly by LEA, as those with lower completion rates will likely need more resources to help students and families complete the aid forms. This legislation would also increase workload for school counselors and/or other school staff and may require some school systems to hire additional personnel. As recognized in the fiscal note, Maryland’s ratio of counselors to students is 308 to 1, while the recognized acceptable level is 250 students to one guidance counselor. The fiscal note also indicates that Baltimore City Public Schools estimates that they will need to hire an additional counselor for each of its high schools leading to a $4.0 million fiscal impact annually beginning in Fiscal Year 2026.  Lastly, also clearly articulated in the fiscal note, “The MSFAA was not designed to grant access to individual completion data by non-MHEC staff. At this time, the cost of granting access to local school system staff to this information cannot be reliably estimated but is likely significant.  Further it is unclear what entity would be responsible for matching MSFAA data ……….. All options have costs and other implications that should be considered.”  Our opposition is not a statement on the value or importance of students’ completing these important tools, but a realistic description of this bill’s new requirements for school systems and already overburdened school counselors. And to reiterate, this legislation is potentially creating a new barrier to high school graduation that has nothing to do with a student’s academic achievement and we vociferously oppose this as a new graduation requirement.  For these reasons, PSSAM opposes House Bill 688 and kindly requests an unfavorable  report.

BILL: HB 771 TITLE: Student Health - Program for Student Dental Health - Established DATE: February 25, 2025 POSITION: Oppose COMMITTEE: House Ways & Means Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four local school superintendents  opposes House Bill 771.  This bill requires that in the 2027-2028 school year, each student enrolled in a public elementary or secondary school in the state shall submit to the school a certificate of dental health in accordance with the program for student dental health under § 20–2302 of the health general article, on a schedule established by the department. The Maryland Department of Health is required to establish a program for student dental health and shall include (1) standards for the periodic dental examinations of students; (2) the creation of a certificate of dental health that can be used by public schools in accordance with § 7–402.1 of the education article; (3) the creation of a standard form to be used by health care practitioners, parents, and schools to certify a student’s dental health; and (3) information for students and parents. Maryland superintendents acknowledge the importance of dental health in the well-being of Maryland's students. PSSAM’s opposition to this bill is not meant to diminish the value of widespread access to dental care, but rather to oppose the statutory mandate requiring students to submit a certificate of dental health to their school.  Local school systems are actively engaged in promoting and advancing the health of our students through a variety of programs. PSSAM certainly acknowledges the importance of the State’s continued efforts to ensure that children are receiving quality dental health services, but have concerns regarding the operational mandates imposed in this bill that require schools to gather and maintain these medical certificates. We recognize that gaps exist in dental care for students and are willing to work with our State partners in MSDE and the Department of Health to close those gaps without the requirements imposed by this legislation. For these reasons, PSSAM opposes House Bill 771 and kindly requests an unfavorable  report.

BILL: HB 772 TITLE: Education - Career Counseling Program for Middle and High School Students - Alterations DATE: February 25, 2025 POSITION: Oppose COMMITTEE: House Ways & Means Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four local school superintendents  opposes House Bill 772.  This bill would extend, indefinitely, the Career Counseling pilot program between the workforce investment boards and county boards of education. Currently, local boards of education are required to provide funding to workforce development boards to support the Center Counseling Program for middle and high school students. Each county board shall distribute $62 a student, for fiscal year 2024 and for fiscal year 2025, and each fiscal year thereafter, the prior fiscal year amount increased by the inflation adjustment. The local workforce development board along with the county board and any other relevant State or local agencies, shall report to the Accountability and Implementation Board (AIB) on the use and impact of the use of funds. The purpose of the program is to provide each middle school and high school student in the county with individualized career counseling services. This act shall take effect July 1, 2025. PSSAM strongly  opposes this bill due to several critical issues with the pilot program’s implementation. The Blueprint appropriately identified the importance of Career Counseling as part of Pillar III and crafted the pilot program with local workforce investment boards and community colleges to create stronger ties to the business community. The statute reflects that this pilot expires in fiscal 2027, however, the implementation of this initiative has been problematic and inconsistent. Where it is working well, it is largely implemented by staff hired and trained by the districts. In December, 2024 one of our PSSAM’s top legislative recommendations  was to  allow LEAs the immediate discretion to discontinue the pilot partnerships with community colleges and workforce investment boards (WIBs) a year ahead of the pilot’s expiration. House Bill 772 aims to do the exact opposite of our recommendations.  Career coaching is a valuable initiative that should become a permanent program. However, funding for this program should not be allocated to the Workforce Board. While it is essential to continue partnering with the local community college and Workforce Board, career coaches should be employed directly by the local school system. The sections below reflect some of our issues with the current approach to the implementation of local workforce boards.  Lack of Support Career coaches across local districts are disappointed with the insufficient support from workforce boards, particularly in connecting students with industry professionals, providing access to networking events, and offering professional development. Workforce boards have also fallen short in organizing school-based career fairs and interviews for students. As a result, much of the responsibility has fallen on LEA career coaches and Career and Technical Education (CTE) staff. For example, in one school district, career coaches have not received updates on local business trends, labor market data, or current hiring practices since their initial training in Summer/Fall 2023.  Additionally, and unexpectedly, professional development opportunities for career coaches have been outsourced to external partners. This was an area in which many school districts expected their workforce board to support career coaches and even some additional school system employees. Furthermore, many districts have found that local workforce development boards lack effective communication and collaboration, undermining their initial promises and intentions to support both career coaches and students. Mismanagement of Funds The current financial relationship with workforce boards has been proven problematic across many local school districts. First, many districts report that the funds allocated to their local workforce board are primarily supporting internal operations rather than benefiting students directly. In one district, the local WIB’s budget detailed overhead costs of $49,000 for building space, $34,000 for other costs, and $238,000 for salaries for office staff, amounting to 14% of the funds.   In another LEA, the local Workforce Board is unwilling to revisit the staffing structure model regarding the number of coaches per school. Currently, one coach has been assigned to each school, whether it has 75 students or 2,400. The local school system has asked to revisit this structure to better meet the needs of all students, but no changes have been made. Initially, the local Workforce Board had only one administrative position; however, non-school-based positions have quadrupled over the past 18 months. These positions duplicate the roles already established within the local school system, resulting in financial mismanagement. Issues with Staffing Local school districts have identified various inefficiencies in staffing, including the failure to allocate necessary resources for agreed-upon services, inflexibility when it comes to the number of coach assignments per school and unfilled vacancies to the point where, in one school district, 55% of schools experienced vacancies at the start of the school year. Generally, there is a lack of communication during hiring and onboarding processes, leading to some schools being unaware of when a new coach is hired, released, or even reporting to work. Collaboration between the districts and their workforce boards is also insufficient. The local Workforce Board subcontracts most professional development training to web-based platforms and outside organizations. This was an area where we expected the Workforce Board to support career coaches and some additional school system employees, but this has not occurred. Failure to Deliver Meaningful Results and Accountability Overall, local school districts have not seen meaningful and tangible results from the implementation of workforce development boards. This current structure has added very little value to local schools. Their overall lack of accountability has led to incomplete data sharing with the local school system making it even more difficult to assess the programs’ success. Unfortunately, these are just a few of the common problems we have heard directly from our school-based employees.  Local superintendents strongly believe that career coaching is an indispensable resource we provide for students across Maryland’s middle and high schools. However, we believe that funding should not be allocated to workforce boards, and instead should be directed to hiring career coaches at the local level, who can ensure direct oversight, accountability, and alignment with student and school community needs. Benefits of Career Coaches as School System Employees Stronger Student Connections: Coaches will better understand how to engage with students and integrate into the school community. Equitable Access: Ensuring all students receive career coaching, not leaving it to each coach's discretion. School-Specific Alignment: Each principal can hire a coach who best fits the unique needs of their school community, something the Workforce Board may not be equipped to determine. Again, career coaching is a valuable initiative and the Blueprint statute wisely assigns funding for this initiative, but we should learn from the pilot - the successful and unsuccessful pilot experiences - and allow LEAs the discretion to continue these relationships or bring these important resources to more successful and well developed internal programs.  For these reasons, PSSAM strongly   opposes House Bill 772 and kindly requests an unfavorable  report.

BILL: HB 951 TITLE: School Systems - Reportable Offenses - Alterations DATE: February 25, 2025 POSITION: Letter of Information COMMITTEE: House Ways & Means Committee House Judiciary Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, is providing this letter of information for the Committee’s consideration regarding House Bill 951. This legislation makes a number of changes to the reportable offenses statute including including institutions and programs of higher education in which a student is enrolled as part of a dual enrollment program in the definition of “school system”; adding certain offenses to the list of offenses a law enforcement agency must report to certain school personnel; requiring law  enforcement agencies to notify the State’s Attorney if a student is a suspect in an investigation of certain offenses and if the student no longer is a suspect; authorizing the State’s Attorney to notify the local superintendent or the superintendent’s designee if the student is a suspect in an investigation of certain offenses; requiring the State’s Attorney to notify the local superintendent or the superintendent’s designee if a student is no longer a suspect in certain investigations; expanding a certain reporting requirement to include instances when a student is identified as a suspect for certain offenses. The public education system in Maryland is responsible for providing a free and appropriate education for every student in the State. Local superintendents take this responsibility very seriously and balance this tremendous duty to educate, with the need to provide a safe and supportive educational setting for students and staff.  To ensure the highest standards of safety for schools, it is imperative that information regarding students’ criminal involvement and interactions with law enforcement is appropriately shared with school personnel. The current flow of information between law enforcement and schools is disjointed and needs to be vastly improved.  In light of the numerous, and varied proposals before the Legislature this session regarding Reportable Offenses, we believe a work group should be convened and compelled to make recommendations focused on operational protocols for the dissemination and coordination of information ahead of the 2026 session . We obviously defer to the committees to name any participants to such a work group, but we hope the following organizations would be considered to ensure a comprehensive review of the existing statute and its current implementation: the Department of Juvenile Services, the Maryland State Department of Education, the Maryland State’s Attorneys’ Association, the Maryland Sheriffs’ Association, the Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), the ACLU of Maryland, and the Juvenile Services Education Program.  Notably, almost all of these organizations are members of the Commission on Juvenile Justice Reform and Emerging and Best Practices (the Commission) that was created by the Legislature during the 2024 session (HB 814/Chapter 735). Therefore, we believe that a subcommittee or work group of this Commission would be the ideal group of stakeholders to dive deep and comprehensively into these issues.  PSSAM staff and legal counsel from our local school systems would be more than willing to help staff this work group along with the staff from the Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy (GOCPP), who are already charged to coordinate the work of the Commission.  PSSAM believes the following issues should be addressed and considered in developing the most effective public policy regarding the implementation of the Reportable Offenses statute.   More appropriate and comprehensive information regarding juveniles who transfer between local school systems, including programs hosted by the Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) and the Juvenile Services Education Program and Board (JSEP);  Expanding information shared by law enforcement to local superintendents or school systems within twenty-four hours of any arrest of a student with details pertaining to school safety, including whether any victims were students and the type of weapon(s) involved if applicable.  Further, enhancements to the “reportable offenses” law should include the tools necessary for seamless communication between education systems, and allow for a central repository via the Maryland State Department of Education or a similarly appropriate entity. For instance, often a local superintendent, school security personnel, or a school principal will receive information as described in the current reportable offenses statute for a student that is NOT currently enrolled in that county. LEAs do not have the information to notify the appropriate district where the student is enrolled. To fill this communication gap:  Information should be promptly shared with the MSDE (or an appropriate central repository) to facilitate notification of the school or jurisdiction of attendance. Local superintendents and districts are not privy to statewide attendance records and this information must be coordinated at the State level.  We also support the concept of “mandatory information sharing among local superintendents” that was embedded in the emergency regulations passed by the State Board of Education in the fall of 2024. However, to reiterate, local superintendents and school personnel do not have access to the necessary data sources to know where a student has transferred.  In addition, there are many cases where a juvenile under the supervision and jurisdiction of the Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) is transferred to a LEA but no information is shared about the student’s individual circumstances, or the student’s previous educational setting. Therefore, the law must be amended to compel the DJS to:  Notify the local superintendent and the principal of a school in which the student is enrolled, or which that student has been transferred, of the student’s reportable offense or offense that is related to the student’s membership in a criminal organization, the disposition of the offense, and the law enforcement report or description of the offenses including details pertinent to school safety, including whether any victims were student and the type of weapon(s) involved, if applicable. Local superintendents support increased communication between law enforcement and the appropriate, but limited, school personnel needed to ensure the safety of students in school settings, as well as protecting the privacy and due process of those awaiting disposition of criminal investigations.  Again, we respectfully request that the Committees direct all entities involved in the implementation of this statute to work together to create an integrated system that ensures seamless and predictable communication. This information-sharing is integral to ensure proper physical safeguards in school buildings, while also protecting student confidentiality, and allowing due process for all parties involved. We appreciate this Committee’s examination of these important education and safety issues and look forward to continued dialogue on this, and other related legislation.

BILL: SB 321 TITLE: Budget Reconciliation and Financing Act of 2025 DATE: February 28, 2025 POSITION: Favorable with Amendments COMMITTEE: Senate Budget & Taxation Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, supports  Senate Bill 321 with two   amendments  to remove the additional shift of teacher pension costs to local governments, and remove the proposed increase of the local cost share for the placement of students in nonpublic settings. First, PSSSAM opposes the teacher pension cost shift provision  of the bill.  As proposed, this provision would shift approximately $93 million in state teacher pension costs onto counties beginning in FY ‘26, and permanently transfer an increased percentage of the unfunded liability of teacher pension indefinitely. The Budget Reconciliation and Financing Act (BRFA) seeks to permanently transfer additional teacher pension costs to counties. There is also a recommendation from the Department of Legislative Services (DLS) that would more than double the proposed shift, increasing the county burden to $186 million in FY ‘26. If both the BRFA and the DLS recommendations were approved, counties would assume 100% of the State’s unfunded teacher pension liability—an unprecedented and unsustainable financial obligation.  Counties already fully cover the employer share of teacher pensions, or “normal costs” — a responsibility imposed in 2012 after extensive negotiations. These negotiations recognized that county governments have little control over teacher salaries. More importantly, the 2012 negotiations recognized that counties have no control or ability to impact the pension investment returns, or the policies driving these liabilities. In recognition of these facts, the compromise was that the State would continue to contribute the “unfunded liability” of pension costs. This proposal, however, would require counties to shoulder the entire cost. Unfunded liabilities primarily result from underperforming pension investments - again, something that local governments and local school systems have no control over. In addition, the recent normal cost increases are salary-driven -  linked to the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future — also factors outside of the authority of counties and school systems.  DLS staff has proposed a 100% cost shift without justification or policy analysis—a move with severe fiscal consequences. If approved, this is an unprecedented policy shift that will affect the local negotiations between school systems and their county funding partners. If this change is adopted, it is expected that any requests from local school systems over traditional "Maintenance of Effort,” will be met with serious resistance due to this additional fiscal responsibility.  To compound the fiscal burden, the BRFA also proposes slashing supplemental retirement grants under Aid to Civil Divisions by 50% in FY ‘26 and eliminating them entirely in  FY ‘27. These grants were part of a 2012 agreement to ease the impact of the original pension cost shift, and their elimination would break that commitment—resulting in a $28 million statewide loss over two years and compounding the financial burden on counties. Second, PSSAM opposes the proposed nonpublic special education placement cost shift provision of SB 321. This provision proposes shifting $25 million in new costs onto local school systems in FY ‘26 and permanently changes the cost-sharing relationship, lowering the State’s contribution from 70% to 60% for nonpublic placements. This shift will immediately affect school system budgets, starting in July, many of which were recently adopted and awaiting their local governments’ response. Similar to the pension shift discussion above, this proposal will materially change the funding relationship between school systems and their local governments. As school districts have no ability to raise revenue, we will have no option but to seek additional funding to cover this cost shift. Costs for nonpublic placements are not discretionary, these are necessary and federally mandated expenses for our most vulnerable special education students. School systems already suffer from underfunding for special education students. Local school systems spend over $1,038,848,168 in direct special education services that are NOT reimbursed by the state and federal governments  (see linked chart). These BRFA provisions worsen a growing financial crisis facing our local government partners. For these reasons, PSSAM   supports Senate Bill 321 with two key amendments: one to remove the shift of more teacher pension costs to local governments, and another to remove the proposed increase of the local cost share for the placement of nonpublic students. PSSAM respectfully requests a favorable with amendments  report from the committees.

BILL: HB 620 TITLE: Primary and Secondary Education - Reportable Offense - Alteration DATE: February 25, 2025 POSITION: Letter of Information COMMITTEE: House Ways & Means Committee House Judiciary Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, is providing this letter of information for the Committee’s consideration regarding House Bill 620. This bill alters the definition of “reportable offense” to be only a crime of violence as defined by the Criminal Law Article. Therefore, law enforcement agencies are subject to notification requirements in current law when they arrest a student only for a crime of violence and not for other crimes currently included in the definition of a “reportable offense.” The public education system in Maryland is responsible for providing a free and appropriate education for every student in the State. Local superintendents take this responsibility very seriously and balance this tremendous duty to educate, with the need to provide a safe and supportive educational setting for students and staff.  To ensure the highest standards of safety for schools, it is imperative that information regarding students’ criminal involvement and interactions with law enforcement is appropriately shared with school personnel. The current flow of information between law enforcement and schools is disjointed and needs to be vastly improved.  In light of the numerous, and varied proposals before the Legislature this session regarding Reportable Offenses, we believe a work group should be convened and compelled to make recommendations focused on operational protocols for the dissemination and coordination of information ahead of the 2026 session .  We obviously defer to the committees to name any participants to such a work group, but we hope the following organizations would be considered to ensure a comprehensive review of the existing statute and its current implementation: the Department of Juvenile Services, the Maryland State Department of Education, the Maryland State’s Attorneys’ Association, the Maryland Sheriffs’ Association, the Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), the ACLU of Maryland, and the Juvenile Services Education Program.  Notably, almost all of these organizations are members of the Commission on Juvenile Justice Reform and Emerging and Best Practices (the Commission) that was created by the Legislature during the 2024 session (HB 814/Chapter 735). Therefore, we believe that a subcommittee or work group of this Commission would be the ideal group of stakeholders to dive deep and comprehensively into these issues.  PSSAM staff and legal counsel from our local school systems would be more than willing to help staff this work group along with the staff from the Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy (GOCPP), who are already charged to coordinate the work of the Commission.  PSSAM believes the following issues should be addressed and considered in developing the most effective public policy regarding the implementation of the Reportable Offenses statute.   More appropriate and comprehensive information regarding juveniles who transfer between local school systems, including programs hosted by the Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) and the Juvenile Services Education Program and Board (JSEP);  Expanding information shared by law enforcement to local superintendents or school systems within twenty-four hours of any arrest of a student with details pertaining to school safety, including whether any victims were students and the type of weapon(s) involved if applicable.  Further, enhancements to the “reportable offenses” law should include the tools necessary for seamless communication between education systems, and allow for a central repository via the Maryland State Department of Education or a similarly appropriate entity. For instance, often a local superintendent, school security personnel, or a school principal will receive information as described in the current reportable offenses statute for a student that is NOT currently enrolled in that county. LEAs do not have the information to notify the appropriate district where the student is enrolled. To fill this communication gap:  Information should be promptly shared with the MSDE (or an appropriate central repository) to facilitate notification of the school or jurisdiction of attendance. Local superintendents and districts are not privy to statewide attendance records and this information must be coordinated at the State level.  We also support the concept of “mandatory information sharing among local superintendents” that was embedded in the emergency regulations passed by the State Board of Education in the fall of 2024. However, to reiterate, local superintendents and school personnel do not have access to the necessary data sources to know where a student has transferred.  In addition, there are many cases where a juvenile under the supervision and jurisdiction of the Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) is transferred to a LEA but no information is shared about the student’s individual circumstances, or the student’s previous educational setting. Therefore, the law must be amended to compel the DJS to:  Notify the local superintendent and the principal of a school in which the student is enrolled, or which that student has been transferred, of the student’s reportable offense or offense that is related to the student’s membership in a criminal organization, the disposition of the offense, and the law enforcement report or description of the offenses including details pertinent to school safety, including whether any victims were student and the type of weapon(s) involved, if applicable. Local superintendents support increased communication between law enforcement and the appropriate, but limited, school personnel needed to ensure the safety of students in school settings, as well as protecting the privacy and due process of those awaiting disposition of criminal investigations.  Again, we respectfully request that the Committees direct all entities involved in the implementation of this statute to work together to create an integrated system that ensures seamless and predictable communication. This information-sharing is integral to ensure proper physical safeguards in school buildings, while also protecting student confidentiality, and allowing due process for all parties involved. We appreciate this Committee’s examination of these important education and safety issues and look forward to continued dialogue on this, and other related legislation.

BILL: HB 588 TITLE: Juveniles - Reportable Offenses DATE: February 26, 2025 POSITION: Favorable with Amendment COMMITTEE: House Judiciary Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, supports House Bill 588 with amendments . This bill requires the Department of Juvenile Services (DJS), for students committed to its custody, to notify the local superintendent and the school principal of a school in which the student has enrolled or to which the student has been transferred of (1) the student’s arrest for a reportable offense or an offense that is related to the student’s membership in a criminal organization and (2) the disposition of the reportable offense. DJS must also provide information regarding any educational programming and related services provided to the student.  The public education system in Maryland is responsible for providing a free and appropriate education for every student in the State. Local superintendents take this responsibility very seriously and balance this tremendous duty to educate, with the need to provide a safe and supportive educational setting for students and staff.  To ensure the highest standards of safety for schools, it is imperative that information regarding students’ criminal involvement and interactions with law enforcement is appropriately shared with school personnel. The current flow of information between law enforcement and schools is disjointed and needs to be vastly improved. This legislation would help provide school administration with important information when making educational placement decisions but we believe more is needed and have outlined some of the issues we believe should be addressed below.  In light of the numerous, and varied proposals before the Legislature this session regarding Reportable Offenses, we believe a work group should be convened and compelled to make recommendations focused on operational protocols for the dissemination and coordination of information ahead of the 2026 session . We obviously defer to the committee to name any participants to such a work group, but we hope the following organizations would be considered to ensure a comprehensive review of the existing statute and its current implementation: the Department of Juvenile Services, the Maryland State Department of Education, the Maryland State’s Attorneys’ Association, the Maryland Sheriffs’ Association, the Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), the ACLU of Maryland, and the Juvenile Services Education Program.  Notably, almost all of these organizations are members of the Commission on Juvenile Justice Reform and Emerging and Best Practices (the Commission) that was created by the Legislature during the 2024 session (HB 814/Chapter 735). Therefore, we believe that a subcommittee or work group of this Commission would be the ideal group of stakeholders to dive deep and comprehensively into these issues.  PSSAM staff and legal counsel from our local school systems would be more than willing to help staff this work group along with the staff from the Governor’s Office of Crime Prevention and Policy (GOCPP), who are already charged to coordinate the work of the Commission.  PSSAM believes the following issues should be addressed and considered in developing the most effective public policy regarding the implementation of the Reportable Offenses statute.   More appropriate and comprehensive information regarding juveniles who transfer between local school systems, including programs hosted by the Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) and the Juvenile Services Education Program and Board (JSEP);  Expanding information shared by law enforcement to local superintendents or school systems within twenty-four hours of any arrest of a student with details pertaining to school safety, including whether any victims were students and the type of weapon(s) involved if applicable.  Further, enhancements to the “reportable offenses” law should include the tools necessary for seamless communication between education systems, and allow for a central repository via the Maryland State Department of Education or a similarly appropriate entity. For instance, often a local superintendent, school security personnel, or a school principal will receive information as described in the current reportable offenses statute for a student that is NOT currently enrolled in that county. LEAs do not have the information to notify the appropriate district where the student is enrolled. To fill this communication gap:  Information should be promptly shared with the MSDE (or an appropriate central repository) to facilitate notification of the school or jurisdiction of attendance. Local superintendents and districts are not privy to statewide attendance records and this information must be coordinated at the State level.  We also support the concept of “mandatory information sharing among local superintendents” that was embedded in the emergency regulations passed by the State Board of Education in the fall of 2024. However, to reiterate, local superintendents and school personnel do not have access to the necessary data sources to know where a student has transferred.  In addition, there are many cases where a juvenile under the supervision and jurisdiction of the Department of Juvenile Services (DJS) is transferred to a LEA but no information is shared about the student’s individual circumstances, or the student’s previous educational setting. Therefore, the law must be amended to compel the DJS to:  Notify the local superintendent and the principal of a school in which the student is enrolled, or which that student has been transferred, of the student’s reportable offense or offense that is related to the student’s membership in a criminal organization, the disposition of the offense, and the law enforcement report or description of the offenses including details pertinent to school safety, including whether any victims were student and the type of weapon(s) involved, if applicable. Local superintendents support increased communication between law enforcement and the appropriate, but limited, school personnel needed to ensure the safety of students in school settings, as well as protecting the privacy and due process of those awaiting disposition of criminal investigations.  Again, we respectfully request that the Committee direct all entities involved in the implementation of this statute to work together to create an integrated system that ensures seamless and predictable communication. This information-sharing is integral to ensure proper physical safeguards in school buildings, while also protecting student confidentiality, and allowing due process for all parties involved.   We appreciate this Committee’s examination of these important education and safety issues and look forward to continued dialogue on this, and other related legislation.  For these reasons, PSSAM supports House Bill 588 with an amendment  to create the work group outlined above.

BILL: SB 569 TITLE: Anne Arundel County – Public Schools – School Schedule Options DATE: February 19, 2025 POSITION: Favorable COMMITTEE: Senate Education Energy & the Environment Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, supports Senate Bill 569. This bill authorizes the Anne Arundel County Board of Education to operate one or more schools within the county using a scheduling model that eliminates early dismissal days if the minimum 1,080-hour requirement is met.  PSSAM is pleased to take the unusual position to support a local bill. Maryland superintendents have been challenged to “reimagine” public education by the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future and this scheduling model provides an unique opportunity for innovation and creativity. Other local education agencies (LEAs) are eager to watch as AACPS test-drives alternative scheduling for today’s modern and adaptable students and staff.  Current law requires per pupil attendance for at least 180 actual school days and a minimum of 1,080 school hours during a 10-month period in each school year; OR if normal attendance is prevented due to conditions enumerated in law, schools shall be open for at least 1,080 hours during a 10–month period. These longstanding, and inflexible requirements hinder innovative school calendars.  This legislation opens up possibilities for scheduling solutions that meet diverse student and staff needs. Change is difficult, especially change involving school schedules that dominate a family’s ecosystem and daily work/life activities. However, we know that AACPS will go above and beyond to actively involve students, families, staff, and stakeholders in any proposed changes. For these reasons, PSSAM   supports Senate Bill 569 and requests a favorable  committee report.

BILL: SB 601 TITLE: Education - Dependent Children of Service Members - Advance Enrollment Procedures DATE: February 19, 2025 POSITION: Favorable with Amendments COMMITTEE: Senate Education Energy & the Environment Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, supports Senate Bill 601 with amendments . This bill requires local school systems to allow a dependent child of a service member to apply for advance enrollment in a public school and specifies requirements for advance enrollment procedures. The Secretary of Veterans and Military Families, in consultation with specified entities, must publish and maintain information on (1) advance enrollment procedures and (2) any assistance and services available to service members regarding advance enrollment. The bill takes effect July 1, 2025. PSSAM appreciates the intent of Senate Bill 601 in addressing the challenges faced by current enrollment procedures for dependent students of service members. PSSAM is pleased to support this bill with two amendments to streamline and clarify the enrollment process.  We request an amendment to section (D)(2), which states that the advanced enrolled student “shall have access to all academic courses and programs, including extracurricular activities”. We ask that clarifying language is added so the sentence reads as follows: “shall have access to all academic courses and programs THEY QUALIFY FOR, including extracurricular activities.” This clarification is in keeping with the academic requirements that may be needed for certain courses or extracurricular activities.  Additionally, we request an amendment to retain the existing authority superintendents have over which school the incoming student attends, ensuring placements remain tied to the student’s residence and district processes. Without such clarification, this bill could unintentionally allow students to pick and remain in a school, even if they no longer live in the attendance zone or county. For these reasons, PSSAM   supports Senate Bill 601  with amendments.

BILL: SB 887 TITLE: County Boards of Education - Reappointment of Incumbent County  Superintendent - Authorization DATE: February 21, 2025 POSITION: Favorable COMMITTEE: Senate Education Energy & the Environment Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, supports Senate Bill 887. This bill authorizes a county board of education to reappoint an incumbent county superintendent and authorizes a county board, at any point during the incumbent superintendent's term, to take action at a public meeting not later than March 1 of the year in which the contract is being renewed to reappoint the incumbent superintendent to serve a new term of 4 years beginning the immediately following July 1. This act shall take effect June 1, 2025.  PSSAM supports an amendment that will be requested by Howard County that would retain a provision in current law requiring superintendents to notify local boards of their interest in reappointment by February 1 of the final year of their contract.   This amendment retains the current open and transparent public process, and ensures productive communication between boards and their superintendents. Under current law, except in Baltimore City and Prince George’s County, local superintendents of schools of education are appointed for four-year terms. By February 1 of the year in which the term ends, the superintendent must notify the county board of their intention to be a candidate for reappointment. At a public meeting no later than March 1 of that year, the county board must decide to reappoint the incumbent superintendent. Nationally, superintendent turnover has risen since the pandemic, with over 40% of districts experiencing at least one change between 2019-2024. In Maryland, we have seen a 75% turnover since 2019, with eighteen of the twenty-four school systems turning over at least once. Currently, there are only 6 superintendents who have served in their Maryland districts longer than 4 years.   Local superintendents serve as the chief executive and chief academic officers of their school districts. They are crucial in guiding policy, implementing curricula, managing budgets, and ensuring compliance with state and federal regulations. Due to their unique skill set, professionals who step into this role are highly qualified and experienced, but can be difficult to recruit and retain, especially in high-poverty and urban districts. Therefore, it is vital for school boards and communities to prioritize retaining effective leaders.  Longevity in the superintendency provides stability and consistency in leadership across a school district, which allows for long-term planning that creates sustainable change. Further, a superintendent with deep experience in their school district fosters strong relationships with staff, students, and the community at large. A 2023 Seton Hall study* study concluded that superintendent longevity positively correlates with student achievement by creating stable conditions that foster trust, collaboration, and effective leadership. This research aligned with previous research, (Grissom and Andersen, 2012), showing that short superintendent tenure disrupts academic progress, confuses leadership styles, and lowers staff morale. High turnover negatively impacts school districts by preventing the completion of long-term improvement plans and disrupting program continuity. The study highlights that superintendent stability allows for relationship-building, trust development, and alignment of school district objectives with personal goals of staff. For these reasons, PSSAM   supports Senate Bill 887 and requests a favorable  committee report. *Kravitz, Robert L., "To What Extent Does Superintendent Longevity Relate to Student Performance As Measured by Graduation Rates" (2023). Seton Hall University Dissertations and Theses (ETDs). 3111. https://scholarship.shu.edu/dissertations/3111

BILL: SB 821 TITLE: Primary and Secondary Education - Student Immunization - Temporary  Admission Period DATE: February 21, 2025 POSITION: Favorable COMMITTEE: Senate Education Energy & the Environment Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four public school superintendents, supports  Senate Bill 821. This bill requires each county board of education to grant students temporary school admission if their parent or guardian provides proof of an immunization appointment scheduled within 60 calendar days of enrollment. Currently, regulations allow temporary admission only if the appointment is scheduled within 20 days of enrollment. Local superintendents recognize the importance of immunization policies in protecting the health and safety of all students and staff. However, PSSAM also acknowledges that some students—particularly newcomers and those in areas with limited medical facilities —face challenges meeting the required timeframes. There are also circumstances outside of the control of students and families, or the public at large. For instance, this year there was a shortage in some vaccines that caused delays in public health clinics in Maryland, affecting some of our most vulnerable students. Regardless of the reason for a delay in obtaining the required immunization or presenting the official paperwork, these students are excluded from official enrollment counts, leading to significant losses in education funding each year.  More importantly than districts losing funding, the current regulations prevent students from receiving instructional services until immunization requirements are met, creating barriers to timely school attendance. Ensuring that students can begin school on time is essential for their academic success. Again, while PSSAM recognizes the importance of widespread immunization for public health, the existing timeline does not account for the unique challenges faced by some students and their families.  For these reasons, PSSAM supports Senate Bill 821  and kindly requests a favorable   committee report.