Search Results

BILL: SB 377 TITLE: Higher Education - Teacher Development and Retention Program - Definition DATE: February 14, 2024 POSITION: Favorable COMMITTEE: Senate Education, Energy, and 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 377. This bill expands eligibility for Teacher Development and Retention Program educator stipends (a pilot program that terminates June 30, 2029, and provides both initial stipends and internship stipends) to include an otherwise eligible individual who is initially enrolled in any Maryland community college. The Teacher Development and Retention Program was created last year by the omnibus Maryland Educator Shortage Reduction Act to incentivize students to ultimately teach in a high-needs school, grade level, or content area in which there is a shortage of teachers. The pilot is to first provide a one-time stipend for in-classroom training and ultimately placing students in school settings that meet the criteria mentioned. Last year’s bill allowed for participation by two community colleges, but this bill will expand eligibility to all community colleges in the State, reaching a potential audience of at least 2,700 students enrolled in teacher preparation programs each year. Teacher shortage is a significant problem in Maryland, one we share with school districts across the nation. As we know, teacher support and teacher quality directly impact educational achievement for students. Systems and schools plagued by the lack of qualified teachers, teacher turnover, and lack of diversity in the workforce all negatively impact student learning. According to a State Board of Education presentation in July of 2022, “Research indicates that the cost of separation, recruitment, hiring, and training has been estimated to cost between $9,000 and $21,000 per teacher. While teacher vacancies continue to increase, total enrollment in Maryland’s Educator Preparation programs has declined by 33%.” This pipeline shortage is critically important and portends that our shortage will continue in the near-term. Teacher diversity is also a challenge in Maryland. The teaching workforce has remained predominantly white, while the student demographics have grown much more diverse. From the above referenced MSDE presentation, “Over the past 10 years, less than 30% of Maryland teachers were teachers of color. Studies show that increased diversity amongst teachers and broader sets of school professionals benefit student test-score performance and leads to improved school behaviors.” Research has shown that alternative preparation programs are more diverse than traditional colleges of education and while the community college route is not “alternative” per se, it is an important conduit for part-time and non-traditional students to pursue teaching as a profession and very likely to help produce more diverse teacher candidates. This legislation will complement and supplement the tenets of the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future. The Blueprint includes the creation of career ladders based on merit, as well as salary incentives for highly trained teachers, and incentives for teaching in low-performing schools. For these reasons, PSSAM supports Senate Bill 377 and urges a favorable report.

BILL: HB 795 TITLE: Education - Peace and Conflict Studies - High School Course DATE: February 14, 2024 POSITION: Oppose COMMITTEE: House Ways and Means 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, opposes House Bill 795. House Bill 795 would require the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) to develop curriculum content standards for a high school course on peace and conflict studies. Additionally, each local board of education would be required to implement a course on peace and conflict studies in each public high school in the county beginning in the 2025-2026 school year. Furthermore, each public high school would be required to set aside funds to hire a mediator to provide education and support to students and school personnel relating to conflict resolution and peaceful communication. PSSAM has a longstanding policy of opposing efforts by the General Assembly to codify curriculum standards, assessments, or graduation requirements. Local superintendents strongly believe that the role of curriculum development and implementation belongs solely to local boards of education in conjunction with MSDE. Rest assured, PSSAM’s opposition to this bill is not an evaluation of the merits of teaching any specified subject matter, but rather opposition to statutorily mandating content standards and curriculum. The Maryland General Assembly, in creating the Maryland State Board of Education and local boards of education, has delegated to these entities the responsibility of delivering a high-quality statewide system of public education. The State Board establishes State content frameworks, state assessment standards, and minimum state graduation requirements, while each local board and school system implements locally-developed curriculum to ensure that the state content frameworks are followed, student performance standards are met, and students are prepared to meet graduation requirements. Superintendents are committed to providing students with a comprehensive, well-rounded curriculum that includes the teaching of personal development skills, such as conflict resolution after proper stakeholder input and review processes. In addition to creating a mandated curriculum, this bill would also require local systems to use existing funds to implement the bill without the guarantee of new funding source, therefore creating an unfunded mandate for all twenty-four local systems. House Bill 795, alongside similar bills that seek to interject or extract piecemeal segments of the curriculum, only serve to weaken the effectiveness of the overall educational curriculum. Again, PSSAM’s opposition to this bill does not rest on the merits of instruction pertaining to peace and conflict studies, but the bill’s imposition of curricular mandates on local school systems. For these reasons, PSSAM opposes House Bill 795 and requests an unfavorable report.

BILL: HB 730 TITLE: Education - Public Middle Schools - Course on Collateral Consequences of a Criminal Conviction DATE: February 14, 2024 POSITION: Oppose COMMITTEE: House Ways and Means 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, opposes House Bill 730. House Bill 730 would require the Maryland State Board of Education (MSDE) to develop curriculum standards for a course on the collateral consequences of a criminal conviction for public middle school students in the State. Additionally, county boards of education would be required to develop and implement a curriculum for a course on the collateral consequences of a criminal conviction, which would be a required course offering for students in grades six through eight. PSSAM has a longstanding policy of opposing efforts by the General Assembly to codify curriculum standards, assessments, or graduation requirements. Local superintendents strongly believe that the role of curriculum development and implementation belongs solely to local boards of education in conjunction with MSDE. Rest assured, PSSAM’s opposition to this bill does not rest on an evaluation of the merits of teaching any specified subject matter, but rather opposition to statutorily mandating revisions to content standards and curriculum. The Maryland General Assembly, in creating the Maryland State Board of Education and local boards of education, has delegated to them the responsibility of delivering a high-quality statewide system of public education through State standards and accountability measures, as well as locally governed and administered curriculum. The State Board establishes State content frameworks, state assessment standards, and minimum state graduation requirements, while each local board and school system implement locally-developed curriculum to ensure that the state content frameworks are followed, student performance standards are met, and students are prepared to meet graduation requirements. Superintendents are committed to providing students with a comprehensive, well-rounded education through curriculum that is implemented after proper stakeholder input is received and review processes are completed in each individual system. However, as it stands, this bill would require all local systems to expend additional funds in curriculum and assessment creation that are not provided under the bill’s current language. Therefore, this bill serves as an unfunded mandate for all twenty-four local systems. Again, PSSAM’s opposition to this bill rests on the implications of curricular mandates on local school systems. House Bill 730, alongside similar bills which seek to interject or extract piecemeal segments of the curriculum, only serve to weaken the effectiveness of the overall educational curriculum. For these reasons, PSSAM opposes House Bill 730 and urges an unfavorable report.

BILL: HB 696 TITLE: Primary and Secondary Education – Breakfast and Lunch Programs – Universal Expansion DATE: February 14, 2024 POSITION: Support COMMITTEE: House Ways and Means 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 696. This bill requires the State Board of Education to ensure that by fiscal 2026 schools that participate, respectively, in the federal School Breakfast Program must offer a free breakfast to all students and in the National School Lunch Program must offer a free lunch to all students. Beginning in fiscal 2026, the State is responsible for reimbursing a local board of education or a participating nonpublic school for the cost of offering free breakfasts and lunches meeting U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) guidelines. The State must (1) for schools participating in the federal Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) pay the difference between the federal funds allocated to those schools and the cost of offering each student a meal, and (2) for other eligible schools, pay the difference for each student between the USDA free meal rate and paid meal rate. Some provisions exempting elementary schools from the requirement to provide a free breakfast are repealed. PSSAM strongly supports this legislation and the State’s generous participation. Based on our experiences during Covid in feeding students and families, we are extremely confident that all twenty-four local school systems will be able to implement such an ambitious program effectively and efficiently. The research on free meals for all students is vast and universally confirms the positive impact on student achievement, including academics and behavior. According to Madelein Levin and Jessie Hewins, the authors of  Universal Free School Meals: Ensuring That All Children are Able to Learn, their findings include increased participation in meal programs, in part due to the removal of the stigma of “free lunch.” In addition, there is no room for error in identifying food-challenged students with the elimination of paper applications. Students in school meal programs are also more likely to eat healthier foods, including fruits, vegetables, and milk. In turn, these healthier eating habits positively impact lower childhood obesity. Removing the transaction of paying for meals also results in more time for students to eat. According to Levin and Hewins, families also benefit strongly from free meal programs as it reduces their financial burden of purchasing two meals a day for their children. Lastly, research shows that a consistently well-fed student is a better student, test-taker and participant in school. Participation in the free meal programs is also linked to fewer absences, increased attention span, decreased tardiness and behavior problems, and overall, an improved school environment. For these reasons, PSSAM supports House Bill 696 and urges a favorable report.

BILL: HB 620 TITLE: Education - Sexual Abuse and Assault Awareness and Prevention Program - Human and Sex Trafficking DATE: February 14, 2024 POSITION: Oppose COMMITTEE: House Ways and Means Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM This bill requires that age-appropriate education program on the awareness and prevention of sexual abuse and assault be developed and implemented by the State Board of Education and certain nonpublic schools, for students in grades 6 through 8, material promoting the awareness and prevention of human and sex trafficking. PSSAM is supportive of the intent of this bill, but must oppose due to our core philosophy that curriculum decisions are left to superintendents and their local boards of education. However, it is important to note that many local school systems are currently incorporating these important topics in their health curriculum. Under current law each local school system must provide a comprehensive health education program for all students in prekindergarten through grade 8, and offer an education program in grades 9 through 12 that enables students to meet graduation requirements, and to select health education electives. In order to graduate from a public high school in Maryland, students must complete one credit of health; this was changed from a half credit requirement two years ago. Moving to a full credit will give additional time to address the specific concerns of human and sex trafficking without a mandate from the Legislature. PSSAM thanks the sponsor for his interest and advocacy but firmly believes decisions regarding curriculum belong to superintendents and local boards of education working together with the State Board of Education.

BILL: HB 571 TITLE: Family and Medical Leave Insurance Program - Modifications DATE: February 14, 2024 POSITION: Support with Amendments COMMITTEE: House Ways and Means 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 571 with amendments. This legislation proposes improvements to the Family and Medical Leave Insurance (FAMLI) Program and Fund by extending implementation dates and other technical changes. However, PSSAM requests an amendment to exempt local government employer provided plans from the Department’s new authority to collect fees from employer provided plans. The Time to Care Act of 2022 established the Family and Medical Leave Insurance (FAMLI) Program and Fund to provide up to 12 weeks of benefits to a covered individual taking leave from employment due to personal and family circumstances. The FAMLI Fund consists of contributions from employees and employers, including Maryland’s 24 local school systems and municipal and county governments. Employers and employees are to begin making payroll contributions to the Department of Labor to generate the FAMLI fund and to support benefits payments beginning in 2026. The Time to Care Act provided an exemption for employers who satisfy the requirements of law through their employer plan. This exemption provides the opportunity for employers, including public sector employers such as boards of education, counties, and municipal governments, to receive departmental approval to establish employer provider benefits plans. Many Local Education Agencies (LEAs) are members of the Maryland Boards of Education (MABE) Insurance Pool and are participating in the “The Time to Care Act Collaborative,”  established in partnership between MABE, the Maryland Association of Counties (MACo), and the Maryland Municipal League (MML). These partners are working diligently to use economies of scale to attract national vendors to administer this local government program that meets the conditions of the Time to Care Act. This collaboration will save school systems and local governments millions of tax dollars. Therefore, PSSAM does not believe this public sector Collaborative should be charged departmental fees. For these reasons, PSSAM supports House Bill 571 with amendments.

BILL: SB 161 TITLE: Community Schools - Alterations DATE: January 24, 2024 POSITION: Support with Amendments COMMITTEE: Senate Budget and 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 161 with amendments. This bill authorizes a local school board for a school system with fewer than 40 eligible schools under the Concentration of Poverty Grant (CPG) program to expend up to 10% of personnel grant and per pupil grant funds on behalf of eligible schools, provided that a plan to meet specified current law requirements is submitted to the Accountability and Implementation Board (AIB). The State Director of Community Schools must, in consultation with local school systems and members of the community schools’ leadership team, create a common needs assessment tool that each community school shall use. Programs and services provided to CPG-eligible schools must prioritize areas of greatest needs according to the most recent needs assessment plan. The definitions of “community school” and of “wraparound services” are altered. The establishment and expansion of community schools has been one of the most impactful and successful initiatives in the implementation of Blueprint for Maryland’s Future. PSSAM is pleased to see the exponential growth in community schools and the corresponding academic improvements and positive community impact. Allowing districts with less than 40 schools to use some of their grant funding to manage the program will yield tremendous economies of scale and enhance best practices and cooperation among these smaller cohorts. Federal Title programs have long acknowledged the need to set aside funding for administrative tasks, such as budgeting, contracts and grant writing, to support the hands-on work. Centralizing and supporting these tasks at the district office will allow school coordinators to concentrate on engaging families, supporting students, and collaborating with community partners. The following example from Harford County Public Schools illustrates the importance of allowing funding to be used for centralized support. Currently, their ten community schools have a combined budget of $3,957,841 with no dedicated coordination or support. In the near future, their community schools budget is expected to exceed their Title 1 budget, which currently has 6 district-support professionals. Making this much needed adjustment is extremely important to ensure funding is used efficiently and effectively. While we appreciate the increased flexibility provided by the bill for community school grant funding, we do not support the expanded authority given to the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) to modify the needs assessment and implementation plan for a community school before granting approval. Granting MSDE this authority to assess the merit of the broad and extensive collaborative and community-driven approach undermines the spirit of developing plans to meet the individual needs of each school. There is no one-size-fits-all solution for these schools and developing the plans and outreach with all the stakeholders can take two or more years to accomplish. Allowing the Department to approve and make changes without being part of that intimate process runs afoul of the spirit of community schools. We support continuing the successful approach used to date where MSDE provides feedback but allows districts to make revisions aligned with their overall strategic and performance plans. Lastly, we oppose the requirement for districts to use an implementation plan template provided by MSDE. There should be flexibility in the creation of these local plans, recognizing and incorporating existing district and state-required plans such as Title I and School Performance. Adding yet another template for the schools to complete creates one more barrier to getting successful plans and initiatives in action. Therefore, we respectfully request the removal of the language granting MSDE the ability to alter local plans and requiring final approval by the Department; and, we request the mandated template be removed in support of the existing collaborative process currently in place. For these reasons, PSSAM requests a favorable with amendments committee report for Senate Bill 161.

BILL: HB 558 TITLE: Primary and Secondary Education - Comprehensive Health Education Framework - Established DATE: February 07, 2024 POSITION: Oppose COMMITTEE: House Ways and Means Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four Maryland local school superintendents, opposes House Bill 558. This bill requires the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE), in consultation with the Maryland Department of Health (MDH), to develop a comprehensive health education framework that includes, at a minimum, specified topics. Each local board of education must create an age-appropriate curriculum that is consistent with the comprehensive health education framework as specified. Each local board of education must establish policies, guidelines, and procedures for a parent or guardian to opt their student out of the family life and human sexuality or the gender identity and sexual orientation topics. However, a local board may not authorize a parent or guardian to opt the student out of education related to HIV and AIDS prevention. By June 15, 2025, and annually thereafter, each local board must submit a report to MSDE on the actions taken to comply with the requirements of the bill. PSSAM strongly supports the current local approach to implementation of health curriculum consistent with State guidelines. PSSAM also shares concerns raised by local school boards and other advocacy organizations regarding legislative efforts to codify standardized curriculum, assessments, or standards. PSSAM maintains our longstanding position regarding curricular mandates, which highlights the critical nature of preserving local authority and oversight. Each Maryland local school systems must be afforded flexibility in developing curriculum that best reflects the specific, and diverse needs of their student population and local community. Again, local superintendents support robust and comprehensive instruction in health education, and believe that this objective is best accomplished by preserving local flexibility in implementing health curriculum. For these reasons, PSSAM opposes House Bill 558 and kindly requests an unfavorable

BILL: HB 522 TITLE: Public Schools - Student Telehealth Appointments - Policy and Access DATE: February 07, 2024 POSITION: Support with Amendments COMMITTEE: House Ways and Means 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 HB 522 with amendments. House Bill 522 requires each local board of education to establish a policy to accommodate students who need to participate in telehealth appointments scheduled during the school day. Each local board must ensure that the local school system publishes the student telehealth policy in the student handbook and makes school personnel aware of student telehealth policy objectives and requirements. On request, the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) must provide technical assistance to local boards to establish telehealth policies. During the pandemic, telehealth was a lifeline providing access to doctors and health practitioners during a very traumatic and fragile time. Just as the COVID-19 pandemic created many challenges in the delivery of public education, it highlighted the value and potential of virtual health services. There is no doubt that telehealth has a place in public health well past the end of this pandemic. PSSAM is very interested in this new model of health care for our students, and some systems have already begun implementing various forms of telehealth, but there are some operational concerns with this legislation. If health care delivery is going to become a public education, we need to ensure the highest quality controls and approach telehealth with a deliberate, methodical, and research-based approach. Safe and private spaces need to be created to allow for students to speak in confidence to medical professionals. But schools must also provide support if telehealth appointments create a challenge for students in returning to the classroom, especially with regard to mental health counseling. While the bill does not mandate the construction of new spaces, we feel strongly that private space must be available in order to protect the privacy of students. Additionally, there are operational concerns regarding the coordination of services, approval and verification of appointments, the use of the room, etc. Privacy concerns are key, as well concerns regarding parental consent and when there is a need to communicate with parents. The need for behavioral health services have skyrocketed during and following the pandemic. In the realm of mental health services, consistent appointments are a best practice; however, if these appointments are by telehealth during the school day, the student’s academic success could be challenged if they are consistently missing instruction. On the flip side, we see the equitable benefit of telehealth in helping families who are challenged in getting to appointments due to transportation or work commitments. So while PSSAM acknowledges the very positive aspects of this legislation, we highly recommend that the committee consider creating a workgroup to make recommendations on the most appropriate service model, with consideration to the operational concerns we have described above. A workgroup with all of the affected stakeholders would address the legal, operational, and financial implications that need to be considered for telehealth best practices. Stakeholders should include LEAs, MDH, MSDE, school nurses, other health or support providers in the schools, and parents. For these reasons, PSSAM requests a favorable with amendments report for HB 522.

BILL: HB 386 TITLE: Maryland Meals for Achievement In-Classroom Breakfast Program - Alterations (Maryland Meals for Achievement Flexibility Act of 2024) DATE: January 31, 2024 POSITION: Support COMMITTEE: House Ways and 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, supports House Bill 386. If approved by the Maryland State Department of Education and a county board of education, this legislation allows elementary schools to serve breakfast in any broadly accessible part of the school, including from “grab and go” carts after the arrival of students to the school, provided that students are allowed to consume the meal in the classroom after the start of the school day. According to Maryland Hunger Solutions, Maryland leads the country in ensuring that students can start the day ready to learn with the Maryland Meals for Achievement (MMFA) program. This program provides state funds to leverage and supplement federal funds for breakfast in the classrooms for all students. A school is eligible when at least 40% of students qualify for free or reduced-price meals. PSSAM strongly supports this program and the State’s generous participation. The research on eating breakfast is vast and universally confirms the positive impact on student achievement, including academics and behavior. Students in school meal programs are also more likely to eat healthier foods, including fruits, vegetables, and milk. In turn, these healthier eating habits positively impact lower childhood obesity. Lastly, research shows that a consistently well-fed student is a better student, test-taker and participant in school. Participation in the free meal programs is also linked to fewer absences, increased attention span, decreased tardiness and behavior problems, and overall, an improved school environment. For these reasons, PSSAM supports House Bill 386 and urges a favorable committee report.

BILL: HB 213 TITLE: Education - Maryland STEM Program - Established DATE: January 31, 2024 POSITION: Oppose COMMITTEE: House Ways and 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 213. This bill establishes the Maryland STEM Program in the Maryland State Department to Education (MSDE) to provide additional compensation to a current or retired public school teacher to teach science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) classes at nonpublic schools beginning in the 2024-2025 school year. Subject to availability of funds, MSDE must award grants that are at least equal to the number of hours the teacher teaches STEM classes at the nonpublic school multiplied by the average hourly salary of a public school teacher in the local school system multiplied by 1.25. A local school system may object to an employee’s participation, and MSDE must reject the application if the objection is valid. For each fiscal year, the Governor must include in the annual budget bill an appropriation of $1.0 million to MSDE for grants under the program. PSSAM strongly opposes the establishment of any funding stream that financially benefits private and nonpublic schools. The financial needs of our public school students must take priority over those who choose a private or parochial education. Any educational initiatives funded using State or local taxpayer dollars should only be for public school students and staff. While this legislation would financially benefit teachers and retired public school teachers, the legislation is flawed in a number of ideological and practical ways. The bill contemplates new funds diverted from public education, but also requires that local school systems participate in the administration of the program. The bill requires that the school systems are the conduit to pay participants (existing and retired teachers) for teaching in nonpublic schools that exist within the boundaries of the LEA. However, the legislation is silent regarding any retirement or other employee-related compensation complications this might create. Local school systems must also notify all current and retired teachers from their system about the opportunity to participate in the program, and provide a list of interested candidates to any nonpublic school upon request. These administrative expectations are unreasonable and excessive alongside all of the existing responsibilities of the LEAs in the delivery of public education of taxpayer supported schools. Providing this level of support for private institutions is a serious departure from the State’s constitutional mandate to provide a fair and equitable public education system. For these reasons, PSSAM opposes House Bill 213 and urges an unfavorable committee report.

BILL: HB 206 TITLE: Education - Student Behavior - Parent and Guardian Notice and Required Counseling (Parent and Guardian Accountability Act) DATE: January 31, 2024 POSITION: Oppose COMMITTEE: House Ways and Means Committee CONTACT: Mary Pat Fannon, Executive Director, PSSAM The Public School Superintendents’ Association of Maryland (PSSAM), on behalf of all twenty-four Maryland local school superintendents, opposes House Bill 206. HB 206 would establish parental notification requirements for school administration in response to multiple violent and disruptive incidents by a student. This bill also establishes criminal penalties for parents who fail to seek either school-based or private counseling as a result of their child’s behavior. Local superintendents strongly support high levels of parental engagement in childrens’ education, and in response, highly prioritize the establishment of policies and procedures concerning student discipline. However, the positive outcomes resulting in parental engagement are not met by the approach proposed in this legislation. State law reflects the Legislature’s long standing recognition that principals and superintendents have broad discretion to make student discipline decisions “as warranted” (Section 7-305 of the Education Article). State regulations mirror this deference to local decision making, as well as place a clear emphasis on maintaining a safe learning environment for all students. Local school systems take very seriously the need for strict and comprehensive student discipline and school safety policies that focus on controlling and/or preventing bullying, verbal threats, student fights, and numerous other actions that can disrupt effective classroom environments. In line with State regulations and local decision making, PSSAM strongly supports the implementation of restorative approaches to discipline -- approaches that were mandated by the legislature in 2019 for all Maryland public school systems, but that are not apparent in this legislation. The law defines “restorative approaches” as a relationship-focused student discipline model that: 1. Is preventative and proactive; 2. Emphasizes building strong relationships and setting clear behavioral expectations that contribute to the school community well-being; 3. In response to behavior that violates clear behavioral expectations, focuses on accountability for any harm done by the problem behavior; and, 4. Addresses ways to repair the relationships affected by the problem behavior with the voluntary participation of an individual who was harmed. While this legislation aims to provide a response and accountability measure for student discipline, it fails to meet other outlined objectives that are essential parts of a restorative approach. Proactive practices that are implemented following appropriate professional development and training of all teachers, board members, superintendents, students, parents, and the larger community can make significant improvements in school climate and learning conditions. In conjunction with local discretion, proactive and restorative student discipline approaches allow positive parental and student engagement in the discipline process without threat of criminal penalties. For these reasons, PSSAM opposes House Bill 206 and requests an unfavorable report.