Search Results

BILL: HB 740 TITLE: Public Schools - School-Based Mental Health Services Full-Time Therapist DATE: February 18, 2026 POSITION: Unfavorable COMMITTEE: House Ways & Means and Health Committees 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  HB 740.   This bill requires that each public school employ a full-time therapist during instruction hours who is licensed by The State Board Of Professional Counselors And Therapists. It directs each county board of education in tandem with the county health department to provide (1) adequate school health services; (2) instruction in health education, including the importance of physical activity in maintaining good health; and (3) a healthful school environment. HB 740 also directs the county Department and Maryland Department of Health to jointly, (1) develop public standards and guidelines for school health programs; (2) offer assistance to the county boards and county health departments in their implementation. HB 740 is scheduled to take effect on July 1, 2026. PSSAM strongly values student mental health and well-being. At the same time superintendents must balance education priorities within fiscal reality. Requiring a full-time therapist in each of Maryland’s over 1,400 public schools would impose substantial costs on local education agencies (LEAs). Because the bill does not identify a new or dedicated funding source, HB 740 creates an unfunded mandate for local school systems who would be forced to redirect existing funds, reducing resources for other essential educational mandates and priorities.  It is important to note that, over the past five years, Maryland has made meaningful progress in expanding student access to mental health services through existing initiatives. In 2022, the Maryland State Department of Education launched the Maryland School Mental Health Response Program (MD-SMHRP), which achieved its year two objective to train LEA staff in best practices to advance comprehensive school mental health systems and address student mental health needs. In addition, in 2025, the Maryland Department of Health expanded access to behavioral health services by allowing local education agencies to offer certain Medicaid-covered services to eligible students. As a result, approximately 650,000 children across the state now have access to diagnostic evaluations, individual, family, and group therapy services provided by licensed school psychologists and other qualified professionals. Further, as part of the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future, the General Assembly established the Maryland Consortium on Coordinated Community Supports, a 24-member body tasked with developing best practices for delivering student behavioral health, wraparound, and community-based services. During the 2024–2025  academic year alone, 136,945 students received behavioral health services through these coordinated efforts. Consistent with this intent, Maryland’s community schools model already emphasizes coordinated, wraparound services that connect students and families to mental health, health care, and social supports through partnerships with local agencies.  Given the above highlights we remain confident that Maryland’s current policies and investments are effectively expanding access to student mental health supports without imposing additional unfunded mandates on local school systems.  For these reasons, PSSAM respectfully opposes  HB 740 and kindly requests an unfavorable  report.  04.

BILL: HB 704 TITLE: Community Eligibility Provision Expansion Program – Establishment DATE: February 17, 2026 POSITION: Favorable COMMITTEE: House Appropriations 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, supports House Bill 704. This legislation establishes the Community Eligibility Provision Expansion Program in the State Department of Education to provide funding to eligible schools that participate in the federal community eligibility provision of the child nutrition programs; requiring schools that opt out of the Community Eligibility Provision of the Child Nutrition Program report their reasons for not participating; and, requiring the Governor in fiscal year 2028 and succeeding years to include $10,000,000 in the annual budget bill for the Program. Based on our experience during the COVID-19 pandemic - when local school systems successfully delivered millions of meals to students and families under extraordinary circumstances - we are confident that all twenty-four local school systems can implement an ambitious universal meals expansion program effectively and efficiently. Maryland school systems have demonstrated both the operational capacity and commitment to ensure that no child goes hungry during the school day. Unfortunately, funding has not been available to provide this impactful opportunity for all schools. The research on universal free meals is extensive and consistently confirms their positive impact on student achievement, both academically and behaviorally. Students who participate in school meal programs are more likely to consume nutritious foods such as fruits, vegetables, and milk, contributing to healthier eating habits and reductions in childhood obesity. Eliminating the transaction of paying for meals also allows students more time to eat and removes stigma or administrative barriers that can discourage participation. Importantly, universal access removes the margin of error in identifying food-insecure students that often exists under traditional application-based systems. Families benefit as well; reducing the cost of providing two meals a day for children eases financial strain, particularly for working families navigating rising living costs. Research consistently demonstrates that a well-fed student is better positioned to succeed – they are more attentive in class, better prepared for assessments, and more fully engaged in the school environment. Participation in free meal programs is associated with fewer absences, improved attendance, reduced tardiness, fewer behavioral incidents, and a more positive overall school climate. While we strongly support the establishment of this program, we respectfully note that the $10 million annual appropriation will not fully meet the statewide need. Moreover, the reporting provisions in the bill will likely confirm what we already know - participation in federal CEP has lagged in Maryland, not because districts are unwilling, but because they must carefully weigh significant fiscal risks. Under the current framework, districts entering or expanding CEP must discontinue the use of traditional federal meal application forms. In the absence of a new, reliable statewide methodology for counting students in poverty - as required under the Blueprint for Maryland’s Future but not yet created by the Department - districts face uncertainty. Compensatory Education funding counts remain heavily dependent on poverty measures, and CEP calculations alone do not always capture an accurate or complete picture of need. School systems must therefore balance the benefits of universal meals against potential losses in compensatory education funding tied to incomplete data. Until Maryland adopts a consistent and reliable alternative poverty-counting methodology, participation in new CEP schools or districts will likely remain cautious. For that reason, we believe the long-term success of this legislation is closely tied to the State’s development of a more accurate and equitable method for measuring student poverty. A refined methodology would allow resources to be targeted to students and schools with the greatest need, provide local systems with the confidence to expand CEP participation, and generate more accurate data to support funding decisions. Such an approach would also assist in identifying additional community schools - a major priority under the Blueprint - and could improve the calculation and allocation of federal Title I funds at both the school and district levels. By aligning meal access, poverty measurement, and funding distribution, Maryland would advance equity in a meaningful and data-driven way. PSSAM strongly supports this legislation and the State’s commitment to expanding access to free school meals. We encourage continued attention to funding sufficiency and the development of a comprehensive poverty-counting methodology to ensure that this investment delivers maximum impact for Maryland’s students. Ensuring that students are consistently well-fed is not only a matter of compassion - it is foundational to academic success and educational equity. For these reasons, we respectfully request a favorable report on HB 704.

BILL: HB 655 TITLE: Education - Student Behavior - Parent and Guardian Notice and Required Counseling (Parent and Guardian Accountability Act) DATE: February 18, 2026 POSITION: Unfavorable 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 655. This bill establishes that it is unlawful for a parent or guardian of a student in a public school to fail to seek and participate in counseling with the parent’s or guardian’s child after receiving a certain notice of violent and disruptive behavior. A parent or guardian convicted under this section may be ordered by the court to perform community service as determined by the court. The bill also requires a public school principal to provide a written notice to the parent or guardian of a student who engages in a certain number of violent and disruptive behaviors or school-related activities during the school year.  Local superintendents strongly support high levels of parental engagement in students’ education, and in response, prioritize the establishment of policies and procedures concerning student discipline. However, it is very unlikely that the approach proposed in this legislation will produce positive outcomes or increased parental engagement.  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; these concepts are not reflected 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 an 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 the threat of criminal penalties.  For these reasons, PSSAM opposes  House Bill 655 and kindly requests an unfavorable report.

BILL: HB 233 TITLE: Education - Public School Construction - Alterations DATE: February 17, 2026 POSITION: Support with Amendments 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 public school superintendents, supports House Bill 233 with amendments .  This bill proposes several changes to the public school construction program including, clarifying the type of proposals and plans that require the approval of the State Superintendent of Schools; requiring a county board of education to request and receive approval from the State Superintendent before the county board may proceed with certain actions; authorizing the  Interagency Commission on School Construction (IAC) to adopt requirements for eligibility for certain State funding; modifying due dates of Commission reports; repealing the requirement for the Commission to approve a certain percentage of the preliminary school construction allocation by a certain date; requiring the Commission to establish an appeal process; clarifying the circumstances when the State may not require or shall require counties to reimburse the State for debt service; altering the requirement for certain assessments and inspections the Commission is required to conduct; and generally relating to public school construction. PSSAM appreciates several provisions in the bill that clarify or streamline existing statute, but we have identified a number of concerns for LEAs and county partners.  The proposed language in 4-115  appears to narrow the types of land acquisition and projects requiring approval from the State Superintendent. In addition, it appears that minor projects (e.g., paint or patch work) would be exempt unless they exceed a dollar threshold and involve substantive structural changes. We are fully supportive of this provision.   Below are areas of concern that we have shared with the IAC, and where appropriate, hope to clarify or resolve these concerns through amendments.  We are supportive of the changes in §2-303 (Change Order Review Threshold) but propose an amendment to increase the threshold to $500,000 and limit review to educational spaces.  The increase (2-303) in the threshold for State review of change orders is a positive step, particularly given that the State does not participate in funding for change orders. The Department’s (MSDE) proposed amount appropriately narrows State review only to major change orders, but is still very low and will trigger an excessive amount of review that will create unnecessary delays.  However, we feel a more appropriate threshold would be $500,000 or for the Department to adopt a process similar to the IAC where all change orders are examined at the time of project close-out. Again, since the State (through the IAC or MSDE) does not participate in funding these change orders, this process more appropriately reflects the Department’s oversight.  Further, we request an amendment to this section, specifically line 19 on page 2, to STUDENT-OCCUPIED SPACES THAT DIRECTLY RELATE TO THE DELIVERY OF EDUCATION in a school building.   Again, this more appropriately reflects the Department’s role in oversight of educational spaces, not all buildings and ancillary spaces that are not in direct use for students.  §5-303(d)(2)(xv) – Project Eligibility Authority: The proposed language appears to grant the IAC substantially greater authority to define eligibility criteria for State funding through regulation rather than statute. Shifting eligibility standards to regulations may provide less opportunity for LEAs and counties to respond to changes.  After speaking with the IAC, it is our understanding that this language is meant to provide more transparency by explaining the eligibility requirements, rather than creating new requirements and will be working on clarifying language.   §5-304 – Timing: Eliminating the requirement for 75% approval by December 31 delays meaningful State CIP guidance until March (90% approval). This timing is very late for many LEAs and county governments to plan effectively for the upcoming fiscal year. The December 75% approval has been a critical planning tool for aligning capital programs and local budget development. In addition, many non-charter counties, and Baltimore City, must introduce bond resolutions through their state legislative delegations for consideration during the annual legislative session as part of their capital debt issuance structure. Therefore, this proposed timing further complicates important steps that are mandated in local and state laws regarding financing local debt.   In our discussions with the IAC they have explained that in their opinion, the current process does not provide for the most reliable decision making process. In its place, they are considering a more robust monthly project request status update that will provide more productive dialogue between the LEAs and the IAC. They believe the existing deadline of December 31st does not provide enough time for important information to be developed about proposed projects. Further, they believe making these allocations before the state’s capital budget is introduced provides less reliability.  We appreciate the IAC’s commitment to a more reliable and accurate process for policymakers and the public. However, since the “75% allocation date” is a longstanding historical practice, we are hopeful that the IAC will share their newly proposed timeline, as well as propose legislative language that would that would ensure meaningful input from the LEAs and the counties before upending a decades-long established process.   §5-310 – Expanded Reporting Requirements: The proposed reporting requirements appear to significantly increase the burden on LEAs by requiring annual reporting of all changes to every building in an LEAs’ portfolio. Typically this level of reporting is done the year in which the quadrennial assessment is undertaken by the IAC. Switching to annual reporting on all schools would be a substantial increase in workload for local school systems.  We have discussed these concerns with the IAC and they understand our interpretation and will provide amendment language to make it clear that this requirements in this section are required “at least once every four years.”   §5-314 – Educational Specifications and Schematic Design: This section appears to expand requirements for educational specifications and schematic design for HVAC replacement or modification projects exceeding $1 million. This review and approval are typically reserved for projects that change educational programs and exceed $1 million. Applying this same level of review to systemic HVAC projects would increase consultant design fees and overall project costs without clear educational benefit. In addition, our facilities directors are concerned that the $1 million threshold is too low for many common upgrades on these systems. If the intent is to limit review to only substantial or major projects, the threshold needs to be significantly increased.  According to the IAC, this section was meant to strengthen the State’s oversight of heating, ventilation, or air conditioning systems earlier in the project’s lifecycle. In addition, the $1 million threshold was to codify existing rules by the Department of General Services (DGS). We have discussed clarifying language for both of these issues that were inadvertently drafted together, confusing the intent. Further, the IAC is open to increasing the threshold review of HVAC systems to trigger more substantial project reviews.  As currently written, HB 233 makes significant changes to Maryland’s school construction approval and funding framework. These changes could reduce project planning and funding predictability, while increasing costs and administrative burden at the local level. However, we are encouraged by our discussions with the IAC and look forward to continuing our work to amend the bill in a way that ensures the intent of the IAC, and preserves predictability in the process for LEAs.  We support the many improvements in the legislation, but need to protect LEAs and counties from unintended increased costs and human capital in fulfilling our obligation to provide the safest facilities possible for our students, staff and communities.  For these reasons, PSSAM supports HB 233   with the amendment s described above.

BILL: HB 525 TITLE: County Boards of Education - Student Electronic Communication Device Use Policy - Establishment (Maryland Phone-Free Schools Act) DATE: February 18, 2026 POSITION: Unfavorable 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 public school superintendents, opposes House Bill 525.  This bill requires each local board of education to develop and implement, by the 2027-2028 school year, a policy to prohibit the use of cellular phones by students during the academic school day, which is defined as any time during the school day, including a student’s lunch, recess, or passing period. The policy must also require students to store their phones in a secure place during instructional time and prohibit a student from using social media applications and websites as determined by the local school board during school hours. The policy may not prohibit a student from using a phone (1) for any purpose documented in the student’s individualized education program or Section 504 Plan; (2) to monitor or address a student’s documented health issue; (3) during an emergency event, if expressly authorized by an administrator; (4) when directed by an education or administrator for educational purposes; (5) to access language translation tools when a school-issued device is not available; or (6) for the purpose of meeting caregiving responsibilities, as approved by the principal. The policy must also establish administrator-enforced tiered disciplinary measures for violations, excluding suspension or expulsion solely for violating the policy. The bill takes effect July 1, 2026. Maryland superintendents appreciate the good intentions of this bill; however, PSSAM steadfastly opposes any legislation that imposes statewide mandates on local school systems or local boards of education, especially on policies that have previously been deliberated at the local level with all affected stakeholders, such as the case regarding student uses of cell phones.  In the past several years, superintendents, school boards and advisory groups in every Local Education Agencies (LEAs) have taken proactive action to establish, update, or study district-wide cell phone policies. These efforts include establishing new policies specific to the use of cell phones, updating board policies, revising the district’s code of conduct or student handbook regarding the use of technology to include cell phones or “smart” technology, and/or introducing pilot programs. Much of the local work in establishing these policies was aided through surveys to parents, teachers, and students, as well as extensive public meetings.  In addition, the Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) convened a broad workgroup of stakeholders in 2025, including several superintendents, to study this issue. We strongly supported this workgroup and its on-the-ground membership. The workgroup anchored its work in national research and partnered with Phones in Focus who have initiated a national study based on educator input regarding best practices around the county. More importantly, the workgroup used the experiences of the local school districts who have already delved deep in their communities to determine the appropriate use of cell phones and “smart technology” in classrooms and schools.  PSSAM remains committed to focusing on empowering local decision-making to ensure education policies that are relevant, flexible, and reflective of the unique needs of each community. Again, we appreciate the bill’s good intentions, but ask the Legislature to allow the education experts at the state and local level to enact and enforce the most effective public policies.  For these reasons, PSSAM opposes House Bill 525 and kindly requests an unfavorable  report.

BILL: HB 473 TITLE: Education - Collective Bargaining - Certificated Employees - Class Size DATE: February 17, 2026 POSITION: Unfavorable 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 Maryland local school superintendents, opposes  House Bill 473. House Bill 473 adds class size to permissible collective bargaining topics. These agreements are negotiated annually through a highly regulated process with an established and successful dispute resolution process.  School systems strive to establish the most reasonable and equitable class size for every grade and student population, including variations for smaller special education classes, and larger classes for gifted and talented courses. Currently, superintendents and their boards have the flexibility to use their best judgement on class size and scheduling as a time management tool. More importantly, in keeping with the tenets of the Blueprint, class size is used to appropriate funds where they are most needed in any given year.  The majority of an LEA’s budget is dedicated to personnel, 84-94% for most systems. Creating a rigid mandate arising out of negotiations around class sizes removes a hugely important management and budget tool. Obviously the most immediate need would be for additional teachers and their associated benefits (health insurance, professional development, retirement, etc.).  Superintendents are sympathetic and largely agree with preferences for smaller classes, but class size limitations have severe cost impacts. A simple example illustrates this point - in one medium size district a reduction of an average class size from 30 to a negotiated maximum of 25 would result in a 16% percent increase in personnel costs. Multiplying that across the entire district would result in a large increase in the number of required staff and associated costs.  In addition to wage pressure, class size limits would stress districts who are already struggling with school construction needs and capital planning. Maryland’s public school systems are currently facing an unprecedented school construction backlog including maintenance of aging buildings, overcrowding, and health and safety upgrades - all in the context of rapidly escalating construction costs. Class size is fluid and constantly changing; maintaining a specific mandate would be a significant operational challenge. Negotiating class size severely hinders a school’s ability to address instructional needs at specific grades and is also subjective based on many different factors including content, student experience, and social economic conditions. Class assignments are determined after much thought and collaboration between principals and school staff. For instance, some classes or teachers may do well with 23 students while another has 17. But, if the maximum were set at 20, 3 students would have to be moved arbitrarily. Some schools combine resource classes such as PE, Art, and Music to provide planning time for subject matter teachers; this would prohibit or hamper that practice. Small schools may combine grades, or may only have one teacher per grade level for elementary or subject matter for high school, but could be required to hire additional teachers based on a mandated class size.  Class size is directly related to instruction and should not be subject to collective bargaining. Establishing class size requirements within a collective bargaining agreement restricts the school administration's decision-making about the most effective use of staff, space, and scarce financial resources.  Lastly, it is important to note that the Kirwan Commission considered and rejected mandating smaller class sizes. They believed there was no conclusive research that smaller classes were responsible for student success, and that small classes were not a characteristic of successful schools around the world. While as educators we question this conclusion, the important point is that funding was not included in the Blueprint to have the flexibility to reduce class sizes. Further, the Blueprint calls for increases in teacher salaries and more planning time (60% teaching and 40% planning), which will require additional staff.  In conclusion, we ask the committee’s consideration of the issues described above, recognizing that placing a cap on class sizes or allowing this to be a topic of negotiations would limit a system's ability to allocate resources where they are most appropriate. Local boards and superintendents need to be able to invest in the students and families who need us most, and must retain the right to negotiate with their unions on topics and matters that reflect the specific and diverse academic and operational needs of their system.  For these reasons, PSSAM respectfully opposes House Bill 473 and urges an unfavorable report.

BILL: HB 76 TITLE: Local School Systems - School Safety - Grant Allocations DATE: February 17, 2026 POSITION: Support 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 public school superintendents, supports House Bill 76. This bill authorizes the reallocation of grants from the Safe Schools Fund to local school systems that have fully expended their grant allocation and demonstrate unmet need within the same fiscal year. This act shall take into effect by July 1, 2026.  Under current law, the Governor is required to allocate $10 million annually to a fund supporting grants for local school systems and law enforcement agencies to provide adequate law enforcement coverage in public schools, including School Resource Officers (SROs) and school security employees (as authorized by Chapter 179 of 2024). Grants are distributed proportionally based on each system's share of public schools in the state. Any unspent funds revert to the fund annually but cannot be reallocated. Local superintendents appreciate the General Assembly's initiative to reallocate these funds to local school systems who demonstrate the most need. This approach empowers districts with greater autonomy and ensures a more equitable distribution of resources, directing support to where it is needed most.  For these reasons, PSSAM supports   House Bill 76 and requests a favorable report.

BILL: HB 326 TITLE: Education - Maryland Center for School Safety - Anonymous Reporting System DATE: February 11, 2026 POSITION: Support 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 public school superintendents, supports  House Bill 326. This bill requires the Maryland Center for School Safety (MCSS) to develop and administer an anonymous reporting system that (1) coordinates the receipt of information relating to a school or student safety concern in a manner that maintains confidentiality and (2) provides a mechanism for any reported information to be forwarded to school or other appropriate officials. A custodian of public records under the Maryland Public Information Act (PIA) must deny inspection of any information or materials related to the anonymous reporting system. ( https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2026RS/fnotes/bil_0006/hb0326.pdf )                                                                    School safety is a top priority for every superintendent in this State. Over the past several years, local school systems have invested significantly in comprehensive safety frameworks that include behavioral threat assessment teams, mental health services, strong school-law enforcement partnerships, and preventive education for students and families. Anonymous reporting systems are a critical component of that layered approach. Maryland’s existing program - Safe Schools Maryland - is already in operation statewide and is used by every public school system. Several local systems also had internal reporting platforms or similar mechanisms in place prior to the establishment of the statewide system. In our experience, these tools have become essential for identifying concerns early and responding appropriately before situations escalate. Anonymous reporting systems work because they address a well-documented reality - students often know when a peer is struggling or expressing harmful intent, but they hesitate to report it. Fear of retaliation, social pressure, or being labeled discourages disclosure. Providing a secure, anonymous method for sharing concerns helps overcome that barrier and fosters a culture of shared responsibility for safety. Importantly, these systems are not limited to preventing acts of violence. In practice, many tips involve students experiencing depression, suicidal ideation, bullying, substance misuse, or other mental health challenges. When reports are received, they are routed through established Behavioral Threat Assessment and Management processes. The focus is not punishment - it is intervention, support, and connection to services. Superintendents across Maryland have seen firsthand the value of this approach. Tips have allowed school teams to intervene early, provide counseling, engage families, and coordinate with community partners when necessary. In many cases, the result is not discipline, but support and stabilization. Equally important, the bill protects the confidentiality of reporting. Anonymity is foundational to the effectiveness of any tip line. Students and community members must trust that their identities will not be disclosed. The bill’s exemption of system records from disclosure under the Public Information Act appropriately balances transparency with the overriding public interest in safety, mental health intervention, and suicide prevention. Without those protections, reporting would decline and the system’s effectiveness would be compromised. We also note that participation in the statewide system does not eliminate local flexibility. School systems retain authority to establish procedures, align responses with their existing threat assessment protocols, and ensure appropriate coordination with administrators, school resource officers, and student support staff. The statewide infrastructure simply provides a reliable, professionally monitored platform operating 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. HB 326 provides important legislative validation to ensure the long-term viability and consistency of this statewide resource. Codifying the program formally recognizes its existence, clarifies the Maryland Center for School Safety’s responsibility to establish operational guidelines, and ensures consistent standards across systems. For the reasons stated above, PSSAM requests a favorable report on House Bill 326.

BILL: HB 319 TITLE: County Boards of Education - Student Transportation - Sunset Repeal DATE: February 11, 2026 POSITION: Favorable 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 public school superintendents, supports  House Bill 319. This bill repeals the termination date of certain provisions of law that authorize a county board of education to provide transportation for certain students using a vehicle other than a standard school bus.                                                                    PSSAM strongly supported the original legislation in 2021 authorizing alternative vehicles in circumstances when a school bus cannot reasonably be provided. Further, certain student groups were identified as eligible for these services, including (1) preschool-age students; (2) students with disabilities; (3) homeless youth; (4) children in foster care; (5) students without access to school buses; (6) students in a nonpublic school placement; (7) students in dual enrollment programs or work programs or other educational programs based off the school campus. Additionally, the law allowed school systems to provide this transportation to other student groups through a written determination by the board. Transportation is one of the fastest growing costs for school systems with limited ability by LEAs to minimize costs. This legislation has given us the ability and flexibility to provide transportation in challenging circumstances such as geography and student need.  For the reasons stated above, PSSAM requests a favorable report on House Bill 319.

BILL: HB 355 TITLE: Education - Sexual Abuse and Assault Awareness and Prevention Program - Human and Sex Trafficking DATE: February 11, 2026 POSITION: Unfavorable 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 355.  This bill requires age-appropriate education program on the awareness and prevention of sexual abuse and assault developed and implemented by the State Board of Education (SBE) and each nonpublic school include, for students in grades 6 through 8, material promoting the awareness and prevention of human and sex trafficking. ( https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2026RS/fnotes/bil_0005/hb0355.pdf ) 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 currently 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.  Updated 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 subsequently revised to align with those standards. The framework was developed by the State Board and MSDE in collaboration with the Maryland Department of Health, local education agencies, national experts, and key stakeholders to ensure a rigorous review and revision process for 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, all of which are intended to protect young people. In addition, while the Grade 6 and Grade 8 indicators do not explicitly reference “human and sex trafficking,” the terminology used - including sexual mistreatment, grooming, harassment, abuse, assault, exploitation, and boundary violations - was deliberately selected to provide developmentally appropriate instruction on these topics. 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 355 and kindly requests an unfavorable  report.

BILL: HB 198 TITLE: School Systems - Reportable Offenses - Notification of Student as Suspect DATE: February 11, 2026 POSITION: Letter of Information 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 public school superintendents, provides this Letter of Information regarding House Bill 198. This bill requires that a law enforcement agency notify the State’s Attorney when a student is a suspect in an investigation of an act that, if committed by an adult, would be a felony or crime of violence, as specified, and makes conforming changes to reporting requirements related to reportable offenses. ( https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2026RS/fnotes/bil_0008/hb0198.pdf )                                                                           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 the 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.  We appreciate the sponsor’s keen interest in this issue and this legislation, but we believe the Legislature should take a more comprehensive approach on the issues of information sharing regarding students’ criminal behavior. To that end, we are happy to support the workgroup on Juvenile Justice Processes and Systems Coordination  that is part of the The Commission on Juvenile Justice Reform & Emerging Best Practices. This workgroup is actively taking up many of the concerns of PSSAM and our LEA partners on the issue of reportable offenses and information sharing. Specifically, the workgroup has developed an action plan that is expected to address the following areas: Establishing a standardized statewide process for law enforcement notifications; Establishing a standardized statewide process for State’s Attorney notifications; Addressing information gaps during student transfers; and, Standardizing the overall flow of information. More specifically, the workgroup is focused on: Developing a uniform, statewide process for sharing reportable offense information from arrest through disposition; Recommending any statutory or regulatory changes needed to ensure information reaches the appropriate individuals in a timely and consistent manner; and, Ensuring the process appropriately protects confidentiality while supporting school safety, coordination, and student services. Last session PSSAM advocated for the creation of such a workgroup and we are confident that the group’s comprehensive stakeholder representation will facilitate thoughtful, collaborative work and result in consensus legislation for the 2027 legislative session. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this Letter of Information  on House Bill 198.

Baltimore County School Press Release February 13, 2026 AASA, The School Superintendents Association, has named BCPS Superintendent Dr. Myriam Rogers as the winner of its prestigious annual Women in School Leadership Award . Dr. Rogers was one of two finalists for the award, which recognizes exceptional leadership of “active, front-line female leaders who are making a difference in the lives of students every day.” The award was announced today during the group’s national conference in Nashville, TN. “The AASA Women in School Leadership Awards were created for amazing leaders like our honorees and winners today,” said David R. Schuler, executive director, AASA. “They have a wealth of knowledge and an unwavering dedication to student success, staff development, and innovation in K-12 education. We are proud to recognize these educators and showcase their outstanding achievements and successes.” “This honor is a testament to the work that all of Team BCPS has done and is doing every day on behalf of the students in Baltimore County,” said Dr. Rogers, who is in her third year as leader of the 108,000-student school system. “I am truly honored by and grateful for this award. But even more importantly, I am honored to be leading a school system that continues to make solid, sustained progress toward our goal of ensuring that every student can reach their highest potential.” AASA, which stands for the American Association of School Administrators, selects two finalists annually for each of two Women in Leadership awards – one for leaders in central offices or principals and the other for female superintendents who have been in the position for two or more years. “Congratulations to Dr. Rogers for this wonderful achievement, and for what it means for Team BCPS and for our schools,” said Jane Lichter, chair of the Board of Education of Baltimore County. “Her continued insistence on clear communications, focus on results-based outcomes, and relentless advocacy for our students and staff have all contributed to her effective leadership of our schools. We are fortunate to have her vision and drive.” Under Dr. Rogers’ leadership, BCPS has achieved improvements in elementary literacy, reading, and mathematics test scores, and the number of top school ratings from the state, as well as a dramatic decrease in chronic absenteeism. In addition, she has led successful initiatives to increase teacher retention rates and staff compensation and development, among other achievements. Nominees for the award are judged based on creatively meeting the needs of students, strong personal and organizational communications skills, professionalism and success in providing motivation, and active participation in one’s local community and understanding regional, national, and international issues. Founded in 1865 in Harrisburg, PA, and with advocacy as its driving force, the Arlington, VAbased AASA has become the nation’s premier association for school system leaders and serves as a national voice for public education and district leadership in Washington. Source: Baltimore County Press Release