The Boast Bill

In this context, Boast stands for Building Opportunities for All Students and Teachers, which of course is the nice-sounding name given to this bill by its supporters, which include Maryland Governor Larry Hogan, the Catholic hierarchy in Maryland, and the Jewish Community Relations Council.

The subject is state money for non-public schools, indirectly. Rather than say that public money will be given directly to parochial schools, the Boast bill would encourage people and corporations to give money to parochial schools, and then they could take credits, which means the State of Maryland would give them back the money they contributed to parochial schools. After a phase-in period of two years, the State would budget $15,000,000 for this tax credit.

In other words, people and corporations give money to parochial schools, and the State of Maryland gives you back that money when you file your tax returns. Indirectly, the State is giving public money to parochial schools.

Those who support the Boast bill claim it will also help public schools but I cannot understand their allegation. When the State gives a tax credit to taxpayers for doing something, such as giving money to parochial schools, that means less money comes to the State to use for other purposes, such as public schools. When there is less tax money, of course the State has to cut somewhere. In this case, if Maryland is giving money to reimburse those who give money to parochial schools, will that lessened tax money cause less money to go to public schools?

The Boast bill was introduced in the legislature several times in the past but it failed to pass. This year Governor Hogan has made it a priority of his and those who supported it in the past, such as the Catholic officials in Maryland and the Jewish Community Relations Council, are supporting it again. Those who believe strongly in separation of religion and government are opposing the Boast bill.

There was a hearing yesterday in the House of Delegates' Ways and Means Committee on the Boast bill. There will be at least one more hearing in the State Senate, which passed the Boast bill in the past. If this bill passes both houses, there is no doubt that Governor Hogan would sign it.

Budgetpalooza

There was a very informative event tonight as the MoCo Civic Federation, the Taxpayers League of MoCo, and the Parents Coalition of MoCo presented a detailed analysis of the budget of the MoCo Board of Education. That budget of about $2.4 billion makes up more than half of the MoCo entire budget.

Those at the budgetpalooza learned that in many cases it is not possible to find many things about the MoCo Bd of Ed budget that are routinely available in other jurisdictions. And there are many issues about this budget that need a great deal of additional study and possible modification.

The Musical of Musicals (The Musical!)

For a really funny and enjoyable show, well worth seeing, with lots of great singing, dancing, and music, you can see the review of "The Musical of Musicals (The Musical!)" by Damascus Theatre Company, at http://dcmetrotheaterarts.com/2015/02/20/the-musical-of-musicals-the-musical-at-damascus-theatre-co/

New Bill about Campaigning in Apartments and Condos

There is an interesting bill in the Maryland General Assembly, HB 373, which would allow candidates to campaign in apartment buildings, condos, etc.

CAI (Community Associations Institute) has chosen to oppose this bill and they have asked communities such as Leisure World to oppose it. They say it “directly impacts certain control you may have of your common areas, including ‘secure’ areas of condominium buildings.”  CAI further said this bill would turn “private communities and their common areas and open space into campaign spots and has great potential for abuse. Moreover stairwells and buildings with restricted entry intended for the safety and security of the residents may have to be disabled in order to comply with this provision.” CAI asked LW to tell our legislators that this bill would be an “unnecessary intrusion on your private property” and has “great potential for abuse.”

When I heard about this I researched the proposal and talked with its sponsor and some co-sponsors in the House of Delegates. It seems to me that this is a bill that will have positive consequences and, with some amendments, little or no negative ones, despite what some are saying about it.

In a democracy we want voters to know as much as possible about candidates. If some apartment building owners refuse to allow candidates to meet voters who live in their apartments, that hurts everyone. 

So long as there are reasonable provisions, such as allowing people to put notices on their doors saying they refuse to talk to candidates if that is their preference, and insuring that the normal activities of the apartment or condo are not interfered with, why should anyone oppose this bill? I think it should pass.

Council Member Sidney Katz at the District 19 Democratic Club on March 9, 2015, 7pm

TOD Bill

My wife and I testified in Annapolis today, before the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee. We supported a bill called the TOD bill.

In brief, the TOD bill would allow Marylanders to sign a fairly simple form saying who they want to inherit their house after their death. There already are laws allowing them to do this for bank accounts and brokerage funds.

Why is this needed? Because many people don't like lawyers and their fees and won't get Wills or other legal documents to bequeath their houses. Many of these people have few means and would like to have this simple alternative.

Opponents (especially lawyers) say everyone should get a lawyer to say who you want to have your house after you die. They also say the TOD form might be misused and lead to problems.

But more than 20 other states have adopted TOD's to allow their citizens to transfer their houses on their deaths, and no problems have been reported. None of the states that adopted TOD have repealed it. So the arguments of opponents of the TOD bill are not backed by any evidence.

Tomorrow there's be another hearing on the TOD bill, this time in the Maryland House of Delegates Health and Government Operations Committee. Supporters of the TOD bill will again present the evidence for the usefulness of this bill and we hope to convince the legislature to adopt it.

State Senator Rich Madaleno at District 18 Breakfast Club

The District 18 Breakfast Club is a very educational club run by Susan Heltemes, whom you may have seen on Cable TV's "21 This Week," a political talk show about Maryland politics.

This Monday morning the guest at the District 18 Breakfast Club was District 18's State Senator, Rich Madaleno. He is the Vice Chair of the Maryland Senate's Budget and Taxation Committee and in just an hour he gave an explanation of the Maryland budget and Governor Hogan's budget policies that was masterful. Everyone who was there left with a much better understanding of what's going on fiscally in Maryland.

The main point is that Maryland's fiscal situation is not nearly as dire as Governor Hogan has been saying. It's just that it will look better when the legislature adopts a balanced budget, as it does every year, if people are led to believe that it only happened as the result of "new" policies.

Wonderful Production of "Godspell" at Olney Theatre Center

There is a great production of "Godspell" at Olney Theatre Center. It's very funny, and has great singing and dancing.

A full review is at http://dcmetrotheaterarts.com/2015/02/08/godspell-olney-theatre-center/

Solutions to Excess Money in Politics Examined at Women's Democratic Club

Tonight the Women's Democratic Club held a meeting with speakers on the subject of what to do about too much money in politics.

The speakers were Congressman Chris Van Hollen, Congressman John Sarbanes, and State Senator Jamie Raskin, each of whom has introduced legislation to try to ameliorate the results of radical decisions by the current U.S. Supreme Court that allow "speech" by corporations using their money to influence elections.

Congressman Van Hollen is attempting to help by introducing legislation to require openness about who has given money to politicians and how much. Congressman Sarbanes is attempting to help with legislation for public financing to make small individual contributions worth as much as large corporations' contributions. State Senator Raskin is attempting to help with legislation requiring corporations to obtain approval of their shareholders before they can make political contributions.

The meeting included a packed audience even though it was a very cold evening. The Women's Democratic Club is to be congratulated for an excellent program.

Maryland Governor Hogan's "State of the State" Address and House of Delegates Majority Leader Anne Kaiser's Response

   

Maryland House of Delegates Majority Leader Anne Kaiser did an excellent job with her response to Governor Hogan's State of the State address. She hit on all the key issues where people need to show they care about other people and Maryland in general. 

And although I'm a Democrat and other Dems may disagree, I thought Governor Hogan's address was not bad. I disagree strongly with some of his specifics (Boast bill, for example) but his general theme was that he's willing to work with the Democrats in the legislature to come up with good programs that will help everyone. 

If that is true and continues, and I hope and think it is, that will be very good for Maryland.

Hearing on Proposed Rezoning in Aspen Hill

Photo of Blair H. Lee, President of Blair Development Group (BDG)

Last night there was a hearing by the MoCo Council on a proposed rezoning (minor master plan amendment) in Aspen Hill. It was clear that the main goal of this proposal was to allow Lee Development Group (LDG) to use its property that was formerly the very large Vitro / BAE building (now empty) to be used for other purposes.

I'm not sure which side of the dispute is right about the basic point, whether the community would be best served by having one or more large stores on this property or whether it would be best to prohibit that and only allow small stores there.

What was disconcerting, to say the least, were the tactics. Lee Development Group presented testimony from its leader, Bruce H. Lee. Later, a women who identified herself only by giving the name of her law firm gave testimony as an "individual," supporting Lee's proposal. Only when a Council member asked if she had a client she was representing did she say she her firm was representing LDG.

Then two more people who identified themselves as "individuals" speaking on their own behalf finally identified themselves as working for LDG, and County Council President George Leventhal wisely said they could not take up time presenting oral testimony that everyone knew would support LDG which was paying them.

This misrepresentation of making it appear that "individuals" in the community supported what LDG wanted, when they were on LDG's payroll, was in my opinion bordering on fraud.

In addition, some alleged that the new zoning being requested by LDG had not been considered by the MoCo Planning Board until almost the end of the Planning Board's consideration of this issue, long after public comments were supposed to be made openly and in public.

LDG might have a good case for the rezoning they want, but in my opinion their tactics undermined their efforts to sway people such as me who had not yet taken a firm position.

Dr. Joshua Starr's Resignation as MCPS Superintendent

Yesterday Dr. Joshua Starr, the Superintendent of schools for Montgomery County, announced his resignation agreement with the county's Board of Education at a raucous press conference.

There's now controversy about whether Starr deserved to go or whether the Board of Education acted improperly in not assuring him of a second term in office. Did Starr do a good job or not?

I don't know the answer to that question, but I can say that in my experience (limited) I found that Dr. Starr promised to discuss issues with the community and then didn't do so. That's a serious matter, in my opinion.

Another serious matter is the almost constant jump to secrecy by the Board of Education. In the past they were found guilty of violating the Maryland Open Meetings Act on several occasions. Even now, they seem to reflexively want to do things in secret whenever possible. That's another serious matter, in my opinion.

I realize that some may say this was a personnel matter so secrecy was appropriate. However, even in this case the Board of Education could have been more open, and in the recent past the Bd of Ed has opted for secrecy whenever they can. See, for example, their announcement they were having a secret meeting to discuss school board policy on their members' use of taxpayer-paid-for credit cards.

Then there's the matter of the agreement signed yesterday by the MoCo Board of Education and Dr. Starr to end his service as superintendent. It provides for Starr to continue to receive his salary for another 5 months, more than $46,000 in vacation, sick, and personal leave, deferred compensation benefit (no details about that are in this agreement), all of his own attorney's fees for the negotiation and writing of this agreement, full payment of his health insurance through December 31, 2015, long after his contract would have ended, and continued use through March 31 of a vehicle provided to him by the MoCo Board of Education.

In return, Starr resigns effective February 16, 2015, and he agrees not to say anything disparaging about the Board of Education, or they about him.

I don't know about others, but this sounds overly generous to me. It sounds as if the Board of Education just wanted Starr to get out quietly and they were willing to give him just about as much money as he wanted to get him to do that.

The problem is that it's not their money; it's the taxpayers' money. I realize I could be wrong, and other contracts might have affected what was in this one, but this resignation agreement appears to be another example of lack of careful concern for the taxpayers' money -- now about $2.4 billion -- given each year to the Board of Education and guaranteed by a Maryland state law called MOE or maintenance of effort.