Dear Harford County We Stopped the Tire Pyrolysis Plant!

Dear Harford County We Stopped the Tire Pyrolysis Plant!

Dear Harford County Voters We Won One!

This is one of the only times that the Harford County Council voted against zoning and the County Executive.

Change is possible!

Change will continue if you vote for me Frank “Bud” Hines for Harford County Council President.

I am committed to bringing greater change to the Harford County Council.

Why vote for Bud Hines?

Because we are dealing with:

  • A huge influx of development
  • Crowded roads and schools
  • An opioid crisis
  • An increase in crime
  • Inadequate funding for our schools and teachers.

Let’s stop rubber stamping and make the council work for you.

Let’s also prevent any more large settlement payouts ($millions)  because of poor zoning decisions.

I have a plan to:

  • Enhance our children’s lives and reduce the use of opioids in our community
  • Provide an equal percentage of dollars to our schools
  • Plan our communities more effectively
  • Fund our education system and reduce class size.

 

Harford County currently has an air quality score of F as a result of poor decisions.

I will fight to prevent bad decisions that could impact our air, our water and our land.

 

Part 3 Tire Pyrolysis – The Dangers That Are Inherent as Part of a Tire Pyrolysis Plan

Part 3 Tire Pyrolysis – The Dangers That Are Inherent as Part of a Tire Pyrolysis Plan

Background:

This document is part of a three-part series to discuss the waiver granted to the Auston company to build a combustible tire processing plan in a densely populated residential area that could impact residents from White Marsh and Kingsville to Aberdeen and Havre De Grace – an estimated 73,000 resident.

Part 1 covers out recommendation to Barry Glassman to reverse the waiver given the pyrolysis plant and to address the issue of stockpiled tires.

Part 2 deals with issues with the Harford County Zoning Appeal

Part 3, this section, deals with the dangers of tire Pyrolysis plants.

What is Pyrolysis?

  • The reduction of anything by ashes via incineration in a combustible environment. This is a relatively new and unproven technology.

What are synonyms to the word Pyrolysis?

Synonyms from the power thesaurus (https://www.powerthesaurus.org/pyrolysis) include: Combustion, Gasification, Blazing, Burning, Incineration, Calcination, Cineration, Cremation, Scorching, Self-Immolation, Suttee, Blistering Smelting, Oxidation, Distillation.

What are the Dangers of Tire Pyrolysis?

Three websites highlighted the dangers involved with pyrolysis:

  1. IPEC – The International Power Ecology Company
  • URL: https://i-pec.ru/en/news/pyrolysis-plant-disasters.
  • This site states: “the hazards of pyrolysis process arise from the releases of toxic gases and explosions. Hydrocarbons released from the pyrolysis reaction are highly flammable. Under the sufficient heat and oxygen, an explosion may take place.”
  1. Intelligent Energy Europe
  1. Agile Process Chemicals LLP
  • URL: http://pyrolysisplant.com/
  • This page lists the dangers involved with pyrolysis plants: http://pyrolysisplant.com/safety-concerns-batch-type-tire-pyrolysis-plants-2/.
  • This page of their website states that: “100s of workers, operators and investors have died in such batch type tire plant due to explosion or accident. Given below is the detailed chart that explains the accident risk involved in batch tire plant.”

Here are the dangers listed on their site:

Faults in batch tire plants Hazard and Risks
·       Lack of efficient pollution control equipment ·       The facility emits huge quantity of suspended particulate matter in air. There is powder carbon lying everywhere in the facility and around the facility.
·       There is no Gas Handling System to store and burn toxic pyrolysis gas ·       The excesses pyrolysis gas is released in the environment causing emission issues

·       This is hazardous to human health

·       Spreads bad smell around the industry
·       Manual temperature control of reactor ·       Mistakes by operator can lead to overheating and reactor explosion

·       Under heating of reactor leads to plant insufficiency

·       Required highly vigilant and experienced manpower
·       Wrong selection of material of construction for reactor manufacturing. ·       Reactor metal damage due to direct heating and opening of welding joints

·       Reactor metal damage leads to explosion within 2 years.
·       Manual carbon removal from reactor ·       Workers look like black monkeys

·       Carbon particles accumulate in the lungs of workers affecting their health and causing numerous lung diseases

·       Spreads toxic carbon through the plant
·       Reactor needs to be opened for removing carbon. There is no provision that ensures 100% prevention of accident due to carbon catching fire. ·       Most of the fire and accidents in batch tire plants happen due to opening of reactor when inside carbon is above 100 Degree Celsius.

·       Every day, during reactor door opening there is danger of explosion and accident
·       Frequent clogging of reactor vapor line ·       Reactor vapor line gets clogged due to bitumen produced in the reaction and needs to be cleaned every 2 to 3 days.

·       In case vapor line gets completely clogged, it leads to massive explosion and life hazards.

·       Unpredictable pressure built up in reactor
·       Tiny and insufficient size of reactor safety pressure release systems ·       Safety pressure release system of reactor never works

·       Adds to health hazard in case of high reactor pressure
·       Lack of gas burner system ·       Heavy black smoke from chimney

·       Gas back fire leading to worker skin burns and accidents

 

  • In many cases, the hazards associated with the pyrolysis process arise from the releases of toxic gases and explosions. Hydrocarbons released from the pyrolysis reaction are highly flammable. Under the sufficient heat and oxygen, an explosion may take a place.

Are there any other dangers involved with this pyrolysis plant?

Yes, there are two other dangers or concerns:

  1. Fire Safety: There is the danger that the county lacks the facilities and expertise to deal with the type of accidents and fires that could result at such a plant. We are now dealing with dangerous petroleum and carbon – Hydrocarbon and Hydrogen Sulfide emissions. These are extremely dangerous and need to be handled much differently than a regular fire.
  2. Traffic congestion. Years ago, a dump in this area was closed due to heavy traffic volume. When this operation began, per their website, Auston had only one truck. Now a permit is being granted for 16 inbound tractor trailers daily and three outbound oil tankers for a total of 19 heavy duty trucks traveling down route 7 and onto Mountain Road Daily. In addition, there are expected to be an additional 25 employees traveling down route 7 and Mountain road as well.

 

If a previous garbage plant was closed due to congestion, why isn’t the proposed congestion for this plant being researched?

 

This document outlines the many dangers that 73,000 citizens of Harford County and Baltimore County could face with the tire pyrolysis plant planned on the Auston facility which is close to Mountain Road and Route 7. These dangers include explosion and deadly emissions emitted into our air, ground, and water. In addition, the implementation of this plant would pose challenges for our fire safety crews and cause issues for traffic.

Obviously, the most important dangers are the dangers related to the pyrolysis process itself.

I call on our County Executive Barry Glassman to rescind the waiver his zoning department gave to Auston Transfer & Processing LLC.

 

Bud Hines

Concerned Harford County Resident and Candidate for the President of the Harford County Council

 

Donna Hines

Concerned Harford County Resident and Candidate for the Maryland State Senate District 7

Part 2 of Tire Pyrolysis: The Harford County Zoning Appeal

Part 2 of Tire Pyrolysis: The Harford County Zoning Appeal

Part 2.   The Harford County Zoning Appeal

 

Background:

This document is part of a three-part series to discuss the waiver granted to the Auston company to build a combustible tire processing plant in a densely populated residential area that could impact residents from White Marsh and Kingsville to Aberdeen and Havre De Grace – an estimated 73,000 residents.

Part 1 deals with our recommendation to Barry Glassman to reverse the waiver he gave to the Auston pyrolysis plan and to address the issue of stockpiled tires.

Part 2, this document reviews the Harford County Zoning appeal meeting.

Part 3 identifies the dangers involved with a tire Pyrolysis plant.

Background on the Zoning Waver:

Summary:

Harford County Zoning granted a waiver to allow a combustible pyrolysis plant in a CI district surrounded by residential neighborhoods. This is a relatively new and unproven technology. Our research shows this type of facility can be hazardous and dangerous to the people and their environment.

So, Harford County Zoning identified that they are fine with implementing a new unproven technology in the middle of a heavily populated area. An area that will now be subject to explosions and to the deadly Hydrocarbon and Hydrogen Sulfide emissions that could be released into our air, land, and waters.

The Details:

On January 18, 2017, Mr. Bradley Killian, Director of Harford County Planning and Zoning sent a letter to the Maryland Department of the Environment stating that “the addition of a tire pyrolysis operation on the [Auston Property] is permitted in the CI District”.

There is no classification in the Harford County Zoning Codes for Pyrolysis Plants. However, according to the letter sent my Mike Perone to Mr. Killian on September 6, 2017 asking him to rescind his decision, Mr. Perone points out:

“There are three Industrial Use Classifications in the Zoning Code that a tire pyrolysis operation could arguably be placed within:

  • Petroleum Refining
  • Rubber Reclamation, or
  • Recycling Center

As you are aware, none of these uses are permitted within the CI District. How then can the County take the position that a process that is essentially a combination of all three uses would be permitted?”

County Councilman Perone, District A, continues and points out:

“The Code in Section 267-60 describes the commercial Industrial District (CI) as being for uses of “a moderate scale and intensity”. If a process that involves the extraction and storage of crude oil, release of Volatile Organic Compounds, and the emission of waste gas falls within the “moderate” range of the industrial intensity spectrum, what could possibly fall at the high end?”

Mr. Perone continues:

“The Code also seems to make clear that the types of facilities that nobody wants to live near belong only in the General Industrial District, as the Code states in Subparagraph A (3) that the GI District is for uses “which may generate substantially more impact on surrounding properties.” There being over 4,500 acres of GI zoned land in Harford County, it should not be difficult to relocate this proposed facility to an appropriately zoned site.

In light of these considerations, I ask that you reverse your Department’s position on this matter and notify MDE as soon as possible. “

In addition, in our review of this section under (3) e. the code states: “Blasting activities shall not be permitted within 2000 ft of any residential zone parcel or historical landmark”.

Moreover, how does Harford County explain ignoring their own zoning codes?

Mr. Perone did not point out, that the company that Auston is teaming with has not built a single pyrolysis plant in the United States. I believe Mr. Killian already knows this and the fact that tire Pyrolysis is rather new technology in the United States. These plants currently exist in countries where there are few environmental laws.

The Appeal

Obviously, Mr. Killian did not reverse his decision.

So, a group of stalwart citizens, led by Charles Lembach and supported by Gordon Koerner among others filed an appeal to this zoning waiver. Hiring an attorney would be costly so they made the decision to represent themselves. They went to court arguing the error, the unlawfulness of such a plant in a CI district.  They pleaded their concerns about the potential of great danger to their communities such a plant at this location could posed.

The focus of the defense was that Zoning had the right to make the decision rather than arguing the safety of the plant in this proposed location.

The citizens were hurt because they did not hire their own attorney, which can be most expensive. (My wife and I spent $60k, along with our neighbors, to fight Harford County Zoning when they didn’t follow their own rules in the past. We won). As noted it is quite expensive to disagree with Harford County Zoning.

The Appeals Judge was gracious in that he allowed all the concerned citizens that wished to speak about the plant to speak.

However, the attorney for Auston bludgeoned the concern, mostly senior citizens who testified to their worries and concerns for their properties as well as their health. His behavior was that of a Blow Hard Bully badgering these witnesses with questions meant for a Harford County Zoning employee or a Pyrolysis engineer such as:

  • Are you an expert in zoning?
  • Have you ever worked for Harford County Zoning?
  • Are you an engineer?
  • Are you familiar with the processing inside of a Pyrolysis plant? How does it work?
  • Are you familiar with the CI designation?
  • Are you familiar with the GI district?
  • Are you familiar with what is stated in Section 267-60 and so on?

He did seem to falter when one of the witnesses who had an engineering background could speak to the processes as well as the dangers associated with such a plant.

I was able to state that I was not able to find one working plant in the United States that is not embroiled in legal controversy.

Testimony by the Chief of Harford Development, Moe Davenport

In his testimony, Moe Davenport, stated, more or less: “there was no provision anywhere in the zoning code for pyrolysis.” So, we tied it to a zoning section for petroleum and coal products which are permitted in a CI district. (As Mr. Perone’s letter points out, this is not true).

What a leap of logic the Director of Zoning and our County Executive made at the expense of at least 73,000 residents!

In my opinion, if this part of the law allows petroleum on the premises, I do not believe it allows for the creation and the processing to make petroleum from old used tires in a combustible plant.

Mr. Lembach was not given the opportunity to point out that the creation of Petroleum was not included in the CI district and per Mr. Perone’s letter, the combination of all 3 processes should not be included in a CI district.

At the ripe time of 9:10pm, rather than asking to continue to trial, this attorney decided to rest his case. (Thank God! This is the same attorney who lost the Gravel Hill Rumble Fill case while representing Harford County Government. In that case the jury awarded $45 million in damages.

The people of Harford County should not have to fight and foot the legal fees to contest this. Instead, the letter sent by Mr. Perone to Mr. Killian and copying Mr. Glassman should have been all that was required to start a discussion on how better to handle the removal of tires and the investigation of the best location for this facility.

Having recently lost a $45m judgement in a suit against them, where was the County Executive, the State’s Attorney, the County Council, and the Zoning Department? Why did they not put the health of their residents first and prevent another big law suit against the county?

 

 

Conclusion:

The way that this waiver was quietly passed through and accepted shows that your County Executive, the Harford County Council (Mike Perone excluded), the Harford County zoning department, and the Harford County State’s Attorney do not have your best interest at heart.

It is time to elect a new group of representatives who will listen to concerned citizens and look out for their health and safety.

We Will,

Bud Hines

Concerned Harford County Resident and Candidate for the President of the Harford County Council

 

Donna Hines

Concerned Harford County Resident and Candidate for the Maryland State Senate District 7

Part 1 – Our recommendation to Barry Glassman

Part 1 – Our recommendation to Barry Glassman

Summary,

Harford County Executive Barry Glassman and his zoning department granted a waiver to allow a Pyrolysis Plant in a CI district to Auston Transfer & Processing, LLC (Auston) at their current location.  This location is in a heavily populated area. Clearly, Mr. Glassman exercised poor judgment when allowing this to occur.

I am astounded that no one in the county government, including the Harford County Council (except for Mike Perone who requested this waiver be rescinded), has investigated the possible safety issues involved with a pyrolysis plant. Yes, an evaluation of what to do with the tires that are being stockpiled at this Auston location should be done.  But, it cannot be a quick fix.

Allowing a tire pyrolysis plant could appear to be a good decision as Auston and Harford County are running out of options for discarding used tires. However, after researching the company that Auston is teaming with (no proven pyrolysis plants in the U.S.) and the pyrolysis technology (numerous potential dangers) it seems that permitting a pyrolysis plant so close to so many communities is far too dangerous.  It’s just too risky.

There is a huge risk of explosions, toxic air, land, and water emissions for the people of Baltimore and Harford Counties, (from White Marsh and Kingsville to Aberdeen and Havre De Grace which would affect approximately 73,000 citizens), if this wavier is not rescinded.  There are 16 schools and numerous day care centers within a 6 mile radius of this location.  It’s just too risky.

I recommend that Harford County Executive, Barry Glassman, rescind the decision made by his zoning department to grant such a waiver to Auston.

While rescinding this decision will protect our safety, it does not address the health and safety issues of what to do with the tires that are being stored and stockpiled at the Auston facility which is close to Mountain Road just off Route 7.

I further recommend that Mr. Glassman transfer funds from his new budget and task members of his waste management team to determine if there are alternative technologies other than pyrolysis to safely dispose of tires. After this analysis is performed and if pyrolysis is still determined to be the answer, I recommend that this plant be placed in a less densely populated area that would affect the fewest number of citizens.

As part of this budget, I recommend setting aside some money to compensate or lend money to Auston for their effort to-date and to include them in the investigative process since they have been encouraged to move forward with their pyrolysis proposal by Harford County Zoning.

It would be in our best interest to come to an agreement, stop further legal battles and move forward with the investigation of the best approach for all Harford County residents as well as Auston.

 

Thank you,

Bud Hines

Concerned Harford County Resident and Candidate for the President of the Harford County Council

Donna Hines

Concerned Harford County Resident and Candidate for the Maryland State Senate District 7

Tire Pyrolysis introduction to a 3 part series

Tire Pyrolysis introduction to a 3 part series

Dear Editor,

The Baltimore Sun has written several articles about the proposed pyrolysis plant in Harford County.

My wife and I recently learned about the plant and feel that this is a critical issue to all the residents of Harford County as well as Baltimore County.

We have been investigating the pyrolysis process and its associated dangers. I also researched why the county and Auston Transfer and Processing LLC were considering this technology. Finally, I was taken aback when I attended and acted as a witness at the Harford County zoning appeal meeting. This is covered in its own document.

Since these topics cannot be adequately covered in a one-page document, we have divided our report on the Pyrolysis Plant into a 3-part letter:

  1. Our recommendation to Barry Glassman
  2. Our complaint about the zoning waiver appeal hearing
  3. A presentation of the risks inherent in a paralysis plant provided by companies that are in the businesses of building pyrolysis plants.

I am asking the Baltimore Sun to print these letters as three separate letters. I believe combining them would provide too much information in one letter.

Thank you,

Bud Hines

Concerned Harford County Resident and Candidate for the President of the Harford County Council

Donna Hines

Concerned Harford County Resident and Candidate for the Maryland State Senate District 7

 

Harford County Education Association Questionnaire

Harford County Education Association Questionnaire

I was asked a number of questions by the Harford County Education Association:

Here are my responses:

 

Harford County Education Association

2018 County Council

Candidate Questionnaire

CANDIDATE:  Frank “Bud” Hines

OFFICE SOUGHT: President of the Harford County Council

CAMPAIGN ADDRESS: 1308 Terry Way Fallston, MD 20147

 

PHONE NUMBER(S):  443.826.6267

EMAIL: budhines@gmail.com

WEBSITE: https://voteforbudhines.com

I confirm that the responses provided here are my official positions in seeking local office and I understand that HCEA reserves the right to share my responses with members and interested parties.

CANDIDATE SIGNATURE: Frank “Bud” Hines   DATE SUBMITTED: 04/10/2018

Candidates: In order to be considered for a recommendation, you must indicate your response to each of the questions. Clarifications, explanations, and other information may be attached, but please be certain to indicate clearly the questions(s) to which you refer. Please return your completed and signed questionnaire to:

HCEA

2107 Laurel Bush Rd.

Suite 207

Bel Air, MD 27075

Education Funding

Background Points

• In 2002, lawmakers passed the Bridge to Excellence in Public Schools Act (also known as the Thornton Plan) based on the recommendations of the Thornton Commission. While this increased investment has helped Maryland’s public schools and students achieve outstanding results and develop a reputation as a national leader, many unmet needs remain.

The cost of educating students continues to increase. Over the last 10 years, Maryland has seen an increase in our Title I student population of 129% and limited English proficiency students of 88%. With year-to-year increases in special education needs, it is clear that the changing student population is a significant driver of costs.

Maryland had the best schools in the nation for five years in a row from 2009 to 2013, according to Education Week. In 201 6, Ed Week ranked Maryland fifth in the nation. Maryland now ranks 2nd in AP performance (201 7)—after leading the nation for ten consecutive years—with 30.4 percent of Maryland graduates scoring a 3 or better on AP assessments. And Maryland’s graduation rate is at 87 percent—the highest ever in the state and 3.8 percent higher than the national graduation rate.

There is a critical need for improvement in closing education gaps, expanding programs and services, community schools, and improving student achievement.

The governor will have a significant impact on the future funding and Success of Maryland schools. Maryland’s median incomes are the highest in the nation, but school spending is the 1 0th highest among the states and 1 6th highest when adjusted for regional cost differences.

According to consultants hired by MSDE, Maryland schools are now underfunded by nearly $3 billion annually. That means each of our schools, on average, is underfunded by more than $2 million every year.

MSEA supports legislation to update our school funding formula and policies to ensure adequate and equitable state and local education funding. Our priorities include elevating the respect and support for Maryland’s educators with higher salaries and greater career opportunities and addressing Maryland’s economic inequality in our schools with programs to target concentrated poverty.
  1. Please provide your general and specific thoughts on how the county can address the unmet needs facing our schools. Detail how you would prioritize aid for education in your budget deliberations.
  2. There is considerable room for improvement in addressing educator recruitment and retention. Across the state, educator salaries have been relatively flat for the last eight years. Pension benefits have been reduced but employee contributions have increased. Class sizes have increased because of cost-cutting measures and/or due to hiring freezes, layoffs, and retirements. Support personnel positions have been eliminated. How will you address critical concerns with educator recruitment and retention?

I will support any initiative to increase the salaries of and the resources for our teachers and our schools.

I think that educating all of our students is critical to the success of this county, our state and our country. I recommend a renewed focus on technical schools and would strive to make community college and technical schools free.

I would suggest that community college students getting a free ride would pay back the county by providing free or low cost assistance to kindergartens through high school as teacher helpers, substitute teachers, tutors, coaches, etc.

I believe we can address the unmet needs facing our schools by supporting the legalization of marijuana and using the proceeds from the sales tax to go directly to our school system.

In addition, I believe our gaming systems should be contributing more to our school systems and that the governors office is looking into this.

  1. Do you support or oppose Maryland’s maintenance of effort law that requires local jurisdictions to fund at least the same per pupil allocation in local aid for education as the prior year unless a waiver is granted?

Support                                                                               Oppose

Additional Comments:

 

I believe this law is a good law as it prevents wild variations in funding.

 

Public Funding for Private Schools

Background Points

HCEA believes any education dollars spent outside of improving public schools makes it harder to make the progress necessary to provide a world-class education for every student.

The Maryland State Department of Education requires a certificate of approval or registration for private schools; it does not accredit or license them. Private schools do not have to report or administer teacher qualifications, class sizes, adherence to College and Career State Standards, student retention rates, graduation rates, demographics, or discipline or suspension policies. Without these measures, it is impossible to ascertain the standards to evaluate any of the funded programs funneling public tax dollars to private schools.

• Carroll County Commissioners created a $400,000 “Educational Opportunities Fund” to enhance and enrich the educational opportunities for home- and private-schooled students. HCEA is opposed to this type of diversion of public funding with no accountability.
  1. Do you support or oppose allocating public funding to home and privately schooled students?

Support                                                                                Oppose

Additional Comments:

 

I believe that if children with special needs can not be accomated by the school system, then funds should be provided to assist with their education.

I do not believe in providing funding for private and charters schools.  

There is already too much competition for funds now.

 

 

 

 

Collective Bargaining

Background Points

HCEA supports efforts to protect and enhance the collective bargaining rights.

Collective bargaining is the negotiation of a contract — including wages, salary scale, benefits, and working conditions — between employers and employees. The items agreed to in a ratified collective bargaining agreement apply to all employees in a bargaining unit, providing a benefit to employees and employers in not having to negotiate thousands of individual contracts.
  1. Do you support or oppose public education employees’ rights to bargain collectively?

Support                                                                                          Oppose

Additional Comments:

 

 

I support the right of teachers to bargain collectively.

This is the only way they can use their collective voice and fight for what they desperately need – better pay, secure pensions, greater resources and strong support from the educational system and the community.

 

 

Parental Involvement and Public Support

Background Points

It is calculated that school age children spend 70% of their waking hours (including weekends and holidays) outside of school.

Research shows that the most consistent predictors of children’s academic achievement and social adjustment are parental involvement in schools and parental expectations of the child’s academic attainment and satisfaction with their child’s education at school.

Additionally, research indicates there are three major factors that influence parental involvement in schools:

Parents’ belief that they can impact what is important, necessary on behalf of their children school;

The extent to which parents believe that they can have a positive influence on their children’s education; and o Parents’ perceptions that their children and school want them to be involved.
  1. What would you do to increase parental involvement and public support for our public schools and educators?

 

I think we should tell students that they will exceed their parents. We should have sessions where they visualize and dream of their futures.

I would also recommend meditation classes to assist students in maintaining their focus.

I would hold competitive rallies between communities where they compete based upon school involvement, teacher support, etc.

I would love to see the introduction of a chess programs in some of our underserved schools similar to what was done in Missippi.

We need to identify innovative ways to suggest that community college students getting a free ride would pay back the county by providing free or low cost assistance to kindergartens through high school as teacher helpers, substitute teachers, coaches and as tutors.

 

Community Schools

Background Points

Poverty dramatically and negatively affects the wellbeing of children, particularly in the areas of physical health, mental health, safe housing, access to technology, parental support, family planning services and education, youth employment, and nutrition. Each of these factors play a large role in whether students can learn and do well in school—making it imperative that these opportunity gaps be closed if we want to provide equitable education in our communities. According to the data collected by MSDE, 44% of Maryland public school students were enrolled for free and reduced-price meals this school year (at or below 185% of poverty).

HCEA supports the establishment of community schools, where applicable, which are designed to close these opportunity gaps by making the school a hub for essential services that students in disadvantaged communities lack.

Community schools generally have the following four components: (1 ) they serve a high concentration of students in poverty; (2) they employ a full-time coordinator to lead community school-related services; (3) they conduct a needs assessment to identify key obstacles to learning and the services needed to close the opportunity gaps; and (4) they work with community partners to bring those needed services into the school building or nearby locations to make them accessible to students and community members.

HCEA supports equitable and adequate resources to provide every student with an opportunity to learn in a safe and non-disruptive environment. Establishing and funding community schools is a research-based strategy for closing opportunity gaps and building strong communities.
  1. Do you support or oppose local efforts to create and support community schools in areas of concentrated poverty?

Support                                                                                          Oppose

Additional Comments:

 

 

Yes. Children can not focus on learning if they are hungry. Programs such as this will show the children that the community cares which in turn will help break the school to prison pipeline.

 

I support anything we can do to support our children in need and helping them focus on getting a good education so the doors of opportunity will be open to them.

 

Privatization

Background Points

HCEA opposes any effort to outsource or privatize education jobs that are part of a bargaining unit. We maintain that any attempt to outsource or privatize jobs of public educators violates collective bargaining agreements because such an effort is terminating or firing bargaining unit positions.

Outsourcing and privatization efforts have threatened teacher and education support professional (ESP) jobs for years. Just in the last three years, Anne Arundel County has attempted to outsource teaching services for deaf and blind students, Talbot County has discussed privatizing transportation services, and Kent County has attempted to privatize custodial services. There currently is a multi-county effort on the Eastern Shore to outsource the hiring of occupational therapists and physical therapists to work in the schools.

When jobs are outsourced, quality control is diminished, and safety is compromised. Public employees are subject to background checks that private employers often skip. After privatizing, local school boards lose control over the individuals working in schools and have little ability to provide input on job performance.

Privateers often use an argument of cost-savings as a means of winning contracts. The amount is often misleading because they low-ball the first-year operating costs. Ultimately, they reduce hours, health care coverage, or just cut jobs. All these steps lead to increased local unemployment and less overall money in the community.
  1. Are you in favor of contracting out custodial, cafeteria, and maintenance services rather than have those services provided by Board of Education employees?

Support                                                                                      Oppose

Additional Comments:

 

Contracting this work out results in having to either pay more for the services or receiving substandard services.

Only by running these programs ourselves can we maintain the greatest control.

In addition, the constant and consistent presence of these workers in our childrens lives provides a stronger sense of community and belonging. We all remember a kind word from a custodian or cafeteria worker who we came to know and expected to see on a regular basis.

 

 

 

Essay Questions

  1. What are the top three things you would like to accomplish in the next four years if you are elected to the Harford County Council?

 

  1. Assist the county executive and governor in finding new sources of funding (like the legalization of marijuana) that could fund our schools.
  2. Minimize the transfer of monies out of the school budget that could go to teachers salaries and benefits and instead goes to technology or other uses.
  3. Suggest a cross county fund raising campaign to help raise money for our schools by establishing quarterly music/art/educational fests. Each quarter the fest would be held in a different part of the county (north, south, east and west. The fests would be used to help showcase art, music, science, programming and other talent. We would host cooking competitions and hold raffles to assist us in funding our schools. These fests start out small and grow quite large over the years.
  4. What is your view of the current local tax structure? What, if any, changes would you advocate?

Harford County has a reasonable tax rate.

I think that our citizens may be open to paying more in taxes specifically  to fund our schools, i.e. a school tax.

 

I would be open to proposing legislation to increase the taxes we pay to better fund our schools. Let’s try it and let’s give it a go.

 

I also think that the greatest potential increase to school funding would be from alternate sources like the adquate acquisition of funds from gaming that for some reason have not materialized and the legalization of marijuana.

 

 

 

 

 

en_USEnglish
en_USEnglish