|
division to be able to control its local higher
educational institutions as well as its pri-
mary institutions.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Bard.
DELEGATE BARD: You are thus not using
the word "law" here to be synonymous with
"general public law"?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: No.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
The Chair recognizes Delegate Cardin.
DELEGATE CARDIN: Delegate Wheat-
ley, could you direct me to the terminology
in section 5 which tells us what the local
school system shall or shall not do because
in the constitution we have attempted to
separate the powers and delineate the re-
sponsibilities?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: I am not sure
that I follow the question.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Cardin.
DELEGATE CARDIN: In section 4, it
states very clearly what the State Board of
Education does, what its responsibilities
are and how it shall perform.
Section 5, I believe, is specific as to the
local school system but I fail to find any
language in there that tells us what the
local school board is permitted to do.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: I think your
point is very well taken and I would have
objection to amending the language if there
were need for clarification. We interpreted
this to mean the local school system, re-
ferring the system back to the type of
thing that now exists and in the article
now providing for this Article 77, Section
55 and 54 of the Maryland Code, the follow-
ing language is used: "Shall exercise con-
trol and supervision over the public school
system of the county." This is the intent of
the Committee and we would certainly want
to carry on the same intent now expressed
in Article 77, Sections 54 and 55.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Cardin.
DELEGATE CARDIN: That would not
conflict if you were ,to include that language,
|
that would not conflict with the exercise,
control and direction of the public school
system in section 5.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Again, as I
have indicated, if there is clarification
needed as to purpose, the purpose of the
Committee was to continue the state board
as it now exists with its control limited to
those areas for which it is responsible and
then we would amend to make both of these
compatible if the Committee of the Whole
feels that they are inconsistent or conflict-
ing with existing law.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
The Chair recognizes Delegate Raley.
DELEGATE RALEY: Delegate Wheatley,
in section 5, line 18, you said should there
be a change proposed in the method pres-
ently employed in selecting such local school
boards and so forth on down. I am very
confused there, because I just do not think
it can be done under the local government
provision which prohibits local legislation;
have you thought about that?
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Again, let me
be clear on this. We are not advocating any
changes, and the reference to fiscal au-
thority here refers to such existing fiscal
authority as may now be joined by such
school boards so your question is can it be
done by local law. My answer is only if it
will be provided by constitutional provision
or state law to allow this.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Raley.
DELEGATE RALEY: But I think we are
getting into an awfully confused tangle in
this section and it would be better to have
left out any reference to it whatsoever.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: You are re-
ferring to the provision on fiscal authority.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Raley.
DELEGATE RALEY: No, the method of
changing a local board in section 5.
DELEGATE J. CLARK (presiding):
Delegate Wheatley.
DELEGATE WHEATLEY: Again, as I
tried to explain in my report, where per-
|
