2001 article:
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-2001-02-19-0102190172-story.html"I know board members who have no children at all and they are fantastic board members ... " said Carl W. Smith, executive director of the Maryland Association of Boards of Education. "The litmus test for board members is in the quality of the individual and what they bring to the job."
No rule states that a school board member with children must enroll them in the district he or she serves, said Michael E. Morrill, spokesman for Gov. Parris N. Glendening, who appoints board members in 11 of the state's 24 school districts. Members are elected in the remaining districts.
"I have been fully committed to public education," said Arnold, who was appointed to the Baltimore County school board in 1996. This is his second year as board president. His three older children attended public schools.
Arnold said he decided to place two of his three younger children at the School of the Cathedral of Mary Our Queen in Baltimore because of religious beliefs. A third child is too young to attend school.
Some parents in Baltimore County view Arnold's decision to enroll his children in a private school as a slap in the face. He lives near Pine Grove Elementary School, which ranked 34th out of 102 county elementary schools on the 2000 Maryland School Performance Assessment Program.
"As a public school parent, you would hope the people who represent you have children in the same system," said Laura Nossel, PTA Council of Baltimore County president. "I would like teachers and administrators to have their kids in the system, too." By choosing private schools, she said, educators are sending "a bad message about our school system."
Baltimore school board member Jones said that at the time of his appointment last year, he enrolled his two children - one of whom now attends college - in private schools because he and his wife thought they would "get a significantly better education in the private school system than they would in the public school system."
The opponents of those who chose private had no problem with the agendas of those members, they only felt that the members should have supported the public schools by sending to them. No resentment of their appointment or complaints of agendas.
What do you think locals consider an “agenda”? Is taking into account the (legal) bussing needs of the private schools in your jurisdiction an “agenda”? Nefarious indeed.
