[{"_1":2,"_88":-5,"_89":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6328055,"mediaKeyId","2321728-83ce21eb54e79de993017515e26aa6cb","parentId",2321728,"title","Harford County board hears hours of public comment on Patriot Program changes; adopts resolution to preserve original volunteer program","audioSeconds",4258,"startMs",6405000,"endMs",10663000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2321728-83ce21eb54e79de993017515e26aa6cb&start=6405&end=10663","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2321728-83ce21eb54e79de993017515e26aa6cb/thumbnail_6405000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6328055/Maryland/Harford-County-board-hears-hours-of-public-comment-on-Patriot-Program-changes-adopts-resolution-to-preserve-original-volunteer-program","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6328055-4060e9d6796b87eeed69ce14c6848b66/orig.mp4?Expires=1771171472&Signature=bRkpPbtznVuycI9ftbvtOYIG7MLRka8pTQ6spBUiwribxLcmVUvVDxtgr8prIhPh8Q9ddvVGcEdrpSki7Unx8TO1~nXmH3GFvdiCjWTe6LrNNe6enHRxi7KaidgmsK08~APZnGjqWs23zHy90Jv8uxE5K0qx8WAfDnrK46mMp1jpThOo-Wtb9HHGxG7IbBfm7MHTU~78uHDiHc-xqMDaRK4mRMGJbSHaKRLiEj7Y36l4iVvgimHpaHUMwb4IXSttxwr5ZtxsgWVtadjdqeFCYlrMvA~BrfYyiCp2MHnsLcVLAVWc~Oflk2hQOVhF9ruMI5mklkSjAuulj9OQ5IPV6w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Harford County Public Schools","date","2025-01-27T00:00:00Z","article","At its Jan. 27 business meeting, the Board of Education of Harford County faced sustained public comment over proposed changes to the county’s 30‑year Patriot Program and voted in favor of a board resolution directing that the existing volunteer/parent‑led Patriot Program remain available at participating schools.

The dispute drew dozens of public speakers and sustained comment from community groups, veterans, parents and students. Superintendent Dr. Bolsom introduced a presentation from curriculum staff explaining a plan to “elevate and amplify” the Patriot Program by embedding civic strands into pre‑K–5 classroom instruction so all students would have access to core civics content. Erin Lang, Supervisor of Social Studies, said the goal was to make the program “too important to be optional.”

Why it matters: Supporters of the existing Patriot Program said the program encourages memorization, civic pride, community engagement and provides awards, field trips and assemblies that families value. Opponents of the operational change voiced concern that moving program elements into classroom time could reduce the volunteer‑driven, extracurricular recognition that older community members and PTAs have supported for decades. Board members said they must weigh instructional time, equity of access and community expectations.

What presenters told the board

Thomas Smith, Director of Elementary School Instruction, and Erin Lang showed the board an “integrated Patriot program” pilot for grade 5 that staff say expands strands in history, geography, civics, media literacy, arts and service learning. Fifth‑grade teacher Emily Shepherd described three strands piloted this year — a constitutional convention simulation based on the Preamble and debates, a geography strand on industry and transportation tied to Maryland history, and a study of border states and sectional conflict leading to the Civil War — and said parent “learn with me” sessions drew positive feedback.

Lang told the board that 22 of 35 elementary schools offered some form of Patriot experience and that about 6,000 of an estimated 8,340 eligible students (roughly 28%) have participated where the program exists. Lang and Smith emphasized inconsistent implementation across schools, difficulties providing accommodations for students with individualized education programs when the program is run by volunteers, and the loss of teacher capacity when testing or program activities occur during standard instructional time.

Public comment and community reaction

More than two dozen speakers addressed the board in person or virtually. Tony Gee, vice president of the County Council for District C, said the Patriot Program \"is a long standing initiative\" and urged the board to \"preserve the program's original mission to educate, inspire students about American history and patriotism.\" Several parents and community groups, including Moms for Liberty chapter leaders and veterans' organizations, urged the board to retain the existing optional, PTA‑or parent‑led model. A number of speakers said they had submitted public‑information requests for the new curriculum and had not received materials or satisfactory answers.

Some speakers framed the change as a loss of a cherished community tradition; others argued the revision would increase equity by offering core civic learning to students whose schools or families currently lack volunteer capacity. One teacher who piloted the integrated model told the board that parents who attended class demonstrations said they “actually learned a lot.”

Board discussion and the motion

Board members pressed staff on timelines and public outreach. Several members — including Miss Alvarez, Miss Strauss and Miss Pizzoke — described personal or family experiences with the traditional Patriot Program and urged community engagement before operational changes. At the meeting’s close, Board Member Mister Sewell moved a resolution saying, in summary, that the Patriot Program should remain “intact as originally designed and as previously implemented in HCPS participating schools led by the individual school, parents, and PTA as a supplementary and volunteer program” and that the voluntary program should remain in addition to any curriculum‑embedded civics instruction.

The motion drew a roll‑call vote after some procedural confusion; board members recorded votes individually during the recorded roll call and the chair announced the resolution passed. Minutes show the motion was approved by the board and staff said they would follow up with formal guidance.

What remains unsettled

District staff told the board they will continue developing a pre‑K–4 component of the integrated model and produce a family information packet for fifth‑grade families. Staff said the integrated strands are not a new separate curriculum but activities and learning experiences aligned to existing Maryland frameworks and the BOE‑approved social studies standards. Supporters of the existing volunteer model said they want the district to preserve assemblies, awards, field trips and volunteer roles in addition to any classroom civics work.

Ending note

Board members and staff agreed to continue community engagement and to provide more detailed materials to the board and the public; the district scheduled a follow‑up meeting and indicated it will provide the curriculum packet and additional information for board review. The board’s approved resolution directs that the existing, volunteer Patriot Program continue while curriculum work proceeds.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Board Meeting - Jan 27, 2025 ","oneSentenceSummary","At its Jan. 27 business meeting the Board of Education of Harford County received hours of public comment over proposed changes to the 30‑year Patriot Program and adopted a resolution directing that the original volunteer/parent‑led Patriot Program remain available at participating schools.","taxTitle","Harford County Public Schools, School Boards, Maryland","taxId",17368,"location","Maryland","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6328049,"Superintendent proposes $670 million FY2026 operating budget; seeks $26.2 million additional local funding, flags $15 million in position reductions",4734,10959000,15693000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2321728-83ce21eb54e79de993017515e26aa6cb&start=10959&end=15693","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2321728-83ce21eb54e79de993017515e26aa6cb/thumbnail_10959000.jpg","/articles/6328049/Maryland/Superintendent-proposes-670-million-FY2026-operating-budget-seeks-262-million-additional-local-funding-flags-15-million-in-position-reductions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6328049-839ffd7271dae2e8eb51d5758b54d1a2/orig.mp4?Expires=1771171472&Signature=mVQGCTuf~s~qjQmPxAh9ZcwEB0tYTbU2yo~k5h8BZgg1pR-9-SXaYAV~1311i3t4KTv0IDEeKauzcz7mRQVk3IWgR-4zkBnMP0EXV0C~WwJ2ISypppF2sxESD30l3nEpiL4sZ0NoNniqEeTyV3RHyLBREdGCCHo465H1ulttIBWfEic5L4-POHfYHQiAhVmA1WDN78~1VHYeT1opFnj3n6c6fvb~3p4Wi1iPToYroBrPQpkkvLHORw9LEuxFTr6vHePGzYdYcQJO-MrihYRV8xwvO65yxCME9rK~A2KgO~6Ct~uUcaoXQN~-mWnYlidQh3gO0lDkNjqZkGeZKgXWWw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","On Jan. 27 Superintendent Dr. Bolsom presented his proposed FY2026 operating budget to the Harford County Board of Education, proposing a $670 million unrestricted operating budget and requesting an additional $26.2 million in local funding to balance FY2026 spending.

Key numbers and the trade‑offs

- Total proposed operating budget (unrestricted): $670,000,000 (≈ +2.6% vs. FY2025).
- Local request to Harford County: $26,200,000 (≈ +8.2% vs. FY2025 local funding).
- Estimated state revenue (based on the governor’s budget): +$10,700,000 (3.6%), subject to legislative changes.
- Proposed use of fund balance: $10,000,000 (administration seeks to reduce reliance on fund balance compared with prior years).
- Salary/wage package included in proposal: roughly $13,000,000 (lower than earlier board parameters; board earlier discussed a larger package).
- Proposed position reductions: administration proposed approximately $15,000,000 in position‑related savings (roughly 150 net positions by the department’s estimate) to reduce the local funding request and hold the district to an achievable ask.

Administration warned the board the trade‑offs are consequential. “I can’t balance this budget in a way that doesn’t impact student achievement,” Dr. Bolsom told the board, adding the proposal is intended to make the budget more sustainable and avoid a late, disruptive round of cuts later in the fiscal year.

Major drivers called out in the presentation

- Employee benefits and health insurance: Human‑resource and benefits costs are increasing; the administration projected a ~$6,000,000 increase in active employee health insurance costs for FY2026.
- Electricity/energy: projected increase of roughly $3,000,000 (about a 33% rise versus FY2025 estimates).
- Pension costs: the normal employer pension increase for teacher pensions was projected at approximately $1,700,000; the governor’s budget proposes shifts that could transfer additional pension costs to local governments and school systems, which would create an additional multi‑million dollar exposure.
- Contracted transportation: an estimated $1,000,000 increase is included in the proposal to reflect increased contract costs tied to wage changes.
- AP exam fees: the district budgeted roughly $500,000 for Advanced Placement testing fees (a requirement in the state blueprint).
- Pre‑K expansion: nine FTEs and approximately $615,000 are proposed to carry forward a pre‑K expansion grant into the operating budget as seats convert to ongoing funding.

Position reductions and timing

Eric Clark, director of budget, and Deborah Judd, assistant superintendent for business services, said the $15,000,000 in staff‑related savings is an estimate intended to be achieved primarily through attrition and vacancy management, not immediate lay‑offs. Clark said the $15.4 million figure is an early estimate that used an average cost per position; staffing details will be developed so the board can see the distribution of cuts by function and school level before final action. Dr. Bolsom said the administration wants to present reductions earlier in the spring so the district avoids disruptive late‑June cuts that would coincide with hiring season.

Questions from the board and next steps

Board members pressed administration on the likely class‑size effects, the mix of positions targeted for reduction and whether fees (sports, transportation, magnet) should be considered. Administrators said fees provide comparatively small revenue and carry steep administrative costs and equity trade‑offs; the district is not proposing major new fees at this time, but it seeks to increase facility‑use fees closer to market levels.

The superintendent proposed a mix of three revenue and reduction strategies: a reduced salary package, $15,000,000 in position reductions primarily achieved through attrition and vacancy management, and a $10,000,000 use of fund balance. With that mix, the administration said its local request would be approximately $26.2 million. If state legislative action reduces anticipated state support (for example, if teacher collaborative time funding is paused), the district would need to identify deeper cuts, additional revenue or greater use of fund balance.

Public engagement and timeline

Dr. Bolsom and his budget team said they received more than 4,400 responses to the district’s public budget survey and would hold a public budget input session on Feb. 5. The board scheduled a vote on the superintendent’s proposed budget for Feb. 10 so the BOE can transmit a proposed budget to the county executive within the county’s timetable.

Ending note

Administrators said they will return to the board with more detailed staffing breakouts, updated fund‑balance projections and revised state revenue estimates after the Maryland General Assembly acts on the governor’s proposal. The board will continue its deliberations in February with opportunities for public comment and additional review.","Superintendent Dr. Bolsom proposed a $670 million FY2026 operating budget and asked Harford County for $26.2 million in additional local funding; the plan combines a reduced salary package, proposed position reductions and use of fund balance to close a significant shortfall.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Harford County board hears hours of public comment on Patriot Program changes; adopts resolution to preserve original volunteer program

Superintendent proposes $670 million FY2026 operating budget; seeks $26.2 million additional local funding, flags $15 million in position reductions