http://www.thesentinel.com/303282592418476.php

Schools support background checks


By Ian Herbert

Staff Writer


The Montgomery County Board of Education voted Monday to support a bill that would require contractors to conduct background checks on their employees.

The bill, currently in the Maryland House of Representatives, forces all contractors working with Maryland public schools to conduct background checks and requires that they prohibit employees convicted of certain crimes from working at schools when students are in the building.

Against Superintendent Jerry Weast's recommendation, the school board voted unanimously to support House Bill 531 with an amendment. The members of the board said they supported the intent of the bill - to protect the children from criminals - but wanted to make sure the onus was on the contractor and not the school board to enforce the law.

The way the bill is written now, county boards of education would be prohibited from contracting work to companies that hadn't completed background checks. Vice President of the Board, Sharon Cox said she would like to make sure it is the contractors who are punished, and not the school board, for not completing background checks.

Weast had different reservations. He too said he agreed with the "wonderful intent" of the bill, but he said it might have unintended consequences, such as leading to the prosecution and potential deportation of immigrants.

"From a practical standpoint, when you do a criminal background check, someone with no papers is not going to show up," Weast said.

He said he didn't want to get caught up in the issue of deporting illegal immigrants and added that it might put an unnecessary strain on certain companies that MCPS does business with.

The crimes that would cause removal from a school work site are laid out very specifically in the bill - it includes child sexual abuse and violent crimes - but it could still unintentionally hurt innocent workers who are trying to make an honest wage, Sebastian Johnson, the student board member, said.

"We're less likely to find sexual criminals than we are to find illegal immigrants," Johnson said. "And we don't want those people to lose their jobs."

Still, the superintendent did not want the school board to oppose the bill. He wanted the group to take no position while the financial and legal impacts to companies of all sizes were investigated.

The school system has contracts with hundreds of service companies ranging from local providers to Council of Government and national companies with hundreds of employees. The cost of doing a large number of background checks had not been properly researched, Weast said.

Board member Gabe Romero initially said he would support the bill only if it were confined to construction contractors and not other jobs such as school chefs. He said the intent of the bill was for construction contractors, but that suggestion drew fire from other board members.

"If your reading is so limited to limit this to construction, then I think you're missing the boat," Stephen Abrams said. "What this ought to say is any private contractor."

MCPS already conducts background checks on all its employees, so why shouldn't it hold outside contractors to the same standards, Abrams argued. He wanted legislative aide Lori Rogovin, who presented the bill along with a dozen other pieces of legislation to the board on Monday, to express to the delegates that the board's concern was to support a bill that focused on the protection of children from exposure and ensured that the burden was on the contractor to fulfill the obligations. Abrams instructions were also voted on unanimously, and, even with all the disagreement, most board members felt it was too important of an issue to not support the bill in the end.

"Our first obligation is to ensure the safety of our students," board member Patricia O'Neil said. "I think we have an obligation to protect anyone who comes into the school."

The bill has already been introduced and has had a first reading in the Ways and Means committee. There is a hearing planned for March 9 at 1 p.m.

Photo by Justin Sheridan