Montgomery County's top two lawmakers said Thursday that they are prepared to sue the state over the attorney general's opinion this week on the county's maintenance-of-effort requirement.
Under maintenance-of-effort law, local governments are required to spend at least the same amount on education as in the previous year.
Officials from Montgomery, Prince George's and Wicomico counties sought waivers from the state school board on the requirement, saying that the recession made it difficult for them to fully fund their school systems.
The state board denied all three waiver requests in May.
Government leaders in Montgomery, Prince George's and Wicomico counties then approved plans to fund their respective school systems through a debt service option that would have required the systems to eventually pay back the money.
In June, Montgomery schools Superintendent Jerry D. Weast wrote a letter to state Superintendent Nancy S. Grasmick questioning whether the county's funding plan was legal.
In an opinion issued Wednesday evening, Attorney General Douglas F. Gansler, Assistant Attorney General Elizabeth M. Kameen and Chief Counsel Robert N. McDonald said that the funding plans proposed by Montgomery and Prince George's lawmakers are "not a permissible means" of satisfying their maintenance-of-effort requirement for fiscal 2010, which began July 1.
Wicomico's plan was approved by the attorney general's office. While the county also used debt service to fund maintenance of effort, it applied surplus money from the school system's construction fund toward the operating budget, according to the opinion.
Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett and County Council President Philip M. Andrews said the attorney general's opinion is "disappointing and wrong."
"We are prepared to sue the state of Maryland, and we will aggressively pursue legislative remedies to a law that is fatally flawed," Leggett (D) and Andrews (D-Dist. 3) of Gaithersburg said in a statement. "We cannot accept this opinion as the final word. Too much is at stake for county residents and for county residents dependent on critical services."
Montgomery County Councilman Michael J. Knapp (D-Dist. 2) of Germantown voted against the county's fiscal 2010 operating budget because of the debt service option. In arguing against debt service, Knapp said the county should forgo funding maintenance of effort and take a penalty from the state.
The county already gave $80 million to the school system for the fiscal 2010 budget, Knapp said. Now, the county could be penalized as much as $64 million by the state.
"It's unfortunate because it was avoidable," Knapp said. "At a time when nobody has any money, we're going to be $150 million in the hole. We've created our own problem."
Weast's letter to Grasmick raised the ire of some council members who faulted him for not consulting them before going to the state.
In a statement issued Wednesday, Weast said he was "disappointed, but not surprised" by the attorney general's opinion.
"We had serious concerns that the County Council's plan did not meet the maintenance-of-effort provision and, unfortunately, we were correct," Weast said in the statement. "Over the next several days, we will be discussing the impact of this ruling."
Montgomery County Councilwoman Valerie Ervin (D-Dist. 5) of Silver Spring, who chairs the council's Education Committee, said Thursday that she will schedule a committee meeting with Weast, budget officials and a representative from Leggett's office to discuss maintenance of effort.
"There was no gray area," Ervin said of the attorney general's opinion. "It was a slam-dunk opinion."
Michael D. Herman, chief of staff to Prince George's County Executive Jack B. Johnson (D), would not comment about possible penalties against the county.
"We are reviewing the opinion right now and considering our actions," he said.
Moses Alexander Green, a spokesman for Prince George's Superintendent William R. Hite, did not return calls Thursday.
Staff Writer Megan McKeever contributed to this report.