Parris Glendening (File Photo)

Gov. Parris N. Glendening (D) was interviewed July 10 by Post editors and reporters. The governor answered several questions concerning education. His answers are reprinted below.

Q: When Ellen Sauerbrey sat in this chair a couple of weeks ago, she said education would be her number one issue, and she said that she would be telling voters that you've not been a good governor for education, citing what she said were declines in both Prince George's and Baltimore schools ...

Parris N. Glendening: You know, I don't mean to be frivolous but I do want to tell you this. Many of you know me reasonably well. I mean, the driving force of my life is education – it really is. ... You know where I'd be today if it were not for education, and it certainly wouldn't be in this fancy board room. I also just watched my son – and we are so excited about him. But also I mean I teach. I also note what the economy is.

The jobs of today and tomorrow increasingly are knowledge-based jobs and if anything, the legislature has said I'm trying to do too much in education and when I talk about that, I mean the Hope Scholarship Program, as you know, they turned down because they said it was too big all at one time.

The school construction – that had been moving along at $100 [million] to $120 million a year. We have about $225 million this year, and I believe we can do even more. The increase in the funding for colleges – but it is not only about that. I mean we are holding a steady course on assessment and accountability. We are holding teachers and administrators responsible for what happens.

That's one of the reasons we've also assumed responsibilty for the recomposition of some of the schools. And I just think it is going to be a long road to somehow or other say the governor doesn't care about doing what he's supposed to doing.

Q: Sauerbrey criticized you for not doing enough for college funding. The suggestion [was] that that's why Curry was leaving, because there wasn't enough state support.

Glendening: We got everyone together long before there was even a hint Curry was leaving and said okay now we think we're in a financial position to make the next big step in education funding and everyone knows that, as does he and as he has said publicly on a number of times, that we were not only starting to head in the right direction, but we had started to pull that program together with his input, as well, before he announced that he was leaving.

Now the reason I always find these questions interesting – because I remember certain un-named reporters who are sitting on the table across from me. In the last election, there were a number of articles written about how the governor wants to do too much. The governor is promising things he can't afford. I'm sorry, not the governor, the candidate at the time, wants to do too much.

Glendening and Lt. Gov. Kathleen Kennedy Townsend announce their reelection bid. (File Photo)

I mean, go back and look at the archives. You know, I said we are going to invest in education. We are going do this and all and then I got these articles that all the time said, "Oh look, he's going to be a spendthrift, cause he is trying to do much. And when we came in, we did what we had to do. We were fiscally very responsible. We held that budget. We did increase funding for higher education.

The following year we did even more. And by the third year, we're making significant increases – the advanced technology centers, the increase in the community college funding, the signficant increase in the scholarship funding – all of which goes to the campus. And then by this budget, we were in a position to make that huge increase. And next year, I think not only on the funding but also on the capital, we're going to be able to [make a] significant additional investment, as well.

Q: Next year, do you think you'll be able to add more than you added this year for College Park in both operating and capital [budgets]?

Glendening: The capital definitely. The operating, we have to work with the legislature on and obviously work on both. But [with] capital, we have far more flexibility. Without getting into real detail, Maryland has something called [an] affordability spending limit, which is a very good idea that basically says spending can't go up faster than the growth in the family income.

There's a lot of other things in that, but it's family income. The net result is our revenues change faster than the affordability limit and so we are constrained to stay within affordability. The reason the revenues [rise] faster is you get capital gains and other things that are not in these calculations. And so last year, for example, the expenditure was limited to 4½ percent and we ended up with $380 million above and beyond the 4½ percent, which is where a lot of our capital money went. And the same thing will be true in this upcoming year.

We will have extraordinary flexibility for expansion of capital and I've already told numerous legislators, and they have concurred, that it's an opportunity for us to do one time construction projects on both campuses as well as school construction to move toward further reduction of class size.

Q: Governor, going back to [the] question about Sauerbrey's criticism, I think – not to be her spokesperson but just to try to voice what her criticism was – if you look at certainly two of the three big school systems in Maryland, Baltimore City and Prince George's County, I think most people familiar with those school systems – parents, administrators, and the audit this week – would agree that those school systems have deteriorated over the past number of years. And obviously you had less to do with Baltimore than Prince George's. But doesn't Sauerbrey have a point that you're spending all this money and yet the actual schools are getting worse?

And her point is that it's management giving more money to school and the Democrats have had a chance to try to do this and they haven't really, frankly, succeeded.

Glendening: Well, first off, remember her basic thrust is in fact to take a significant amount of money from public education. I hope no one is caught up in this soft and fluffy rhetoric. And the reason I'm saying that, look at [her] votes in the past. Look at the constant votes against the budgets, against funding for education.

Look at the alternate budgets that she submitted both in the 1994 session and then subsequently when she proposed those huge tax cuts and there were cuts in education funding, and when you look at say cutting local aid, 85 percent of local aid is education aid, in addition to which the proposal that she has is for vouchers to take public education funding from public education into private education by way of the voucher system, which I oppose.

Now I'm stressing this, first of all, because it's unreasonable all of a sudden for someone to say, well, here we are in 1998 and I'm going to change everything that I've stood for in the last 20 years.

Secondly, on the management end, part of the reason we're having controversies around the state, not just in general, is because we are demanding greater accountability, we are in fact taking over part of the management of some of the school systems – that's what Baltimore City was all about.

In Prince George's County, we have indicated that ... nine schools must be reconstituted, according to state guidelines. And you know, if they're not reconstituted, if we do not see a change in performance in those schools, the next step is the state will flat take 'em over – which we do not want to do, because we believe education should be local.

But we are moving aggressively in these areas. We have also started everything from greater teacher-training programs and technology programs to help, as well as our "It's up to the student" program. And so, we have been aggressive, both in the funding level but also in terms of trying to improve the quality.

Now, some of the school systems have unique challenges, obviously they do, and this is true all across the country. But I believe the way to do it is to continue to invest and demand management improvements, not to abandon public education – which is what her track record is.

Q: Governor, the yardstick that you use to determine how schools are doing [is] the MSPAP test and that was ultimately the yardstick that was used to determine that nine of the schools in Prince George's should be reconstituted, the same in Baltimore.

But, at the same time, the state has set a goal that some 70 percent of Maryland schools should be performing satisfactorily or better on this [MSPAP] by the year 2000. And it's pretty clear that's not going to happen ... And unless something really drastic turns around in the next year and a half, it seems that a lot of schools outside of Prince George's or Montgomery County are not succeeding at the level that the state has set for them. Is it inadequacy of the schools? Is it the test? The expectations?

Glendening: Normally, when I used to prepare my tests at the University of Maryland, I would always have a (d) or (e) choice that says "all of the above" and to some extent, we might. I don't mean to be facetious about it, but I think to some extent it is look at all the above. It does involve additional resources.

For example, the reduction of class size I believe would be very important in certain areas. There are some questions about the tests that can be refined better ... And then the other issue is, we simply have to do better. All of us.

Parents. Teachers. Community. Funding agencies. We have to do better.

I think it is better to require our teachers and our children to reach for higher goals than it is to reduce the standards of those tests, or to say, well, we can't make it. And I want to try to continue to reach and to say what do we have to do to continue to improve quality and what do we have to do in continued financial support to reach those goals.

In fact, quite honestly, even if everyone achieved the goal I think we've still got to do more. I mean all we have to do is look at what is happening to the economy and to know that if our young people don't come out of this being really well educated, and an increasing number do not have the capability and opportunity to go to college. ... When you think what has happened in the last 10 years, and then think what's going to happen in the next 20 years, their future will be so limited, and therefore our future will be so limited. And so, yes, we have some challenges, but I want us to continue to push, I want us to keep raising that bar and have people continuing to struggle to get over that bar.