Two weeks later, many CCPS Outdoor School questions remain unanswered

The Carroll County Board of Education's unanimous vote to end the overnight component of Outdoor School — a county tradition of nearly half a century — took two days, from the time most of the public knew it was coming to the time it was over.

The item appeared on the board's agenda on Monday, June 8, listed under Action Items simply as "Outdoor School Program," with no clear indication that a vote to end the overnight program was imminent.

The Carroll County Times published a story the following day, Tuesday, June 9, alerting readers to what was at stake. By Wednesday night, the vote was done: 5–0 to discontinue the overnight stays that have sent Carroll County sixth graders to the Hashawha Environmental Center for decades.

For many residents, the first time they heard of a potential vote to end Outdoor School overnights was in the newspaper the day before the board meeting. Lisa Maisano, a school board candidate, said she was among them, learning of the vote less than 24 hours before it happened. "It is unacceptable that the public was not made aware of the significance of the meeting, decision, and vote ahead of time," she said.

Julie Walsh, another candidate who spoke at the June 10 meeting in opposition to the vote, echoed the frustration. "I was frustrated at the speed at which the situation unfolded, the lack of notice to the community, and the lack of transparency," she said.

That frustration has persisted in the weeks since, especially in local online forums, where commenters have asked questions about the speed and lack of public information about the decision.

Westminster Wire contacted Carroll County Public Schools (CCPS) to ask about the timeline and whether the district had anything to add about how the decision moved quickly from the agenda item to a vote, with little transparency.

CCPS spokesperson Carey Gaddis, after speaking with Superintendent Dr. Cynthia McCabe, said: "Everything that needs to be said was presented in the last Board meeting, which is available online. As far as transparency, any discussions that took place in closed session regarding Outdoor School were for legal advice from the Board's attorney. These discussions are not public information." Gaddis did not address the timeline or why the vote proceeded without more public notice.

That answer is consistent with what board members said the night of the vote. Board President Steve Whisler told the audience to "trust your five board members," and the board's attorney, Edmund O'Meally, argued that airing the specific vulnerabilities at the Hashawha site publicly could help someone exploit them.

But critics have argued the issue isn't what was said in closed session; it's that the public vote came before any meaningful opportunity for community input.

Shannon Hinkhaus, a school board candidate, said, "My objection stems less from the final result than from the process followed to get there." She said she would have preferred that the board discuss the risks in one meeting, invite community input, and then save the vote for a subsequent meeting. "I believe the community should ideally have had the opportunity to witness and participate in discussions of closure vs. risk mitigation, any potential solutions, and all associated costs," she said.

Hinkhaus added that she trusts the board acted in good faith on safety. Maisano agreed that the process was flawed, calling for future decisions of this magnitude to formally separate the presentation from the vote so the public can respond in between.

One critique came from Leamon Tuttle Jr., a parent who spoke at the June 10 board meeting during the public comment portion and whose son attended the program. Tuttle Jr. wrote in a Facebook comment responding to a statement issued by the board: "Notably absent from this statement is any mention of how sudden the vote was, or how the public had virtually zero visibility into the process. No one would argue against student safety. EVERYONE should argue against an opaque process that pushes parents out of the discussion entirely."

No statistics on incidents at Outdoor School were shared in the risk assessment presentation during the June 10 board meeting when the vote took place.

At the meeting, O'Meally said "a couple of situations" had occurred at the site in the past year. "We've been very fortunate," he said. "Things could have been very, very different in a couple of situations that took place in the past year. We’re fortunate no one was injured. We may not be that fortunate next time around."

The board's post-vote statement described one specific incident in which an individual, apparently under the influence of an unknown substance, entered the property at night, accessed a vehicle, and attempted to enter buildings before a staff member intervened. The individual had an active arrest warrant.

The statement acknowledged that the intruder incident was not the only one, saying they are “unable to talk about most cases because they involve minors."

Westminster Wire reported June 24 that the Carroll County 4-H Residential Camp, YMCA Camp Hashawha, and a Carroll County Recreation & Parks wilderness survival camp are all running overnight stays at Hashawha this summer. The 4-H camp's two weeks are already full with a waitlist. The YMCA program still has openings. These organizations have not responded to Westminster Wire’s request for comment.

The board's public safety argument centered on site conditions at Hashawha: no perimeter fence, unreliable cell service, longer emergency response times, and the fact that anyone can walk onto the property.

While the board's post-vote statement drew a distinction between Outdoor School and activities held in school buildings, citing controlled access and alarm systems, it did not address how other organizations can run overnight programs at the same Hashawha site, or how other Maryland counties can conduct their overnight outdoor schools.

At the June 10 meeting, board member Kristen Zihmer said that some safety concerns at Hashawha could not be resolved regardless of cost. "Even if we lived in the perfect world where we had all the money to institute all the necessary changes to make [Outdoor School] safe in the eyes of the insurance [assessors] or the folks who came out and did the threat assessments,” explained Zihmer, “Even if we were able to do all of those things, there are still safety concerns that we would never be able to address even with all the money in the world."

What those unresolvable concerns are, the board has not said. The publicly stated issues — an unsecured perimeter, unreliable cell service, and longer emergency response times — are the kind that money could theoretically address.

At the same meeting, O'Meally pointed to one that cannot be easily solved: Maryland's Child Victims Act, which eliminated the statute of limitations for child sexual abuse claims and, in O'Meally's telling, creates lasting liability exposure for any setting where supervision is less rigorous than in a school building.

Whisler, in his remarks at the June 10 meeting, said, "We've been doing [Outdoor School] for 50 years. Why now? Why the sense of urgency?" His answer: "We're not at liberty to share what legal counsel provides us because of the risks."

He pushed back on the perception that cost was a factor. "I know everyone out there's going to say it's about money. It's not. It's not about money," he said. "It's about student safety, the safety of our staff, and looking out for the taxpayers with regards to the risk of litigation and lawsuits." He also said the board reached its decision reluctantly. "There is nobody on this dais that wants to see Outdoor School closed or changed in this current format. Nobody."

Whisler said he pressed staff hard before accepting the outcome, stating "there's probably nobody more vociferous than me that has been pushing back," and that board members had consulted with county commissioners and the sheriff before reaching their conclusion.

O'Meally was direct about what the public would and wouldn't be told. "There are other things that we need to address," he said. "We don't necessarily share the specifics in public." He offered a school security camera analogy to explain why: "We don't have a public discussion of where the cameras are located. That would defeat the purpose." He said the board had given the public "a general overview of why we can't continue," but that details remain in closed session.

Board member Kristen Zihmer was blunt about the severity of what the board had been told. "We're not closing Outdoor School and the overnight portion because of minor concerns," she said. "These are major things. And if I can't send my kids, I can't in good faith send your kids either."

Board member Dr. Patricia Dorsey said the information the board had received left no other option. "We can't continue with the overnight program with the information that we certainly have," she said. "I think with all of the risk factors that we have been made aware of, I don't think we really have a choice."

Superintendent Dr. Cynthia McCabe said she would rather absorb public criticism than face a different consequence. "I would rather live with that," she said, "than live with a parent standing there saying, 'You let X, Y, or Z happen to my child, and you knew — you had in black and white in front of you — what the risk was.'"

But what exactly that documentation contains remains unclear, and it is one of several questions driving community frustration: what the additional incident(s) O'Meally and the board's statement referenced actually were; what safety concerns Zihmer said could never be resolved regardless of cost; what the conversations with the commissioners and sheriff revealed; the nature of the information the board says cannot be shared publicly; why more incidents weren't disclosed publicly when they occurred; and why the vote came before the public had any meaningful opportunity to absorb things and weigh in.

Westminster Wire has covered the Outdoor School vote in an initial report on the June 10 board meeting, a follow-up on the board's post-vote statement, and a roundup of board candidates' reactions.

Have tips or other news to share? Submit them here.