Detectives Investigate Eleven Purse Thefts from Schools in County; Photographs of a Suspect Released

What is going on with MCPS security?  Why were all of these schools so easy to enter undetected?  What does this say about the state of security in our public schools? 

Detectives from the Montgomery County Police Department (MCPD) are investigating 11 thefts of female employees’ purses from nine area schools that occurred in May and June.  Two of these thefts occurred in Rockville City and MCPD detectives are working with the Rockville City Police Department regarding those incidents.  Investigators believe that multiple thefts were committed by the same suspect whose photograph is being released today in hopes that someone recognizes him.

Investigators have received reports from 11 female employees who work at nine different schools/child care centers located in the County whose purses/wallets were stolen from a school classroom or office by an unknown suspect(s).  (The thefts are outlined below).  The victims’ stolen credit cards were then used to purchase items at stores.

During each of these thefts the suspect located an unattended classroom/office, found the employee’s purse/bag, and stole the entire purse or wallet or removed the victim’s cash and credit cards and left the purse/wallet.  At three of the schools the suspect was approached by personnel who inquired about his purpose in the school.  The suspect provided a brief response like he was with the cleaning staff or was a member of camp staff and then would quickly leave the area.  The suspect would then go to stores in the County, to include Target, Safeway, Best Buy, and Giant, and use the victims’ credit cards to buy merchandise.

The total amount of fraudulent charges placed on these victims’ credit cards has exceeded $13,000 and is growing.  (Investigators have not received final amounts for some of these fraudulent purchases so this amount will increase).  The total amount of cash stolen from these eleven victims is approximately $500.

Surveillance photographs of a suspect who used four of the victims’ credit cards at stores (from incidents in Germantown, Bethesda, and Silver Spring) were obtained by detectives and are being released to the public.

These thefts remain under investigation.  Anyone with information about this suspect or these thefts is asked to contact 2nd District detectives at 240-773-6710. For those who wish to remain anonymous, Crime Solvers of Montgomery County is offering a reward of up to $10,000 for any information that leads to the arrest of the unknown suspect. Tipsters can call Crime Solvers of Montgomery County toll-free at 1-866-411-TIPS (8477).

Thefts of Purses/Wallets from Schools:

May 9 – Twinbrook Elementary School, 5911 Ridgway Avenue, Rockville, approximately 4:00 pm – 5:00 pm – Rockville City Police Department

May 19 – Little People Daycare, 12720 Royal Carriage Drive, Germantown, approximately 3:00 p.m.

June 1 – Georgetown Hill Early School, 850 Nelson Street, Rockville, approximately 9:00 am to 1:00 pm – Rockville City Police Department

June 8 – Rock Creek Forest Elementary School, 8330 Grubb Road, Silver Spring, between approximately 5:45 pm  – 6:00 pm

June 9 – Montgomery Child Care – Garrett Park, 4806 Oxford Street, Garrett Park, between approximately 11:00 am and 4:30 pm – Note: Two victims at this school

June 14 – Somerset Elementary School, 5811 Warwick Place, Chevy Chase, between approximately 1:40 pm and 3:00 pm

June 19 – Bethesda Elementary School, 7600 Arlington Road, Bethesda, between 10:30 am and 3:00 pm – NOTE: Two victims at this school

June 21 – Silver Spring International Middle School, 313 Wayne Avenue, Silver Spring, between 12:30 pm and 1:30 pm

June 29 – Melvin J. Berman Hebrew Academy, 13300 Arctic Avenue, Rockville

Can law enforcement investigations be "shut down" for "partisan reasons" in Montgomery County?

That's the allegation from former Montgomery County Inspector General Thomas Dagley in today's WUSA9 story:

In  May, Montgomery County's former Inspector General Thomas Dagley wrote to Kanstoroom, alleging that law enforcement investigations into the matter had been "shut down" for "partisan reasons."  

If Mr. Dagley's allegation is true then that would explain a lot about why investigations in to MCPS procurement and spending never result in reports to the public.

Another no-bid procurement coming to Montgomery Co.?

Why not? This is how we buy Promethean Boards, artificial turf, visitor entry systems, security cameras in schools, and the first batch of exterior bus cameras that we don't want to use anymore. Why use a Request for Proposal (RFP) when you can just go shopping!

...Richard Harrison, program manager of MCPD's Automated Traffic Enforcement Unit, has said each camera will likely cost between $5,000 and $8,000, and the county can either put out a request for proposals or negotiate a deal with the vendors it currently uses for speed and red-light cameras...

Patch:  County Council Backs School Bus Cameras

Suddenly, Ethics rode into town.

When was the last time the Montgomery County Board of Education's Ethics Panel met to discuss a possible ethics violation?  How many years has it been? 


What has brought about this sudden change at MCPS? Could it be that there is a new sheriff in town? 


What about all of the other conflicts of interest that have existed for years on the ranch? Will the new sheriff push for a review of those issues as well, or was this just a one time ethics review just for show? 


In December of 2011, the MCPS Ethics Panel actually met, discussed an ethics issue, and issued an Opinion.  The Opinion is shown below with the names of the parties redacted.  

Redacted Montgomery County Board of Education Ethics Panel Advisory Opinion

Operators Standing by to Take Your Calls

Did you know that the Montgomery County Office of Inspector General has established an independent toll-free hotline, using a third-party contractor to confidentially take calls from County government employees and contractors?

Purpose – The OIG is interested in receiving information confidentially from employees and contractors. Our responsibility is to receive and evaluate your concerns regarding fraud, waste, and abuse, and when appropriate, conduct an investigation. We report our conclusions to management for a decision on any corrective action and/or a prosecutor for potential criminal matters.

We define fraud, waste, and abuse as follows:

Fraud

A dishonest and intentional course of action that results in obtaining money, property, or an advantage to which the individual committing the action would not normally be entitled.

Waste

The needless, careless, or extravagant expenditure of County funds, incurring of unnecessary expenses, or misuse of County resources or property.

Abuse

The intentionally wrongful or improper use of County resources that can include the excessive or improper use of one’s position, in a manner contrary to its rightful or legally intended use.

When reporting information, be prepared to provide the following:

· The person(s) involved and title(s) · When the incident occurred

· Where · How

· How long · How often

· How the caller knows

· Is there documentation

· Others who have knowledge

· Any steps already taken

MCPS Vendor Removes Link

On June 1, 2009, this blog reported on a MCPS vendor that was using a Montgomery County Council of PTAs (MCCPTA) memo as an endorsement on its website.

As of today, the link from the EasyLobby website to the MCCPTA memo has been removed.

MCCPTA memo linked in EasyLobby Ad

EasyLobby is a visitor management product that is now being used in some MCPS buildings. According to the Superintendent:

"All of our technology partners know they are not permitted to use MCPS testimonials in advertising." Superintendent Jerry Weast, January 7, 2009(Click on link and see answer to Question #9)

However, EasyLobby has found a way to include a statement about its product from Montgomery County by linking their website to a memo on the Montgomery County Council of PTA's (MCCPTA) website. The MCCPTA memo in turn, links back to the EasyLobby home page. Included in the MCCPTA memo is the following statement:

"Searching for the right software was a challenge since most security systems are designed for office buildings, but MCPS found “Easy Lobby” which allows them to download data at no additional charge compared to a rival, Raptor which charged a fee for the same service."

According to this memo on National PTA and it's ability to endorse products:

"It’s important to note that National PTA does not endorse these companies or their products and services. Due to IRS regulations, an endorsement by a non-profit organization would jeopardize its tax-exempt status. Endorsement of a company is when you make qualitative statements about a company or its products. For example, if PTA stated that our members should go shop at Office Depot because they have the “best office supplies” or they are “better” than Staples. These statements would be endorsements, which PTA does not practice with any companies we work with. It is perfectly legal for non-profits and under PTA’s privacy policy to make our members aware of special offers, discount opportunities or benefits without providing an endorsement."

UPDATE 6/4/09: EasyLobby removes link to MCCPTA memo.

Superintendent Shows Up: Surprises "Seminal" Committee

On the agenda for the 3/17/09 Board of Education Fiscal Management Committee meeting was a review of the Maryland Office of Legislative Audits Report on MCPS. This would be the first time that this 91 page State Audit of MCPS would be addressed by members of the Board of Education since it was released in January.

Ten minutes into the beginning of the committee meeting Superintendent Weast walked into the room and sat down at the table. The Chair, BoE member Chris Barclay, completed his statement about being clear on the MCPS procurement process, and then noted that it was rare to have Superintendent Weast attend a Board committee meeting. He then turned the meeting over to Superintendent Weast and the agenda for the meeting was set aside.

Superintendent Weast spoke for about half an hour on his prediction that 2011 will be a worse budget year than 2010. He discussed the waiver of the maintenance of effort and whether that waiver request would come from the County Executive as a blanket waiver. He said that an individual waiver was preferable. He said that the Fiscal Management Committee "was now the seminal committee" because of budget concerns for FY 2011. Superintendent Weast then left the room and the committee returned to their original agenda.

The discussion of the State Audit of MCPS was abbreviated to say the least. There was little time for Board member questions as MCPS COO Larry Bowers read through the list of State Auditor recommendations and reiterated the MCPS position on each, as already stated in the Appendix to the Audit. While the surprise visit by Superintendent Weast was no doubt illuminating, a detailed discussion and implementation of some of the recommendations in the State Audit could go a long way to alleviating a financial crisis for MCPS.

Of note, was the fact that when Superintendent Weast spoke he mentioned sums of $24 million here and $80 million there as potential gaps in the MCPS budget. All the while ignoring that MCPS no longer brings major procurements to the Board of Education table for approval and, as an example, last summer went out and purchased over $13 million worth of Promethean Boards without so much as a hint of this expenditure at the Board table. How much of this type of unmonitored purchasing goes on in MCPS is not clear. But certainly bringing major procurements to the Board table for a vote would go a long way to regulating the spending of this $2.1 +/- billion school system and averting crisis.

Specifically, recommendation 18 in the Audit was that "MCPS should adopt formal policies governing long-term obligations and cash management". The Fiscal Management Committee did not discuss this recommendation. COO Bowers simply stated that they "are looking at a cash management policy". He also said with regard to long term obligations, they "need to formalize practices in place and bring them to the Board". There was no Board committee action on this recommendation. The committee then moved on to the next recommendation.

Some recommendations in the Audit will be brought back to the Fiscal Management Committee at a later meeting.

Navarro - No Show

Board of Education member Nancy Navarro was a No Show at today's Board of Education meeting. No explanation was given for her absence. Board member Navarro was therefore not present to discuss or vote on a MCPS plan to take out a 10 year $600,000 lease + interest on artificial turf for one high school.

Ms. Navarro also missed the vote on three procurements - EasyLobby, Gompers and Netcom that were specifically discussed.

Notable was the discussion of the EasyLobby purchase. MCPS Chief Operating Officer Larry Bowers told the Board that when considering a visitor management system, MCPS "looked at" 3 different systems. Now, after installing the EasyLobby system in 39 schools, MCPS is hearing "questions" from elementary principals.

MCPS will now be putting out a "RFP to look at what company to go with in the future".

Here's a thought, maybe MCPS should have put out a RFP for a visitor management system in the first place and actually taken formal bids. Just a thought.

Update: Board of Education member Nancy Navarro was at Kennedy High School's Women's Leadership Conference today instead of the MCPS Board of Education meeting. The event was from 7:30 to 11:00 AM. The MCPS Board of Education meeting went until well after 4 P.M.

"There is no contract" for $74,300 purchase.

On January 30, 2009, I testified in Annapolis about the urgent need for transparency in MCPS procurements via an online searchable website. I gave 4 examples of major procurements that did not appear in MCPS Board of Education minutes. One of the examples I gave was the purchase of the EasyLobby visitor management system.

Now we know why the EasyLobby procurement does not appear in MCPS Board of Education minutes. MCPS: "There is no contract".

Montgomery County Public Schools has a Procurement Manual which is based on Policy DJA, Procurement Practices and Regulation DJA-RA Procurement of Equipment, Supplies, and Contractual Services. The Procurement Manual details the procedure to be used in procuring items over $25,000 and details how those purchases require Board of Education approval. In short, the process has an RFP or IFB, followed by competitive bids, and then the selection of a bidder. The contract is then awarded by the Board of Education.

[UPDATE JULY 15, 2009: MCPS HAS REMOVED THE PROCUREMENT MANUAL FROM THEIR WEBSITE SO THAT IT IS NO LONGER ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC. THE LINK TO THE "PROCUREMENT MANUAL" ABOVE NO LONGER TAKES YOU TO THE MCPS PROCUREMENT MANUAL. HERE IS A NEW LINK PROVIDED BY THE PARENTS' COALITION.]

According to MCPS, there is no EasyLobby contract, and so apparently, there was no Board of Education approval of this August 18, 2008, $74,300 purchase. So who exactly authorized the spending of this money?

Please note that the letter from EasyLobby is dated August 12, 2008 and the Purchase Order is dated August 18, 2008. There was no Board of Education meeting between August 12th and August 18th of 2008, and so Board approval of this Purchase Order was impossible.

How often are purchases over $25,000 made without Board of Education approval? Annapolis, we can't wait for a searchable MCPS procurement database, we need it today!

UPDATE 3/10/09: MCPS COO Larry Bowers tells Board that MCPS will be putting out a RFP for a visitor management system soon due to questions from elementary principals.
Easy 1

Publish at Scribd or explore others:

Four words not heard at Board table

The following is testimony delivered in Annapolis on proposed legislation MC 930-09. What documents do exist on these procurements seem to indicate that all four of these contracts were entered into by MCPS during the last two years, during the time that the MCPS Board of Education President was Nancy Navarro.

Montgomery County Delegation

January 30, 2009

Re: MD 930-09 Montgomery County Public Schools - Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2009

Good morning Chairs Madaleno and Feldman and the members of the Montgomery Delegation.

I am Janis Zink Sartucci. I grew up in Montgomery County and I am raising my children in Montgomery County. I attended Montgomery Knolls Elementary School, Eastern Junior High and graduated from Montgomery Blair High School. I am here as a member of Parents Coalition to support Louis Wilen and the Parents Coalition's request that you pass MD 930-09.

In my time before you today, I have four words for you. The four words are:

IQinVision

Promethean

EasyLobby

SmartBoard

These are four words that you will not find in Board of Education minutes approving procurements of the products from these companies. In total, I would estimate that these four words represent contracts of over $30 million in procurements. That’s over $30 million in procurements that are not reflected in MCPS Board of Education minutes. Each of these procurements represents a commitment of taxpayer dollars of well beyond $10,000.

Briefly, let me start with IQinVision. How did Montgomery County citizens discover that MCPS has contracted with this company? In a press release from IQinVision. The contract with this company is not mentioned in Board of Education minutes. Neither is their product IQEye or the consultant that obtained this contract. Rumor has this procurement cost at $9 million. Attachment A

Promethean: How did citizens discover this contract? A press release from MCPS announcing the placement of these products in classrooms. Repeated Maryland Public Information Act requests disclosed that 3,300 Promethean Boards had been purchased for MCPS classrooms, in total a commitment of over $20 million in taxpayer funds without Board of Education review. In support of this purchase, the Superintendent has produced two different versions of a June 9, 2008 memorandum to the Board of Education, purportedly to justify this purchase. Both versions of the June 9, 2008 memorandum are attached. Attachment B

EasyLobby: Citizens discovered this procurement through an article in the Gazette newspaper. This procurement is also not mentioned in Board of Education minutes. Unknown contract cost. Attachment C

SmartBoard: SmartBoards are present in schools and in MCPS headquarters. We simply see them in use but again, can not find any mention of a contract to purchase these items in Board of Education minutes. Unknown contract cost. Attachment D

Does Montgomery County need the Montgomery County Public Schools - Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2009?

Absolutely.

We don’t know what we don’t know.

With regard to funding of this Act, I will reference the recently released State Legislative Audit of Montgomery County Public Schools. In order to fund a searchable website of MCPS procurements, MCPS can cut up the 1,400 credit cards whose use is not being monitored.

From the State Audit:

"Our tests of 32 calendar year 2007 travel expenditures
charged to credit cards totaling $19,028 disclosed 30 expenditures
totaling $17,930 that were not recorded on monthly activity logs and,
therefore, were never approved."

Thank you for this opportunity to speak.

(Attachments available upon request. For each word I searched in the Board of Education minutes on their website and copied the results page. For all of the words except "Promethean" the search yielded "no results". For the Promethean search the only results were references to demonstrations, updates or curriculum but no reference to purchasing 3,300 units.)

UPDATE: EasyLobby procurement was made without a contract and without Board of Education approval.

UPDATE: IQinVision procurement was made without a contract and without Board of Education approval.


UPDATE December 2010: The legislation to create a MCPS database of vendors receiving payments over a specific amount was enacted and the database has now been posted on the MCPS website.