read the feed...
In the wake of a string of school-spending scandals on Long Island, the federal government this week blanketed districts in both Nassau and Suffolk Counties with letters requesting financial records from the past five years.
As districts were preparing for the start of a new school year, the Office of Inspector General at the United States Department of Education asked superintendents in a letter dated Aug. 23 for information relating to contracts exceeding $10,000 and tax documents for all outside workers and consultants. The requests were first reported by Newsday yesterday.
A spokeswoman for the inspector general's office would not comment on the nature or scope of the investigation.
But one school official, Henry L. Grishman, who is superintendent of the Jericho schools and also chairman of a statewide committee on school accounting practices, said he believed that "most every district in Nassau County and probably in Suffolk had received the letter."
Since the eruption of a major financial scandal last year in Roslyn, school districts have been under close scrutiny from local prosecutors as well as the New York State comptroller, Alan G. Hevesi, whose office has completed 13 of 23 school audits on Long Island.
Criminal charges have been brought against school officials and employees in several districts.
But the entry of the federal government seemed to catch school officials off guard.
The letter, which included a disk containing a spreadsheet for districts to complete, said that the Education Department's Office of Inspector General had joined with the United States Department of Justice and "other federal agencies" to review school expenditures on Long Island.
"I can't believe this," said J. Philip Perna, the superintendent of the Montauk Union Free School District, as he opened and read the letter from the Department of Education while on the phone with a reporter.
"It's going to be a lot of work for everybody," he added. "We'll do what we have to do. We'll certainly comply with the request, if nothing else to prove that there are some honest people in the business, which is most of us."
Some law enforcement officials questioned the federal move. The Suffolk County district attorney, Thomas J. Spota, said neither he nor anyone in his office had been notified of the investigation. He said he was concerned that the new inquiry could be covering old ground.
"We have a very extensive, aggressive and growing probe of school districts on Long Island," he said. "We welcome their involvement, but it would really be a shame if they duplicated all of the hard work done by the our staff, the New York State comptroller's staff and the Suffolk County comptroller's staff. There's a lot to be done in this area, and the resources need to be used efficiently."
A spokesman for Mr. Hevesi declined to comment on the federal inquiry. Last week, the comptroller's office issued a blistering report on its audit of the Central Islip school district, saying it paid for "excessive, questionable and unsupported travel and other expenses for school board members."
Auditors found that the district had no policy for credit card use. The superintendent and board members had not attached any receipts to credit card claims totaling $82,873, according to a news release from the comptroller's office.
An additional $9,500 in credit card charges could not be traced to any legitimate business purposes. One board member charged $1,726 for trips to Rochester and Albany; the charges included $47 spent at a performing arts center. No explanation was given for the trips, and auditors found no indication that conferences were being held in the cities at the time the trips were made, the audit said.
In its request for records, the Departments of Education asked districts to identify all vendors, contractors, consultants or other business concerns receiving any single payment of $10,000 or more between January 2000 and this July. It also asked for all 1099 tax statements, federal tax forms issued to vendors receiving payment of $600 or more for services, for the same period.
