Man Accused of Raping Girl Was Working ‘Unauthorized’ at Montgomery Schools

[Anonymous]

The article also says that the girl was not a student at either of the schools where the man was working construction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since the company has a "niche in school construction," according to its website, its management should know better.

This. Absolutely this. It should be a priority that if they specialize in school construction, they are acutely aware of issues related to student safety. Ugh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A complete disgrace. I am so embarrassed to have a child in MCPS. I wish I could move or afford private. This is getting very scary.

MCPS had a contract with Towson-based Oak Contracting. Oak Contracting was contractually obligated to submit background check information about their employees to MCPS before allowing their employees to work on MCPS property. But they didn't do what their contract required them to do.

Also, it's not clear that there is any connection between his work and the rape.

So blaming MCPS for this is, at best, premature.

I think MCPS should audit their contractors on a routine basis. It's hard to audit them all, but at least the larger ones. Or just require them to submit backgroudn check paperwork on each person on the job.

Why not require MCPS contractors to wear ID badges to show they provided a background check to MCPS? No MCPS badge then no work at a location with students. School security should monitor contractors for badges.

The real problem, same for MCPS employees, is that background checks only shows someone has a clean record at the time of the check. A person can later be arrested for a serious crime. How long would it take for MCPS to find out?

I blame MCPS for being complacent because clearly this person had a record dealing drugs so he should not be at a school site. To say that the contractor was responsible still shows that MCPS is failing to check up on its contractors. The contract should be terminated and MCPS should stop using Oak Contracting for future projects as a penalty. However, the "may" clause for terminating the contract means MCPS will never enforce it.

Let's face it, safety is not a priority for the administrators who run MCPS.

+ 1,000,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A complete disgrace. I am so embarrassed to have a child in MCPS. I wish I could move or afford private. This is getting very scary.

MCPS had a contract with Towson-based Oak Contracting. Oak Contracting was contractually obligated to submit background check information about their employees to MCPS before allowing their employees to work on MCPS property. But they didn't do what their contract required them to do.

Also, it's not clear that there is any connection between his work and the rape.

So blaming MCPS for this is, at best, premature.

I think MCPS should audit their contractors on a routine basis. It's hard to audit them all, but at least the larger ones. Or just require them to submit backgroudn check paperwork on each person on the job.

Why not require MCPS contractors to wear ID badges to show they provided a background check to MCPS? No MCPS badge then no work at a location with students. School security should monitor contractors for badges.

The real problem, same for MCPS employees, is that background checks only shows someone has a clean record at the time of the check. A person can later be arrested for a serious crime. How long would it take for MCPS to find out?

I blame MCPS for being complacent because clearly this person had a record dealing drugs so he should not be at a school site. To say that the contractor was responsible still shows that MCPS is failing to check up on its contractors. The contract should be terminated and MCPS should stop using Oak Contracting for future projects as a penalty. However, the "may" clause for terminating the contract means MCPS will never enforce it.

Let's face it, safety is not a priority for the administrators who run MCPS.

+ 1,000,000

DCUM: We need more magnet programs! Why is there no money for it???

Also DCUM: We need to spend our money on background checks on everyone our vetted vendors hire and provide them with ID badges and should be renewed every month!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A complete disgrace. I am so embarrassed to have a child in MCPS. I wish I could move or afford private. This is getting very scary.

MCPS had a contract with Towson-based Oak Contracting. Oak Contracting was contractually obligated to submit background check information about their employees to MCPS before allowing their employees to work on MCPS property. But they didn't do what their contract required them to do.

Also, it's not clear that there is any connection between his work and the rape.

So blaming MCPS for this is, at best, premature.

I think MCPS should audit their contractors on a routine basis. It's hard to audit them all, but at least the larger ones. Or just require them to submit backgroudn check paperwork on each person on the job.

Why not require MCPS contractors to wear ID badges to show they provided a background check to MCPS? No MCPS badge then no work at a location with students. School security should monitor contractors for badges.

The real problem, same for MCPS employees, is that background checks only shows someone has a clean record at the time of the check. A person can later be arrested for a serious crime. How long would it take for MCPS to find out?

I blame MCPS for being complacent because clearly this person had a record dealing drugs so he should not be at a school site. To say that the contractor was responsible still shows that MCPS is failing to check up on its contractors. The contract should be terminated and MCPS should stop using Oak Contracting for future projects as a penalty. However, the "may" clause for terminating the contract means MCPS will never enforce it.

Let's face it, safety is not a priority for the administrators who run MCPS.

+ 1,000,000

DCUM: We need more magnet programs! Why is there no money for it???

Also DCUM: We need to spend our money on background checks on everyone our vetted vendors hire and provide them with ID badges and should be renewed every month!

Guess what? There would be plenty of money for both if they trimmed some of the useless admin positions and extra bloat in central Office. MCPS is just too big and in any large organization, there is a risk of this type of situation - where there is a completely lack of accountability and people know they will keep their job, regardless of how poorly they do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Guess what? There would be plenty of money for both if they trimmed some of the useless admin positions and extra bloat in central Office. MCPS is just too big and in any large organization, there is a risk of this type of situation - where there is a completely lack of accountability and people know they will keep their job, regardless of how poorly they do it.

Which "useless admin positions and extra bloat" in the central office, specifically? And how much money would that free up for other uses, specifically? And how much do the other uses cost, specifically?

Otherwise you're just hand-waving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A complete disgrace. I am so embarrassed to have a child in MCPS. I wish I could move or afford private. This is getting very scary.

MCPS had a contract with Towson-based Oak Contracting. Oak Contracting was contractually obligated to submit background check information about their employees to MCPS before allowing their employees to work on MCPS property. But they didn't do what their contract required them to do.

Also, it's not clear that there is any connection between his work and the rape.

So blaming MCPS for this is, at best, premature.

I think MCPS should audit their contractors on a routine basis. It's hard to audit them all, but at least the larger ones. Or just require them to submit backgroudn check paperwork on each person on the job.

Why not require MCPS contractors to wear ID badges to show they provided a background check to MCPS? No MCPS badge then no work at a location with students. School security should monitor contractors for badges.

The real problem, same for MCPS employees, is that background checks only shows someone has a clean record at the time of the check. A person can later be arrested for a serious crime. How long would it take for MCPS to find out?

I blame MCPS for being complacent because clearly this person had a record dealing drugs so he should not be at a school site. To say that the contractor was responsible still shows that MCPS is failing to check up on its contractors. The contract should be terminated and MCPS should stop using Oak Contracting for future projects as a penalty. However, the "may" clause for terminating the contract means MCPS will never enforce it.

Let's face it, safety is not a priority for the administrators who run MCPS.

+ 1,000,000

DCUM: We need more magnet programs! Why is there no money for it???

Also DCUM: We need to spend our money on background checks on everyone our vetted vendors hire and provide them with ID badges and should be renewed every month!

The contractor pays for the background check. That is the same requirement currently in place. The only difference I proposed is that MCPS issues badges to the person that the contractor turns in a background check for so school security can easily identify if a contract employee has the credentials to work at a school site with children. The only extra cost to MCPS would be the plastic for the badges.

The current system allows for no on site checks that contract workers have the necessary background check on file with MCPS. MCPS needs to close that security gap asap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Guess what? There would be plenty of money for both if they trimmed some of the useless admin positions and extra bloat in central Office. MCPS is just too big and in any large organization, there is a risk of this type of situation - where there is a completely lack of accountability and people know they will keep their job, regardless of how poorly they do it.

Which "useless admin positions and extra bloat" in the central office, specifically? And how much money would that free up for other uses, specifically? And how much do the other uses cost, specifically?

Otherwise you're just hand-waving.

Andrew Zuckerman $300,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Guess what? There would be plenty of money for both if they trimmed some of the useless admin positions and extra bloat in central Office. MCPS is just too big and in any large organization, there is a risk of this type of situation - where there is a completely lack of accountability and people know they will keep their job, regardless of how poorly they do it.

Which "useless admin positions and extra bloat" in the central office, specifically? And how much money would that free up for other uses, specifically? And how much do the other uses cost, specifically?

Otherwise you're just hand-waving.

Andrew Zuckerman $300,000

two years ago but still . . . http://parentscoalitionmc.blogspot.com/2017/07/mcps-top-salaries-175000-275000.html


Zuckerman doesn't deserve his salary.

[Anonymous]

How about we fire MCPS employees who get moved to “Central Office” after they fail to report in a timely fashion a crime against children and instead try to do their own ham-handed investigation. Can we start with them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A complete disgrace. I am so embarrassed to have a child in MCPS. I wish I could move or afford private. This is getting very scary.

MCPS had a contract with Towson-based Oak Contracting. Oak Contracting was contractually obligated to submit background check information about their employees to MCPS before allowing their employees to work on MCPS property. But they didn't do what their contract required them to do.

Also, it's not clear that there is any connection between his work and the rape.

So blaming MCPS for this is, at best, premature.

You just made the case for blaming MCPS. Who reviewed the "contractually obligated" background check????? If it wasn't submitted, who allowed them on school property?????? See? That is exactly why MCPS should be held accountable. They put "safety rules" in place they never implement or enforce and as a result dozens and dozens of children have been sexually abused because of it and people like you always turn their head the other way. The company should never be allowed to provide services again for MCPS AND the person who's job this was with MCPS should be fired. MCPS should be falling all over themselves to tell us how many people they have working on reviewing every single contractor they use to make sure there are no other offenders accessing our children because they did not do their jobs.

Let's start by blaming:

1. The man himself
2. The man's employer

Yes?

Agree. This is a terrible crime, and obviously we want MCPS contractors to be background-checked. But this is one instance that's not about MCPS.

Says the parent that doesn’t have a child that was raped.

What if a non-cleared contractor comes on campus with an assault rifle and kills your kid and dozens others. Whoops, sorry. He must have slipped thru the cracks. Definitely not MCPS fault.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:A complete disgrace. I am so embarrassed to have a child in MCPS. I wish I could move or afford private. This is getting very scary.

MCPS had a contract with Towson-based Oak Contracting. Oak Contracting was contractually obligated to submit background check information about their employees to MCPS before allowing their employees to work on MCPS property. But they didn't do what their contract required them to do.

Also, it's not clear that there is any connection between his work and the rape.

So blaming MCPS for this is, at best, premature.

You just made the case for blaming MCPS. Who reviewed the "contractually obligated" background check????? If it wasn't submitted, who allowed them on school property?????? See? That is exactly why MCPS should be held accountable. They put "safety rules" in place they never implement or enforce and as a result dozens and dozens of children have been sexually abused because of it and people like you always turn their head the other way. The company should never be allowed to provide services again for MCPS AND the person who's job this was with MCPS should be fired. MCPS should be falling all over themselves to tell us how many people they have working on reviewing every single contractor they use to make sure there are no other offenders accessing our children because they did not do their jobs.

Let's start by blaming:

1. The man himself
2. The man's employer

Yes?

Agree. This is a terrible crime, and obviously we want MCPS contractors to be background-checked. But this is one instance that's not about MCPS.

Says the parent that doesn’t have a child that was raped.

What if a non-cleared contractor comes on campus with an assault rifle and kills your kid and dozens others. Whoops, sorry. He must have slipped thru the cracks. Definitely not MCPS fault.

I'm sorry, but your what-if scenario really has nothing to do with this case. Plus, there are far too many examples of "cleared" people who still went on to do terrible things. This was a guy driving his car on a neighborhood street, something anybody can do, who saw the girl walking. They weren't at a school, and she wasn't a student at the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about we fire MCPS employees who get moved to “Central Office” after they fail to report in a timely fashion a crime against children and instead try to do their own ham-handed investigation. Can we start with them?

All MCPS employees are mandatory reporters. They should be fired if they fail to immediately report. Maryland should change the law and impose prison time for school employees who fail to immediately report. However, many employees including Central Office employees raking in 6 figure incomes fail to immediately report, let alone the principals at MCPS schools.

School safety is not a MCPS priority.

[Anonymous]

MCPS once again fails to keep someone with a criminal record from working at a school with children present. Instead of focusing how to do better in the future, the MCPS response is to deflect and blame the contractor.

As a parent, I have to scan my driver's license to enter a school. Why isn't MCPS checking who is working at their school? Delegating the responsibility to a contractor who knows that there is no MCPS check as to who is on site and who may have a financial incentive to let someone who can't pass the background check work on site is negligent by MCPS.

[Anonymous]

While the person should not have been working at an MCPS site, I do not think MCPS is responsible for what happened to the child off school property. It sounds like she accepted a ride from a stranger which was an unfortunate choice of a 12 year old. She did not even attend the HS he was working at.