By Adam Pagnucco.
Soon after the Montgomery County Office of Inspector General (OIG) released a report holding that claims of misconduct by MCPS officials could not be substantiated, the school board and MCPS issued press releases offering comment. Their remarks were stunning – not because of what they said, but because of what they did not say.
Let’s consider MCPS’s statement, which is reprinted below.
*****
Statement from Montgomery County Public Schools Concerning an Office of Inspector General Published Memorandum
January 10, 2024
The school district is providing the following statement in response to the memorandum published today, Jan. 10, by the Montgomery County Office of the Inspector General (OIG).
The memorandum can be found on the OIG website.
The Chief of MCPS’ Office of Human Resources and Development received accusations of alleged violations of policy by MCPS senior staff and administrators. For this reason, Superintendent Dr. Monifa B. McKnight directed her Chief of Staff to immediately inform the Montgomery County Office of the Inspector General (OIG) and asked her office to investigate. The OIG did not find any violations of MCPS policy or regulations by those identified in the complaint. The complainant himself ignored repeated requests from the OIG to connect for information and an interview. We appreciate the very quick and thorough work of Inspector General Megan Davey Limarzi and her team for looking into this matter and, as the report on the MCPS investigations process is finalized and released, we will continue to give full consideration to additional forthcoming recommendations, as our goal is always to ensure a safe teaching and learning environment for students and staff.
*****
First, MCPS responded appropriately by forwarding the complaint to the OIG. And second, MCPS was right to note that “the complainant himself ignored repeated requests from the OIG to connect for information and an interview.” That’s what the OIG said and it was one reason why the allegations against MCPS officials could not be substantiated.
But here is another reason according to the OIG: “Our attempts to corroborate the allegations were further hindered by an MCPS administrator who provided evasive answers to direct questions and made the unlikely claim that they did not recall memorable events noted in the complaint.”
“Evasive answers.” MoCo360 picked up on that. So did the Washington Post. So did the Montgomery County Education Association. I used those two words in my post title on the report. And you better believe that Montgomery Perspective readers are thinking about “evasive answers” as they swarm in to read about the inspector general report and its aftermath.
But the MCPS statement said nothing about it. Neither did the school board statement.
Here’s the deal, folks: these people work for US, the taxpayers. A senior government official should not be providing “evasive answers” and making an “unlikely claim that they did not recall memorable events noted in the complaint” in response to an inspector general investigation. It’s absolutely unacceptable and the school system should respond to it. Instead, MCPS and the school board are silent about it.
Why?
The OIG has not yet released its second report on the promotion process of Principal Joel Beidleman. What happens if MCPS officials provide more “evasive answers” and make other “unlikely claims” in the course of that investigation? Will the public know about it? Will the names of such individuals be disclosed? Will such conduct be permitted to block substantiation of allegations? And will anyone engaging in this behavior be held accountable?
The next OIG report on MCPS will be the biggest test of Inspector General Megan Davey Limarzi’s career in Montgomery County. And it may well be the biggest challenge of Superintendent Monifa McKnight’s tenure as well.