Where are the missing duplicating machines and why it involves Toledo…
I received an email earlier pointing out the Cleveland Plain Dealer story on six missing duplicating machines that are missing from the Cleveland Public School system that appear to have been billed for but not received. The story has ties to Toledo in several ways:
Invoices that The Plain Dealer obtained Friday show the district paid $160,200 to buy the six Ryobi offset duplicators from Toledo-based Superior Offset Supplies. The district paid $24,750 apiece for the machines and gave the company $11,700 for consulting on “copier-duplication requirements.” The company charged a $150 hourly consulting fee.
The purchase authority listed on the invoices is Dan Burns, who at the time was the district’s chief operating officer. Burns, a central figure in the investigation, resigned from his job eight days ago.
As the Toledo Blade article on this story taken from the Plain Dealer points out:
The purchase authority listed on the invoices is Dan Burns, who at the time was the district’s chief operating officer. Mr. Burns, who had been the business manager for Toledo Public Schools, resigned from his job eight days ago.
Both stories also state:
Sheriff’s deputies searched the school district’s downtown offices Dec. 10, seizing two laptop computers, software and files. They were seeking records involving Superior Offset Supplies and SOS Graphics Inc., another Toledo-area company, according to a warrant and one-page inventory of the items they collected.
Deputies also confiscated documents last month from the home of John Briggle, a Toledo businessman who Eakins said is believed to be connected to both companies.
Both stories also state that auditors will be looking at purchases made by the Toledo Public School system during the time period that Dan Burns was the business manager.
What’s even more interesting about the story is that there does not appear to be any evidence that the 6 machines were delivered which calls into question the consulting fee, which as the Cleveland Plain Dealer story covers in detail, was charged in a way that circumvented their process that was in place that required bids if a consulting fee was going to be over $10,000. I’m wondering how consulting could have taken place if it’s ends up being true that the machines were never delivered.
Yeah, I’m betting the educators in Cleveland are kicking themselves now, huh?
http://glasscityjungle.com/wordpress/?p=232
January 26th, 2009 at 5:17 amHas anyone in the Cleveland district school system think about contacting Ryobi concerning the selling of these particular machines?
I mean, there is a custodial protocol involved, and if they were even built, sold and delivered, Ryobi would have the purchaser’s information on file for auditing and tax purposes.
Oh, and in case anyone missed it, I am laughing my ass off.
January 26th, 2009 at 11:43 amI went back and looked to see what I wrote more than a month ago. I posted the item below on 12/12/08 on tpsinfo.com
——
December 12, 2008 – Former TPS Business Manager, Dan Burns, is under a cloud of suspicion when thousands of dollars of equipment comes up missing for the Cleveland Public Schools. The case of the phantom equipment is now under way. We believe it will lead to Toledo and more questions are going to come up. We have community contacts for years questioning TPS purchasing practices while Burns was at TPS. The Coalition has continued to push for a comprehensive conflict of interest policy that identifies all potential conflicts for employees and allows the district the opportunity to manage the risk. If the allegations prove accurate, you will probably find some form of collusion involved including vendor involvement. Stay tuned as the soap opera moves to Toledo.
——
You will note I suspected collusion involving vendors. I’m not sure these machines were ever delivered to Cleveland. If there were actual machines shipped, then they ended up elsewhere.
Brian is right. They should be able to determine if the machines were ever built. I’d love to have a look at the invoice and receiving documents.
But it is possible that the machines were never shipped and Burns as the purchasing authority may have signed off on payment. Normally there will be shipping documents signed off by the receiving agent which must be matched with the invoice to process payment. But there are ways around that if you know the systems and processes. The check and balance here would be the Treasurer’s office as the payment of invoices would not be with Burns but the treasurer. Makes you wonder! And it is not unexpected that the firms involved are from Toledo. Someone should look into transactions that occurred on Burns watch here at TPS – I understand that is to be done by the state auditor. There are several places they could look including some folks to talk with.
January 26th, 2009 at 12:32 pmAnd Steve, you forgot one thing.
Ryobi has a reputation to protect.
There is someone within the company that can and will be held accountable when(if)the investigators go far enough up the ladder.
It’s much more than employees using a well-known company for their personal gain.
This is much more than two clowns getting over on a school district. This is a school district that receives federal funds.
and we all know what happens when you eff with the feds, right?
PS: Steve, ain’t there a FOIA on purchase orders within the public school district?
January 26th, 2009 at 9:47 pmNot cool at all.
January 27th, 2009 at 2:00 pmMr. Flagg….how can one find out if Dan Burns was purchasing from these characters in his tenure with TPS?
January 27th, 2009 at 2:03 pmKateb – You can find the information in the accounts payable files. I have annual listings for FY2000 through FY2007 obtained through open records requests – I have not asked for FY2008 to date. SOS Graphics mentioned in the story does not appear to have done any business with TPS under this name. Superior Offset Supplies from which the Cleveland machines were purchased did business with TPS from 2001 through 2007. Burns left at the end of FY2006. Total billing from Superior Offset Supplies from FY2001 through FY2006 amounts to $952K. Most of this is in FY’s 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 with billings of $116K, $254K, $189K and $262K, respectively, totaling $821K or 86% of the total for this period.
The year after Burns left TPS (FY2007) had $33K in billings from Superior Offset Supplies.
I do not know if Burns ordered the services or equipment, but there is certainly a business relationship with Superior Offset Supplies during Burn’s tenure.
January 27th, 2009 at 2:51 pmVery nice collection of information – I used some of it in my post.
I wonder how “deep” this all goes…
February 9th, 2009 at 4:13 amSteven Flagg wrote:
……Total billing from Superior Offset Supplies from FY2001 through FY2006 amounts to $952K……
Oh wow….I guess Dan’s got some explaining to do here in Toledo as well.
You know I’ve wondered about the building construction program also. Would you happen to know if Dan Burns was involved in the purchasing for that?
I remember a concrete wall that fell over during construction and the blocks were smaller than contracted for….that’s why I started thinking something wasn’t kosher there.
Thanks for letting me pick your brain!
February 9th, 2009 at 11:44 am