Showing posts with label School District. Show all posts
Showing posts with label School District. Show all posts

Thursday, November 7, 2013

MOUNT VERNON SCHOOL BOARD ATTORNEY ALLEGED TO BE STRUGGLING WITH SUBSTANCE ABUSE ISSUE

CORRUPT SCHOOL BOARD ATTORNEY GUS MOUNTANOS

Mount Vernon Exposed has just received information from a source that's states Mount Vernon School District attorney Gus Mountanos is alleged to be struggling with a cocaine addiction.  Gus is a partner at the law firm of Ingerman Smith, LLP located in Harrison, NY.  


According to the source, many board members do not trust Gus and feel that he is doing the bidding for embattled Mount Vernon school chief Judith Johnson and School Board Trustee Len Sarver.  

Gus is the creepy character behinds the scenes that tries to manipulate Board members into going along with Judith Johnson's reckless agenda.  Sources tell Mount Vernon Exposed that Gus frequently meets privately with Sarver and Johnson to draft resolutions that then they sneak onto the agenda. All of this shady business is done knowingly without the consent of other board members.  How can we trust an attorney like Gus that puts his own selfish needs above those of the Mount Vernon taxpayers? To be continued...........

Gus Mountanos, Esq.

Ingerman Smith, LLP

550 Mamaroneck Avenue, Suite 209

Harrison, NY 10528

914-777-1134

914-777-1955 – fax

gmountanos@ingermansmith.com school board attorney 

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

MOUNT VERNON SCHOOL CHIEF JUDITH JOHNSON WILLFULLY VIOLATES F.O.I.L. LAW

CORRUPT MT. VERNON SCHOOL CHIEF JUDITH JOHNSON
The administration of Interim Superintendent Judith Johnson continues to operate in an unscrupulous and unethical manner.  As previously reported by Mount Vernon Exposed, there is a massive cover up going on at the central office while public continues to be stonewalled with getting basic information. 

It appears that Judith Johnson plays by her own set of rules and does not believe in transparency and full disclosure.  Mount Vernon Exposed publisher Samuel L. Rivers requested documents through the NYS Freedom of Information Law or F.O.I.L.

A response was received from the district but the written correspondence from the district was not in line with the Freedom of Information Law.  The NYS Freedom of Information law states each entity subject to the provisions of this article, within five business days of the receipt of a written request for a record reasonably described, shall make such record available to the person requesting it, deny such request in writing or furnish a written acknowledgment of the receipt of such request and a statement of the approximate date, which shall be reasonable under the circumstances of the request, when such request will be granted or denied, including, where appropriate, a statement that access to the record will be determined in accordance with subdivision five of the Freedom of Information Law. 

The Freedom of Information Law further states; 3. (a) Each entity subject to the provisions of this article, within five business days of the receipt of a written request for a record reasonably described, shall make such record available to the person requesting it, deny such request in writing or furnish a written acknowledgment of the receipt of such request and a statement of the approximate date, which shall be reasonable under the circumstances of the request, when such request will be granted or denied, including, where appropriate, a statement that access to the record will be determined in accordance with subdivision five of this section. An agency shall not deny a request on the basis that the request is voluminous or that locating or reviewing the requested records or providing the requested copies is burdensome because the agency lacks sufficient staffing or on any other basis if the agency may engage an outside professional service to provide copying, programming or other services required to provide the copy, the costs of which the agency may recover pursuant to paragraph (c) of subdivision one of section eighty-seven of this article. An agency may require a person requesting lists of names and addresses to provide a written certification that such person will not use such lists of names and addresses for solicitation or fund-raising purposes and will not sell, give or otherwise make available such lists of names and addresses to any other person for the purpose of allowing that person to use such lists of names and addresses for solicitation or fund-raising purposes. If an agency determines to grant a request in whole or in part, and if circumstances prevent disclosure to the person requesting the record or records within twenty business days from the date of the acknowledgement of the receipt of the request, the agency shall state, in writing, both the reason for the inability to grant the request within twenty business days and a date certain within a reasonable period, depending on the circumstances, when the request will be granted in whole or in part. Upon payment of, or offer to pay, the fee prescribed therefor, the entity shall provide a copy of such record and certify to the correctness of such copy if so requested, or as the case may be, shall certify that it does not have possession of such record or that such record cannot be found after diligent search. Nothing in this article shall be construed to require any entity to prepare any record not possessed or maintained by such entity except the records specified in subdivision three of section eighty-seven and subdivision three of section eighty-eight of this article. When an agency has the ability to retrieve or extract a record or data maintained in a computer storage system with reasonable effort, it shall be required to do so. When doing so requires less employee time than engaging in manual retrieval or redactions from non-electronic records, the agency shall be required to retrieve or extract such record or data electronically. Any programming necessary to retrieve a record maintained in a computer storage system and to transfer that record to the medium requested by a person or to allow the transferred record to be read or printed shall not be deemed to be the preparation or creation of a new record.


What is Judith Johnson hiding? Why is Judith stalling and stonewalling board members?  Why isn’t Judith giving the asbestos reports to school board trustees?

Judith Johnson has not worked in the best interest of the taxpayers since her inception in Mount Vernon. 


Will Judith do the taxpayers a favor and resign? Only time will tell.   

Monday, October 28, 2013

PHOTOS OF $200K SPENDING AT ARMANI CHARTER SCHOOL

CUSTOM PURPLE MOLDING

$50K FILE SERVER

CHAIRS TO MATCH MOLDING




BRAND NEW UNSECURED LAPTOPS








Wednesday, October 16, 2013

SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEE LEN SARVER SEEKS TO ENRICH "BUDDIES" WITH $700 PER DAY CONTRACT

CORRUPT SCHOOL TRUSTEE LEN SARVER
Mount Vernon Exposed has just learned about more corruption involving Mount Vernon School Chief Judith Johnson and her minion, Mount Vernon School Board Trustee Len Sarver. 

Johnson with the assistance of Sarver has craftily found a way to sneak an Architectural firm on the agenda that does business and is affiliated with Sarver.  It is unclear if there is or has ever been any financial arrangement between the architectural firm of Fuller Angelo and Trustee Sarver and school chief Judith Johnson. 

Board members including Trustee Elias Gootzeit, have questioned the need to have an architectural firm that’s costs taxpayers $700 per day.  On top of that, they are being hired to oversee asbestos removal, not a service offered to the general public on their website fullerdangelo.com  Every time this matter comes up for discussion during a board meeting, Trustee Sarver, despite a conflict of interest, always seems to go the extra mile to steer his “buddies” millions of dollars of contracts on the backs of cash strapped taxpayers.

Just recently, Trustee Gootzeit recommended that the school district solicit bids or an RFP for architectural services because Mount Vernon taxpayers can no longer afford the current quid pro quo blanket arrangement currently in place with Fuller D’Angelo.  Trustee Gootzeit was met with fierce opposition from Trustee Sarver.  Sources told Mount Vernon Exposed that Sarver went into a hell bent rage and therefore RFP proposal was killed and Sarver’s “buddies” continued to be the recipient of an open-ended contract with no oversight from board members.  Why does Len Sarver continue to meddle in the buildings and grounds business of the school board when he is no longer the chairman of the building and grounds committee? 

During one board meeting, Mount Vernon Exposed witnessed first hand Sarver’s psychotic behavior.  Sarver disrespected fellow board member Adrienne Saunders who currently chairs the building and grounds committee.  Saunders, who is African American, was at the receiving end of Sarver’s tirade in which he lashed out at her in public saying, “What do you know about buildings”?  Sarver assumed that because Saunders was a woman and also possibly because she was a black woman, that Saunders knew nothing about buildings and grounds and that he would use this as a basis to get his old job back so he continue riding the money train. 

Once again Sarver is wrong.  In addition to being a Licensed Real Estate Broker, Saunders is a successful real estate investor, so it would hard to believe that one would become successful in real estate without a clear understanding of buildings and grounds.  Sarver’s true colors were revealed that evening.  He is a racist and he has no respect for woman, especially woman of color.   

Board members have long questioned the motives and integrity of Len Sarver.  Many wonder when did Trustee Sarver begin to “Break Bad”.   Sarver, who ran on a ticket vowing to reform the school district, has done nothing but try to reform his bank account courtesy of Mount Vernon taxpayers.  Sarver is all alone on the school board as the other 8 members are all in agreement that Trustee Len Sarver and Super indent Judith Johnson must immediately resign if there is any chance to save the schools and repair the tarnished image that has been a black cloud over the Mount Vernon community for the past two decades.

Just last month when a tab up for vote regarding Fuller D’Angelo, Trustee Sarver recused him from the vote without a thorough explanation, just stating that he is “friends” with one of the principles.  Just what does that mean Mr. Sarver?  Are you receiving kickbacks in exchange for pushing through contracts?  Did Fuller D’Angelo steer work to your electrical business?  These questions are more need to be answered.  Mr. Sarver and Judith Johnson must be held accountable for their actions and they must never forget that they work for the taxpayer and not vice versa.

If Federal investigators did a forensic audit of the Mount Vernon School district, not only will they find Sarver’s and Johnson’s hand in the cookie jar, they will discover the ancestors that came before Sarver and Johnson who taught them the tricks of the trade and how to pacify the people while they robbed the city blind.  They will also discover dozens of people with no show jobs living in Florida, Georgia, and various other states that have been on the school district payroll for over 20 years.   Just ten years ago, the school budget was $101 million dollars today the budget of over $200 million dollars.  Where did all the money go?  It certainly wasn't inflation that drove up the school budget.  

If one was to check the School District website you will notice the absence of the school budget.  Timothy Costello, who is alleged to have looted the school district of tens of millions of dollars during his tenure as Budget Administrator for the Mount Vernon City School District, prepares the budget that is voted yearly by Mount Vernon residents.   Costello is still employed as the Budget Administrator.  What is Mr. Costello hiding?  What is his role in the “great heist”? These questions and more will be answer in the next issue.  To be continued………