UPDATE: Let’s assume Board of Education member the Rev. Ken Moales and his mother Peggy run efficient Bridgeport daycare operations called Kingdom’s Little Ones Academy and Kingdom’s Little Ones Daycare, properties run as subsidiaries of Moales’ church, Cathedral of the Holy Spirit. Let’s assume they do everything in accordance with regulations of the Board of Education that acts as a fiduciary for the state-funded School Readiness Program. Let’s assume they have a tight understanding of rules and regulations of the Connecticut Department of Education that issues grants to the daycares (through the school board) that provide a service on behalf of working parents. Let’s assume they do everything right. The larger question is, why would a Board of Education member be entitled to receive a taxpayer subsidy for daycare facilities he operates financed by the very school board he helps to set policy?
As evidenced by a series of documents transmitted between state and local education officials, Moales’ day care facilities have run astray of state regulations. While Moales served as chairman of the Board of Education last year (he is no longer chairman), an audit conducted by the Connecticut State Department of Education determined the daycare facilities were “overpaid by approximately $75,114” for 27 ineligible daycare slots. The audit also recommended “the Program Manager monitor these sites in the 2013-2014 fiscal year to ensure that school readiness funds are being used appropriately.”
Moales was an unwavering supporter of former Superintendent of Schools Paul Vallas who was in charge of the school system when the audit determined Moales’ daycare facilities had overcharged the state. Vallas appealed the audit decision through Marlene Siegel, chief financial officer of Bridgeport Public Schools, according to a letter by Harriet Feldlaufer, director of the state’s Division of Early Care and Education, dated January 27, 2014. Siegel, in fact, had advised Chief Operating Officer Peggy Moales in a letter dated September 26, 201, “We understand that you intend to present this matter to your Board of Directors and we ask that the process be expedited, so that we can report to the CSDE (Connecticut State Department of Education) the agreed upon payment plan by Tuesday, October 1.” Ken Moales, according to the Kingdom’s Little Ones website, serves as chief executive officer. Website here.
Vallas through Siegel issued an appeal designed to benefit Moales’ daycare facilities. The appeal was denied. In the January 27 letter, Feldlaufer advised, “the committee affirms the refund due. Kingdom’s Little Ones must repay $75,114.”
As chronicled by Jonathan Pelto, who hosts the What Wait blog, and the Connecticut Post, Moales faces a host of financial issues that includes foreclosure actions against a number of his church properties, most of them tax exempt. Moales has pooh-poohed the financial challenges as a result of a predatory lender, claiming all is fine even though his daycare facility was behind on city taxes by more than $7,000 last year, according to a CT Post story.
Adding political flavor to the Moales story is he serves as treasurer of Mayor Bill Finch’s reelection campaign.
Moales’ daycare facilities received taxpayer subsidies before he was elected to the school board, but larger questions emerge: is he leveraging his public position on the school board to wire more taxpayer funds that benefit him? Why put yourself in that position? He’s also not a guy, in light of his personal financial issues and overbilling of the state for uncertified daycare slots, who builds public confidence in his financial acumen. Why stay on as Finch’s campaign treasurer? Also, why would Finch want him to remain as campaign treasurer? Seems like way more trouble than it’s worth.
(Update: learned Monday afternoon that Moales is no longer treasurer of Finch campaign. Change was made a few days ago. Finch campaign fundraiser Marissa Gross Donnelly is the new treasurer.)
And what action will the current school board take in light of this latest Moales news? The school board is scheduled to meet tonight (Monday) at 6:30 at the Aquaculture School, 60 St. Stephens Road.
Letter signed by Harriet Feldlaufer, director of the state program.
Tina Peloso- Ulreich, Director
Early Childhood Programs
Bridgeport Public Schools
948 Main Street
Bridgeport, CT 06604
Dear Ms. Peloso-Ulreich:On January 14, 2014, the Connecticut State Department of Education (CSDE) convened a meeting of the Appeals Committee to consider the October 1, 2013, appeal from Marlene Siegel, CFO of Bridgeport Public Schools. The appeal was made on behalf of the Bridgeport Superintendent of schools regarding the refund of School Readiness funds associated with Kingdom’s Little Ones.
Staff from the Office of Early Childhood and CSDE’s Office of Internal Audit conducted a review of School Readiness claims submitted by Kingdom’s Little Ones. Based upon that review, it was determined that 27 children were ineligible for reimbursement. Those students were claimed in error for four months, at a rate of $695.50 per student. Therefore, the total refund due is (27 x 695.5 x 4) = $75,114.
The committee affirms the refund due. Kingdom’s Little Ones must repay $75,114.
In light of hardship around timing of the refund, CSDE will recover the full amount through a reduction to Bridgeport’s monthly School Readiness grant for the remainder of the fiscal year. That allows for the $75,114 to be spread out over five months–February, March, April, May, and June. In each of the first four months, CSDE will reduce the total payment to Bridgeport by $15,000. In the month of June, the reduction will be $15,114.
The Bridgeport Public Schools may work with Kingdom’s Little Ones to determine how they wish to coordinate the adjustments at the local level.
A lot of churches are in foreclosure, a RECORD number to be factual. How is a tax-free, non-profit daycare behind on taxes by more than $7,000 last year? Don’t understand that. Did Vallas approve, or have anything to do with Moales’ daycare facilities? Or are we just throwing that name in as subterfuge? Finch wants Moales as treasurer because he brings votes (duh). He got himself elected to the BOE.
Look at the approval process for these daycares. There must have been some kind of application process. The BOE should have the applications and assessments of the applicant daycares. I am no fan of Moales and if I were him I would have passed on this deal. As Lennie said, too much aggravation and appearance of impropriety. The board has nine members. How did one get his daycares in? What were the other eight doing? To hold Moales solely responsible would mean we consider him to be some kind of king and the other eight members are clowns, just there for show. Where are the checks and balances? How did anyone get paid for unapproved services? Who is watching the henhouse? These are the people criticizing charters as profiteers?
“The Program Manager monitor these sites in the 2013-2014 fiscal year to ensure that school readiness funds are being used appropriately.” Does this apply to all the daycares or just Little Ones?
“Staff from the Office of Early Childhood and CSDE’s Office of Internal Audit conducted a review of School Readiness claims submitted by Kingdom’s Little Ones.”
When you are providing funds to programs it is good to know someone is looking after things. So the State has done some monitoring or oversight and found some things were not right.
Internal auditors have varied duties, but among them is the responsibility to make sure that process is running as planned and funded and to correct issues when they are not running so.
Bridgeport had an internal auditor in the first year of Mayor Finch’s term. Not much longer.
Check and balance features? Oversight? Monitoring? Listed duties? Evaluations and reviews? Purchasing audits? We don’t need no stinking complicated process!!!
Bridgeport process requires no oversight, just the light touch of Tom Sherwood with his long experience of assisting Bill Finch’s half-truths. A half-truth if stated in a firm tone with an uninformed audience passes every time.
And if caught offsides like last night when the Mayor told the BOE they got the most money increase from his budget, Tom Sherwood will continue to brazen it out. I questioned the $2.8 Million claimed for education in the light of the 39 NEW PUBLIC SAFETY positions presented to the Council as a $3.9 Million expense. According to the changes voted on by the CC last night, this had not changed.
THE FINCH M.O.
Say it often,
Say it loud,
Look superior,
B.S. the crowd!!
Gotta go now,
No rebuttal allowed!!!
Does it work? For how long? Time will tell.
LIKE!
“The board has nine members. How did one get his daycares in? What were the other eight doing? To hold Moales solely responsible would mean we consider him to be some kind of king and the other eight members are clowns, just there for show.”
BOE SPY, Moales wasn’t the only one on the BOE to get funding for his church. Tom Mulligan has strong ties with the Bridgeport Catholic Diocese and was the legal representative of the church. While serving on the BOE with the support Kenneth Moales and Paul Vallas, Tom Mulligan successfully pushed through a $weet lease deal between the BOE and the Bridgeport Catholic Diocese. Like Moales’ church, the Bridgeport Diocese was hurting financially and desperately needed to do something with their empty classroom building. Tom Mulligan saved the day and all he did was abstain from voting on the contract approval to cover his ass. At least Moales had the balls to stand behind what he believed and was very transparent about it. BOE SPY, ask Lennie what was the total of the lease deal between the BOE and the BCD.
Good point, Joel. The question still stands. What were the other seven members of the board doing while these two were conducting personal business with taxpayer money? Granted, Tom pushed from behind while Moales pulled from the front. Does everyone on the board have a you fund my back and I’ll fund yours deal? Don’t think the WFP is totally innocent in this. The teachers got their raise.
On the other hand (Not to defend but to be fair), how many empty school buildings are in BPT, ready to go and available for lease? How many daycares are in the area where Little Ones is and can handle a huge influx of kids? You can’t really go to a ‘mom and pop’ for these huge projects. A lady watching kids in her living room can’t go from five kids to 80, hire a teacher, get insurance, hire a nurse, etc, etc. I don’t know the answer to these questions.
Pelto throws mud at the wall and sees what sticks. His essays need to be read in the light they were written. If you let him lead you by the nose you end up with the conclusion he wants you to have. Then you have the rest of the minions and neophytes who grease the crowd This is how a lynching works. You throw a stone, your people grease the crowd and someone ends up hanging from a tree. Then if the entire thing blows up in your face, you pretend like it wasn’t you.
The state investigated Maoles and found an error. If a criminal investigation was warranted, I am sure CSDE would have referred the matter to the AG’s office. The only sure thing is the BOE paid him when they shouldn’t have. This entire thing would be moot if the BOE were paying attention to what it was doing. Paying someone is easy. Getting your money back, not so much.
BOE, it seems like you are inferring the current board stood by as all of this was going on. The WFP tried in vain to bring up a vote on this issue, but was told by the city atty and state they could not vote on the issue, only distribute the funds. The teachers got a raise, and they deserved it. Furthermore, with a 5-4 majority at the time, the vote would have gone in favor anyway.
The teachers got a raise, and they deserved it. Would that be for the stellar job they are doing or the massive cooperation the super received in an attempt to initiate reform?
So the city attorney and the state approved the daycares and they approved Moales’ daycare? Then the conflict of interest problem falls on them. The BOE was still responsible for monitoring the funds.
I’m not sure about the teachers you may know, but the ones who teach my children are fantastic. I still think the teachers in our district are underpaid considering all they must deal with on a daily basis. We can debate about what changes Vallas tried to make, what would have worked, what may not have worked, ad nauseum … the bottom line was he planned all along to move on, and you want a career professional to gamble on what in essence would be a temporary solution … the next super could just change their mind. My hangup on Vallas was 1) he was not certified according to Conn. State Law, and 2) he had no real plan to stay here as a career i.e. 5 to 15 years.
BOE SPY, please change your name to BOB SPY as in Bend Over Backwards.
BOE, why are you blaming Moales’ problems and regularities on the other BOE members? Blame Moales for gross conflicts and tell your boy Finch to get rid of him now before it gets worse.
BOB Spy–that was cute. Finch can’t ‘get rid’ of Moales. He was elected. I am not sure the BOE has a ‘recall’ process. I am still unsure why Finch and Vallas are tied to this problem. Neither have anything to do with the daycare choosing, are Moales’ boss or responsible for the BOE.
Nonetheless, should we also get rid of the WFP members for the problems and irregularities of being associated with the CEA? What I mean is, are we going to get rid of all the problems and irregularities or just the ones that fit your personal goals. I BOB for one group you BOB Walsh for another.
BOE, in the audit matter according to the letter written by state official Harriet Feldlaufer, it was Vallas who authorized the appeal that was denied by the state. Not saying there was any funny business going on with Vallas’ role here, but he did authorize the appeal. It did not hurt Moales, a board chairman, was a supporter of Vallas.
To answer your question Lennie, there is no legitimate reason to keep Kenneth Moales on as his treasurer. Remember, after the airport fiasco was first publicized, Finch THREW John Ricci under the bus to protect his own hide. Mayor Finch proclaimed he has “zero tolerance” regarding unethical and inappropriate conduct by city employees and elected officials.
Keeping REVEREND Moales as his campaign treasurer will only hurt him in his re-election bid in 2015. What makes it even more interesting is Moales is also up for re-election for the BBOE in 2015. As an endorsed Democrat, he will be on the same line as Finch. That doesn’t help Finch, that only hurts him.
Dave–that might be true but only among voters who know what is going on. I wouldn’t vote for Moales, but I didn’t vote for him the first time. Most voters in BPT do not know what is going on. BOE news is not covered by the cartoon network. Marion Berry was re-elected, OJ was innocent and Ernie Newton just barely lost. I do not think what a politician does has much to do with them being re-elected in BPT.
Why are you blaming Moales’ problems and irregularities on the other BOE members? Why do some blame ‘driveway gate’ on the city council? Finch made the deal and the council issued the check. Same thing here. Moales made the deal. Who issued the errant check?
You really are an ass-kissing Finch supporter, aren’t you? Trying to compare Manny’s driveway to Moales’ daycare is absurd. The City Council voted to approve that deal. As far as I know the elected NOE did not have to take any action on this. As a matter of fact the one item that was supposed to come before the BOE like it always did pre-Moales, Chairman Moales ended the meeting before ever calling for a vote.
Mulligan’s case was purely community interest and he recused himself with full disclosure. Moale’s case was a case of self remuneration. Moales seems to have fraudulently grafted and broken the law. I do not think you can compare the two, in all fairness.
Finch can get rid of Moales tomorrow if he wants.
1) he calls him into his office and asks him to resign and if he won’t the city will begin efforts to terminate the contract for the daycares
2) if Moales doesn’t resign then the city starts the process of terminating the contracts and Finch personally files a complaint with the Ethics Commission. Since he controls the commission he will get a finding of conflicts and then they can fine him.
3) if he still doesn’t resign I am sure he will not receive the DTC’s endorsement to run again.
4) Moales can then approach the WFP for their endorsement. If he gets it and is elected back to the BOE, then it is destiny.
Why would Finch do that? He wanted to be in charge of the BOE and everyone (voters and all) said ‘stay out.’ Never mind alienating all Moales’ parishioners and the black community. I wouldn’t do it if I were Finch. You either want me in charge or you don’t. What are they, children who need to be bailed out by daddy Finch? I can do it, until I can’t. Take the name Finch out of all your statements and put in BOE or Voters. All those statements are still doable things. You should be asking why don’t the other eight BOE members, including the chair Baraka, do those things.
Moales is a duly elected official, and Bridgeport removed the recall provision when the mayoral term went to four years. The only way he’s removed from office is by losing an election. Furthermore, Moales and his church ties did not deliver the “black vote” as evidenced by the charter referendum defeat. Finally, most churches are declining visits by politicians because it disrupts services and they only come before an election, never after to thank the congregation for their support.
And politically speaking, a year from now Moales will be a huge liability to Finch. As Eric pointed out, Moales did not deliver votes on the charter change. And you seem to think Moales will deliver far more votes to Finch in the African American community than Finch will lose in the North End, Black Rock and Brooklawn for sticking with Moales after all of this has come out.
No way. No how.
Bob Walsh, come on now. You have let the cat out of the bag by telling the truth. Moales will NOT deliver the African American community in any large numbers ONCE Moales is joined to the hip of Bill Finch once they hear and understand the Connecticut State Department of Education determined the daycare facilities were “overpaid by approximately $75,114” for 27 ineligible daycare slots. Right now most voters are not aware of this story but this story is big enough for voters to vote AGAINST Mayor Finch.
I did not say Finch should be aligned with Moales. I said he shouldn’t act to remove him from the BOE. Not Finch’s problem. Finch’s best choice is to do nothing. Don’t take one side or the other. Leave the BOE to solve their problems. That way you alienate no one. Finch should do a press release. “The Little Ones daycare is a very troubling issue. Since the BOE is an entity unto itself I (BF) do not have all the facts as they relate to this issue or oversight of the BOE. I believe in the BOE’s ability to solve this problem in the best interests of the students and taxpayers of BPT.’
Maybe this would be better. ‘I believe in S. Baraka and her BOE’s ability to solve this problem in the best interests of the students and taxpayers of BPT.’ She is in charge of this mess, not Finch.
Bill Finch’s guy Moales created a mess. Moales is an elected member of the BOE. Even if he were Finch’s brother, so what. Obama did not create the war in Iraq. Once he became president, it is his problem. Is each president only responsible for the problems that arise while they are president? The problems that came with the job just evaporate? If you wanted Finch to be saddled with this problem you should have approved the charter revision. What power did Moales have? Are you saying Baraka is a ‘lame duck’ president or just a lame president? This is one of many of the bad parts of being responsible for being in charge. You never know when someone will drop a hand grenade in your lap. Baraka wasn’t drafted into the job. She actually avoided it the first time and that is why Moales was president when he was. So she did, inadvertently, cause the problem.
BOE SPY is right, Finch’s best choice is to do nothing. This is one of the best ways to get voters pissed off at Finch, do nothing and just let this issue carry on and on …
No, Ron. Problems in the BOE have as much to do with Finch as problems in Trumbull. It is out of his jurisdiction. If you wanted Finch to be saddled with this problem you should have approved the charter revision. You can’t have it both ways. Either he is responsible for the BOE or he is not. You voted he is not.
BOE SPY, please, you’re way off base. Yes, I want Finch to be saddled with this problem and no, the charter revision SHOULD NOT have been approved.
Moales’ program gets regular money from the State, yes? Like a City Council debit card, the money keeps coming until there is a snag. And when the problem is exposed and an appeal has no traction, $70,000 must be repaid over four months. What’s the problem, folks? We are all adults, right? What is $70,000 among a few educators/fiscal officials anyway?
So why is no one outraged about 15 City Council members last June using $30,000 to benefit their favorite non-profits and get the City (with your taxpayer funds) to provide over 50 checks from the Other Services account, where clearly there were NO OTHER SERVICES performed? Two of the CC who participated indicated an Internal Auditor (if we had one) would be calling on Council President Tom McCarthy for an answer. It would be sweet to hear him tell the story, wouldn’t it? And someone has looked at a CT Statute that would have prohibited that series of payments so close to an election, anyway. OIB? Too easy a statement that does no credit to anyone. What will Bill Finch do with this issue? Time will tell.
We are. That is yet another sign of poor oversight. It is just this particular article is not about that. The ‘money to charity’ problem will not really raise eyebrows until someone does something ‘crazy.’ If I were in the city council and I wanted to change this policy, I’d give ‘my’ portion of the tax money to the REPUBLICAN town council, the NRA or some other group that would hit the administration in the head. Then, when the snot hits the wall, say ‘I thought we were allowed to do it’ and out everyone else’s city-funded charitable contributions. Then the policy will change.
Moales’ program gets regular money from the State, yes? Like a City Council debit card, the money keeps coming until there is a snag. And when the problem is exposed and an appeal has no traction, $70,000 must be repaid over four months. What’s the problem, folks? We are all adults, right? What is $70,000 among a few educators/fiscal officials anyway?
So why is no one outraged about 15 City Council members last June using $30,000 to benefit their favorite non-profits and get the City (with your taxpayer funds) to provide over 50 checks from the Other Services account, where clearly there were NO OTHER SERVICES performed? Two of the CC who participated indicated an Internal Auditor (if we had one) would be calling on Council President Tom McCarthy for an answer. It would be sweet to hear him tell the story, wouldn’t it? And someone has looked at a CT Statute that would have prohibited that series of payments so close to an election, anyway. OIB? Too easy a statement that does no credit to anyone. What will Bill Finch do with this issue? Time will tell.