I would add to the quote above: "...or for stealing public property."
If public funds have paid for 50 computers to be given to your school, who is to point the finger at you, the principal/AP if you take one home? No one. I am not saying that all principals have thought about doing this, but I am saying that there are principals who have taken public property for themselves, or others.
See Stuart Possner's case. and,
Five NYC Department of Education Former and Current DOE Network Leaders Exposed For Violating P-Card RulesThere are many more.
On Thursday July 20, 2017 City Councilman Ruben Wills was convicted of public corruption:
City Councilman Convicted of Stealing Thousands in Public Funds
I wonder how MS226 Principal Rushell White feels about that.
Or, if a member of your staff asks where a missing computer (or two or three) may be, you, as the principal can charge him/her with taking it, and if this person doesn't have tenure, he/she can be discontinued immediately following the 60-day notice; or, if this person has tenure, then it is time for a 3020-a, with other charges padding the list of Specifications to make sure the person is terminated.
So you, principal/AP/favored staff member dont have to worry about anything. Just enjoy your spanking new computer.
Parents and non-staff members are also sometimes on the take:
Stuyvesant High School Parents' Association is Cited For Financial Fraud and Discrimination
or in danger because they say something:
Booker T. Washington Middle School 54, Grievance Brings Retaliation
How many teachers have been told suddenly that they are re-assigned, and must leave the building, leaving all their stuff accumulated over many years, in their classrooms, never to be seen again. Sometimes the property of the re-assigned gets put into a room where staff can go through the items and take what they want.
If this happens, go to the police, make a complaint. Pronto. Then tell the Principal you need your stuff, and go to the UFT and tell them .
Editor, NYC Rubber Room Reporter
Editor, New York Court Corruption
Editor, National Public Voice
Editor, NYC Public Voice
Editor, Inside 3020-a Teacher Trials
New York Schools Faulted Again for Failing to Keep Track of Computers
Three years ago, an audit by the New York City comptroller’s office found that because of “grossly inaccurate” record-keeping, the city’s Education Department could not account for 1,817 computers it owned.
On Wednesday, Scott M. Stringer, the comptroller, issued a follow-up audit and said things had not improved. Mr. Stringer rebuked the department for its “ineptitude” in keeping track of computers and tablets it had bought for schools and offices.
The recommendations the comptroller’s office made in 2014 included creating a centralized inventory system for computers and tablets and routinely monitoring record-keeping procedures at schools and department offices to ensure that their inventories were accurate. Neither recommendation was adopted. The department said maintaining a centralized inventory was not practical.
For the latest audit, the comptroller’s office examined the computer inventory at eight schools and one administrative office. The comptroller’s office found that 4,993 out of 14,329 pieces of computer hardware at those locations were not properly accounted for, and that 1,816 pieces were not found by the auditors at all. At Fort Hamilton High School in Brooklyn, for example, more than one in five pieces of computer hardware listed in purchasing records, school inventory records and other city documents were not physically accounted for.
As for the 1,817 computers that were unaccounted for in the earlier audit, the comptroller’s office said the department had accounted for 234, or 13 percent.
“We constantly hear the same excuses from the agency — that monitoring is in place, that systems are functioning the way they should and that the public should trust that everything is fine,” Mr. Stringer said in a statement. “As this audit once again shows, taxpayer dollars are exposed to waste, fraud or abuse — and it’s coming at our kids’ expense.”
The Education Department criticized the new audit, saying its findings were “fundamentally flawed and unreliable.” The department faulted the comptroller’s office for relying on the department’s Asset Management System, which is primarily used to track hardware warranty and service data, as a central inventory of hardware that had been bought.
The comptroller’s office noted that the department had instructed schools to use data from the Asset Management System as a basis for creating and updating their own inventory records.
The new audit covered the two years from July 1, 2014, to June 30, 2016. The department bought more than $200 million worth of computers and tablets during that period.
Nearly 2,000 technology devices for students are missing