The report found that the contract between MCPS and Highland Electric Fleets was “arbitrary, unreasonable, and in violation” of the district’s own bidding procedures. The district terminated the agreement over the summer, even though Highland had delivered just 285 of the 326 electric buses it was contracted to provide.

Additional questions about the deal surfaced last year, when a public report cast doubt on the district’s claim that transitioning from diesel to electric buses would result in “zero net change” in transportation costs. Soon after, the Montgomery County inspector general raised further concerns, citing delivery delays and the district’s failure to recover $372,000 from Highland for buses that were not operational.

The state board’s 11-page report also referenced the criminal convictions of two former MCPS transportation officials, including an assistant director who stole more than $300,000 from the project. Their involvement, the board concluded, further “tainted” the procurement process.

Janis Zink Sartucci, with the Parents Coalition of Montgomery County, a watchdog group, said the state’s findings are unprecedented.

“I have certainly never seen a decision by the Montgomery County Board of Education declared illegal,” Sartucci said.

In a statement to the I-Team, MCPS said it is still reviewing the state’s decision and has not yet analyzed the full implications for the district.

“It is outrageous that our Board of Education and Superintendent have not addressed this issue that has been ongoing for years,” she said. “Instead, they’ve opted to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees on what the State Board of Education now calls a tainted bid award.”

Highland Electric Fleets declined to comment for this story, referring inquiries back to the district.

Despite terminating the contract, MCPS will continue doing business with Highland for years to come. The district does not own the buses or charging stations — it leases them, meaning taxpayers remain on the hook for an annual lease payment.

Have a news tip? Contact Scott Taylor at ScottTaylor@sbgtv.com or follow him on X at @ScottTaylorTV.

Unclaimed funds can be money you forgot in a bank account, uncashed checks or even an unreturned utility deposit.

Right now, there are 1.5 million people who have money or property on Maryland’s Unclaimed Property website.

In 2023, Maryland officials said they had achieved “remarkable success” with its Unclaimed Property Division. It brought in $315 million and returned $81 million.

Ron Lizzi, a national unclaimed funds watchdog, has a different take.

“No, that’s a failure. They returned only 26% of what they collected which is terrible, and they made owners jump through hoops to get their money,” said Lizzi.

Brooke Lierman, Maryland’s state comptroller, said when she took over two years ago, it was clear the state’s unclaimed property division needed major improvement. Many of its resources were three decades old.

“We need to do much better and that’s part of the reason we’re bringing this legislation and moving to new technology,” said Lierman.

Maryland is partnering with Kelmar, used by 40 other states, to create a new website. However, it won’t be available until next year.

How far is Maryland behind other states?

Texas, Illinois and Wisconsin use data-matching programs to automatically return money. Illinois has returned $100 million to more than 400,000 people. Wisconsin, which has been automatically returning money since 2015, has a return rate of 47%.

Under current state law, Maryland can’t automatically return your funds.

“Maryland, Virginia, and D.C. should be automatically returning unclaimed money to known owners without requiring claims,” said Lizzi.

Lierman is pushing two bills in this current Maryland legislative session. If passed, Maryland can use automatic money returns for claims under $5,000.

“It’s painless revenue. If you tax people, they complain. If you take their money without their knowledge, there are no complaints. If they figure it out. You pay them. Pat them on the head and they go away,” said Lizzi.

When asked what incentive Maryland has to return unclaimed funds, given that, Lierman said he is “really proud” of the state’s efforts to send money back to its rightful owners.

“We’ve stepped up our outreach over the past two years to make sure people know that we have this money, and we want to get it to them,” Lierman said.

Other sites like missingmoney.com have been endorsed by the National Association of State Treasurers. The state doesn’t supply a link to missingmoney.com on its website.

“This is their money and, at the end of the day, if every single person claimed their money next year, we would pay it because that is our duty,” said Lierman.

Have a news tip? Contact Scott Taylor at ScottTaylor@sbgtv.com or follow him on X at @ScottTaylorTV.

Alsobrooks’ campaign told 7News in September that she rented out the house until selling it in 2018.

The house was listed for sale a month early on Redfin.

Photo inside the home showed ripped carpet, missing wood flooring, and stains on the walls and carpet.

D.C. Code requires landlords to provide safe and livable dwellings and make all repairs. Rentals must be clean, and floors must be in good repair.

So, who rented the U.S. Senate candidate’s home for 15 years?

7News found only four names that used Alsobrooks’ home address on voter registration cards, according to D.C.’s Board of Elections.

Her grandmother who last voted in 2002 and the new owner. Plus, two other names.

Jesselene White registered to vote using Alsobrooks’ home address in July 2003. That date was four months before Alsobrooks was deeded the property from her mom.

White told 7News she lived at Alsobrooks’ home with her aunt Darlene Mclean. Online records confirm Mclean lived at the address from 2003 to 2004. White last used her voter registration card with the same address in October 2017, three months before Alsobrooks sold the house.

The second person? Nathaniel Fitzpatrick used Alsobrooks’ property address for his home address when he registered to vote on Oct. 9, 2012 — an important date. He also voted on Nov. 6, 2012, using the same address.

We found Nathaniel’s dad, Tim Fitzpatrick, showing off what he called his “Whip 2” vehicle, outside Alsobrooks’ home in August 2014 on Facebook. Online records show Timothy Fitzpatrick started living at Alsobrooks’ property in 2005.

On July 17, 2003, White’s voter registration, and on Oct. 9, 2012, Nathaniel Fitzpatrick’s voter registration both used Alsobrooks’ property address with the D.C. Board of Elections.

This later became an issue because the district had no record of Alsobrooks renting out her property from 2003 to 2012.

If you are renting in D.C., the property owner is required to be properly licensed by the Department of Licensing and Consumer Protection.

District records show no rental license, called a Basic Business License (BBL), in Alsobrooks’ name from 2003 to 2012 when it appears people were living at the home. A BBL is required to rent out a property in Washington.

D.C. records confirm Alsobrooks never had a rental license for 10 of the 15 years she claims she rented out her home. She did have a valid BBL to rent the property from November 2013 to October 2015 and from August 2016 to July 2018.

In D.C., the consequence for renting without a valid BBL is a Class 1 or Class 2 infraction. You can be fined $2,000 for a first offense and it can rise to $16,000. A judge can order a landlord to return all rent to a tenant at triple the amount paid.

Last week, 7News asked the Alsobrooks campaign eight questions about her 15 years as a landlord. 7News requested copies of her rental agreements with tenants, her D.C. rental licenses and housing inspections, and if rental payments were paid to her in cash.

“QUESTION 1: When did Angela’s grandmother move out of the DC property? It appears she moved out within a year of her husband’s passing in 2001.

QUESTION 2: Can she provide a renter’s agreement between Angela and Darlene Mclean and/or Timothy Fitzpatrick or any renter between 2001 to 2018?

QUESTION 3: Can she explain why DC doesn’t have a copy of her DC Basic Business License on the property that according to DC Code must be filed with the district to rent the property from 2003 to 2012?

QUESTION 4: What were the monthly rental payments and who received the rent for the DC property from 2003 to 2018? Can you provide a copy of any rental payments or was it a cash transaction?

QUESTION 5: Can Angela explain why there is no record filed with DC that she was renting her property from 2002 to 2013?”

As of Thursday evening, her campaign hadn’t responded.