Sutter County Auditor Support Grows...
Support for elected Sutter County Auditor-Controller, Robert Stark, and Assistant Auditor-Controller, Ronda Putman, continues to grow. More than 170 attended a fundraiser last night.
Assemblyman Keith Richman led off the evening discussing post-retirement benefits and how the related costs will impact our government. There is little doubt that those in attendance heard what he said (too bad the Sutter County Board of Supervisors didn’t do the same).
The legal action appears to have the County administration a bit off of their edge. A simple request for documentation regarding the County’s cost allocation plan brings a conflicting statement from Mr. Curtis Coad, Assistant County Administrator:
“To the best of our knowledge, the documents you are requesting do not exist.”
Mr. Coad continues:
“Furthermore, we know of no requirement that the Board of Supervisors adopt such policies and procedures.”
No requirement to have Board of Supervisors approve policies and procedures for taking money from one government fund to benefit the General Fund? For the uninitiated, the Board of Supervisors is responsible for the establishment of policies and procedures, in consultation with the elected Auditor-Controller, for County budgets and accounting. Mr. Coad’s statement clearly indicates that Sutter County has been using the County Cost Plan for purposes NOT SPECIFICALLY APPROVED by the Board of Supervisors.
To protect the Board of Supervisors, Mr. Coad tells us that if such policies and procedures are required, and since they don’t exist, it has to be the responsibility of someone else. Mr. Coad states that the policies and procedures manuals are not up to date as if this is an important issue. He is right, the issue is important but it is obvious that it has not stopped the “Independent Auditor” from issuing an “atta-a-boy” audit report. That means that the accuracy of the financial data could be confirmed.
Simply the tip of the iceberg! Apparently Mr. Ian Edward, a member of the public, has decided to look into Sutter County’s LAFCo. Reading the limited data available on the internet related to this important Commission one can only determine that this could become a prime plumb for Mr. Edward’s investigation.
Auditors love little things as they tend to lead us to the bigger issues. Management tends to ignore the little issues because they are relatively unimportant.
To my Lassen County readers, this may appear unimportant to you but it is not. Our County Cost Plan and LAFCo are still entwined.
Assemblyman Keith Richman led off the evening discussing post-retirement benefits and how the related costs will impact our government. There is little doubt that those in attendance heard what he said (too bad the Sutter County Board of Supervisors didn’t do the same).
The legal action appears to have the County administration a bit off of their edge. A simple request for documentation regarding the County’s cost allocation plan brings a conflicting statement from Mr. Curtis Coad, Assistant County Administrator:
“To the best of our knowledge, the documents you are requesting do not exist.”
Mr. Coad continues:
“Furthermore, we know of no requirement that the Board of Supervisors adopt such policies and procedures.”
No requirement to have Board of Supervisors approve policies and procedures for taking money from one government fund to benefit the General Fund? For the uninitiated, the Board of Supervisors is responsible for the establishment of policies and procedures, in consultation with the elected Auditor-Controller, for County budgets and accounting. Mr. Coad’s statement clearly indicates that Sutter County has been using the County Cost Plan for purposes NOT SPECIFICALLY APPROVED by the Board of Supervisors.
To protect the Board of Supervisors, Mr. Coad tells us that if such policies and procedures are required, and since they don’t exist, it has to be the responsibility of someone else. Mr. Coad states that the policies and procedures manuals are not up to date as if this is an important issue. He is right, the issue is important but it is obvious that it has not stopped the “Independent Auditor” from issuing an “atta-a-boy” audit report. That means that the accuracy of the financial data could be confirmed.
Simply the tip of the iceberg! Apparently Mr. Ian Edward, a member of the public, has decided to look into Sutter County’s LAFCo. Reading the limited data available on the internet related to this important Commission one can only determine that this could become a prime plumb for Mr. Edward’s investigation.
Auditors love little things as they tend to lead us to the bigger issues. Management tends to ignore the little issues because they are relatively unimportant.
To my Lassen County readers, this may appear unimportant to you but it is not. Our County Cost Plan and LAFCo are still entwined.
<< Home