Good afternoon ….
At the last Council meeting I asked the Manager if there was an intent to deceive with the way the agenda item regarding the $411, 000 un-authorized over spending had been presented. He answered that he did not know.
Perhaps if he were to ask his Utilities director to credibly explain why the Agenda Item requests he submitted for the April 22nd and again for the May 20th Council meetings never referenced un-authorized over spending he would have that answer – as regards the Utilities director’s intent.
Perhaps if he were to ask the Finance director if he had approved the April 22nd Agenda Item as submitted by the Utilities director that never referenced any un-authorized over spending he would have that answer – as regards the Finance director’s intent.
And finally if he were to credibly explain why if the Finance director refused to approve Utilities April 22nd Agenda Item request in mid April WHY HE did notify Council as to the un-authorized over spending until some 40 days had elapsed, AND until after that information had been leaked to the Mayor and others, we would all know more – as to the Manager’s intent.
In light of this major internal control failure coming on the heels of repeated assurances from the Manager that we had little to worry about in that regard I hope it is crystal clear to all but those who do not want to see that
it is imperative that the City employ financial professionals with the requisite qualifications and ability to design, implement and monitor effective internal controls to adequately safeguard taxpayer interests, and that the purpose and intent of the Audit and Budget Advisory Board is one of inquisitiveness and skepticism intended to serve as yet another and perhaps final failsafe, in alerting Council and the people to whom they answer as regards likely or even possible non-feasant, mis-feasant, or mal-feasant performance on the part of the Manager and his Finance director
Taxpayer interests were harmed greatly by a cozy relationship between the former Manager and CFO who masked known control deficiencies and withheld disastrous information from Council and the public alike.
IT WOULD APPEAR that is also likely the case with the new Manager and CFO in the interviewing days which we know to be at least 40 between when it is inconceivable that Finance did not realize that those 16 separate expenditures were un-authorized, And when the Manager finally informed Council of same, AND REMEMBER that was after he learned that information had been leaked and was going to come out.
Establishing a watch dog role for ABAB has not been an easy lift. The Manager as might be expected of any manager has not welcomed any measure of added scrutiny for himself and his staff, AND THE MAYOR does not favor any increase in transparency in Port Orange government.
Stay tuned to see if Council will be insistent in ensuring that the ABAB is provided all the relevant documentation required to determine exactly what happened in this instance.
From: Ted Noftall [mailto:Ted@TedNoftall.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2014 8:36 PM
To: Robin Fenwick (email@example.com)
Subject: FW: Draft DF’s relating to Sunstate Meter & Supply
Thank you Robin,
I understand the volume impractically of retaining pure drafts.
However once another departments approval is bestowed on a document, OR such approval is denied for cause or concern — that approval or denial becomes a separate public record unto itself independent of the draft itself.
I am un clear if approvals or denials are physically affixed to the DF or if they are conveyed by e-mail ?
In either even I would again inquire as to whether there are any public records indicating any approval, OR rejection of the agenda item we have been discussing.