Friday, July 10, 2009

Lap Dog(s)

The Official Unofficial Minutes of the WL BOA
July 7 Meeting

Financials/Audit
Bear with me. You might recall last mayoral campaign season when there where "concerns" about financial irregularities within the City. These concerns were voiced, in public, by Alderman Hoy and picked up by Jerry Bos. One of the first initiatives Jerry launched after his election was his creation and appointment of an Audit Committee. There was a suggestion that a more intensive audit might be required. All the aldermen were on board. Much to some folks chagrin, an audit of the 2007 books (commissioned by then Mayor York) was completed with superlative comments from the independent auditor. These findings were turned over to the Audit Committee (before the Aldermen had seen them). Results? Audit Committee concurred with the auditor, the City's books and financial procedures were excellent.

When will the audit of the 2008 financials be completed? Maybe never. Jerry opened the discussion of financials by musing an audit just might be a waste of time and money. He has been having a difficult time finding a firm to do the audit (never has been a problem in the past). Maybe a financial " review" might be in order rather than an audit. Although he didn't share who might do this review, I assume it would be his Audit Committee. The majority of the Audit Committee believes an audit is not necessary. How would I know this? According to Jerry at Tuesday's meeting, "a lot of emails have gone back and forth" and a "feeling of the majority" is an audit is "not worth it". So when was the last time the Audit Committee met? Who knows. No need as the Mayor is polling them. Apparently the Committee's work is being conducted outside the view of the Aldermen and the public. Can you say Sunshine violation? During the discussion the City Attorney could be seen shaking is head, I'll bet he wished he could cover his ears.

Amend the current budget? Jerry thinks it is a waste of time, citing some of his experience at DFA (amazing, huh?). Problem is, it could very well be, some of the off budget expenditures made by this administration require an amended budget...by State law. Does Jerry know this? Don't know. Does our audit committee know this. Don't know. Do the aldermen care?

Alderman Hoy felt it would be "prudent" for the City to have an audit. Other than that, the somnolent council is in great need of No Doze to stay awake...at least their eyes are open.

After all this, it was agreed a joint meeting of the BOA and Audit Committee will be held. No date discussed. Based on Tuesday's comments, the meeting will be short, a "baked cake" as they say.

Sit, Heel, Good boy!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3FnpaWQJO0&feature=related

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

I know this could be a stretch for some . . . wondering if we can possibly entertain the notion that our mayor is on the up and up, our city books are in upstanding order and, as a result, truly feels an outside audit is an unnecessary expenditure at this time.

Anonymous said...

Have found many factions at the lake who sit in judgment, whisper their opinions about the idiosyncrasy of one or more individuals and then come to some smug conclusion as if they have all the right answers. Nine times out of ten, these judgmental people have their own house to clean up. I don't always agree with Mike's take on things but like the fact he puts it out there for all to brood over.

Anonymous said...

I'm usually fine with what our elected officials recommend, but it does seem odd that the same group that questioned the city finances and audits during the election, now seem fine with not worrying about it. A bit hypocritical.

Anonymous said...

I went by Costello's property and it too has a for sale sign.

Anonymous said...

To Stretch..........not a stretch at all. However, you ignore the fact that the current administration loudly and publicly questioned the books of the previous administration, then ignored the audit professionals who said "one of the best set of books I've seen". I heard it with my own ears. Why then did they waste time after the fact. Rather than just say, "terrific". Let's move on. Pretty embarrassing if you ask me.

Anonymous said...

I hope we put a lien n on the Costello property

Anonymous said...

Anybody ever think the state statues require an audit every year by an independent firm?

Anonymous said...

Not accusing anyone of anything, but with the Mayor's background as a CFO who was slapped with the kind of fine and judgment he was for financial dealings, I would think he'd go over board in making sure outsiders saw that everything was ok. Especially after running for Mayor boasting about his background while questioning the previous administration about finances.

Anonymous said...

Fact of life: All elections thrive on some perceived or contrived inadequacy the next newly elected claims they can correct or do better. WL is no exception - applies to some degree or another to present and all previous WL mayor or alderman elections. Right or wrong, it is the American political way of life. Otherwise, all elected officials across this country would only have one term if their performance was solely based on what they said during their campaign. 4:30 - that's the point you miss.

Anonymous said...

Another "fact of life" is perception is reality. Moving bank accounts and bypassing audits when you accuse the prior administration of not having their act together and you yourself have shown a less than clean cut background means you don't operate like the current administration. I don't think there's any real misconduct, but perception becomes reality.

Anonymous said...

Wow,you are a political genius.

Thanks for educating us on the reasons to accept the failure of elected officials and our own Mayor who has not fulfilled his campaign promise.

Anonymous said...

8:55: Operative words: "right or wrong". Where does it say the failure of elected officials should be accepted?

Anonymous said...

"Right or wrong, it is the American political way of life"

"Otherwise, all elected officials across this country would only have one term if their performance was solely based on what they said during their campaign. 4:30 - that's the point you miss."

To me that means everybody does it
and we ought to expect unfufilled promises and "failure " to deliver on a campaign platform.

I am ask the mayor to be accountable to a "real" promise .

The perceived issues which make my concern greater come along with apparent misconduct in his business life. All the more reason to expect he do what he promised.

Anonymous said...

Okay, here are some facts folks:

1. Mayor Bos did not run on the premise the city had issues with their books or financial misdeed. That was Mayor York's BOA that had a problem with the "judgement used in spending".
2. An issue with the "judgement used in spending" does not not necessarily mean a LEGAL problem would be discovered in an audit. Rather it is an opinion based on a different belief system. Just because one may not agree with how money is spent does not mean a city audit would show wrong-doing.
3. The audit conducted and ordered under York was a Management Audit, NOT a Financial Audit, though York assured all of the BOA it was in fact a financial audit. This was discussed at the BOA meeting.
4. Attend the next BOA meeting and ask our city attorney as to whether or not it is NECESSARY by State Statutes for a city to conduct an audit each year. I believe he was asked this question and I believe he answered it. The answer is NO.
5. I believe this blog alone has made several comments about how open Mayor Bos is about the financials of this city and the expenditures. In fact, several of Mike's posts have commented on how exhaustive the reviews are. I believe Mayor Bos has been very open about the city's finances...to the point of redundency. He also assembled an audit committee to watch over the city's spending and budgetary process. Did this happen under York? NO.
6. If you still feel the city should spend your money on an audit, please let Mayor Bos know this. I am not sure you will want to do away with whatever that money could buy instead, however. So ponder this one carefully as it is expensive.

Anonymous said...

Thank you 1:42 and 12:59.
Get your facts straight 3:05, 4:30, 5:37. 6:12. 8:55 . . .

Anonymous said...

Several refer to a "broken campaign promise" but aren't specific on exactly - repeat: exactly - what the mayor promised.

Obama said he would end this war. He is not ending the war in the timeframe he said he would. Does that mean he is dishonest and has broken a campaign promise? Reality changes and I'm sure reality has changed for members of our BOA once elected. It is the American political way of life, right or wrong.

Anonymous said...

1259 - You are indeed lost. 1. What do you mean 'York's BOA'? Did he appointment all the members of the BOA? It is not his 'judgement used in spending'. Maybe you don't know, the BOA APPROVES the budget, not the Mayor. 2. I went to a coffee and heard Mr. Bos insinuate there were financial misdeeds at City Hall. When I pressed him, he started backing away and talked in circles. If he hadn't spent so much time listening to White and Hoy, maybe he would have came to a different conclusion. 3. Audit Committee, what a waste of time and the City's resources. Can you please explain to me how often they meet and how, as you say, watch over the City's spending and budgetry process? All the members of this committee are Bos buddies.
4. Bos DID run using scare tactics including financial misdeeds with the prior administration. I wish now I wouldn't have voted for him, especially with his issues with DFA and his commodities trading scandal (which he knew about when he ran for office). 5. A management audit is what is needed for the City. At least York had one completed. More than what you can say about the current Mayor. He doesn't want any outside Auditor looking over his shoulder. RED FLAGS! We'll see what the other 'Accuser in Chief' Hoy has to say about this.

Anonymous said...

"Obama said he would end this war. He is not ending the war in the timeframe he said he would. Does that mean he is dishonest and has broken a campaign promise?"

Please add in

In the 2000 debate DubYa said he would not " Nation build"
Dick told us "we would be welcomed as liberators"
"Does that mean they were dishonest?"

It depends on what is is and those promises aren't specific on exactly - repeat: exactly - is is or what the President promised

Anonymous said...

Today we find out Dick Cheney directed the CIA eight years ago not to inform Congress about a program it was required by law to do.

As you know Mr Cheney knows whats good for us and that seems to be good enough some people.

I can think of a few people here who made the decision to act for us too thinking and deciding they were smarter than the rest of us .