It seems as though the City of White Salmon might be as much as $100,000 over their budget but their bookkeeping is in such a state that they can't say how much money they do or do not have.
Haven't we been down this road before?
Anonymous
Monday, November 19, 2007
White Salmon Might Be $100,000 Over Budget?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
I would like to hear some facts on this before I comment. I am sure all on the city council knew there was a problem.....maybe just not the extent of the problem.....also I don't think White Salmon is unique as far as budgetary problems facing small towns across the country.
Beatledawg
Beatledawg,
This a lot of money. What size is the budget anyway? It can't be that big for a town of this size. Its not rocket science. Even if the money isn't ultimately missing, it isn't accounted for. This is the BASIC fiduciary responsibility of the council, for goodness sake!!!!
What is the role of the budget advisory committee, and who is on it?
Exactly why did Eric Green quit? To spend time with his family?
It sounds to me like the city council may be in over its head. Hopefully the new regime can get a handle on things.
Actually the city budget is alot more like rocket science than one would think. It is easy to point fingers and say "yep- this is a disaster" then it is to come up with a plan to straighten it out. The best thing that WS has for it now is Jan Brending. Municipal budgets and accounts are not like personal and business accounts. They are a whole different animal.
I see this problem stemming not from council but from the lack of continuity in the Clerk position and the staff generally. We need to hire people that know what they are doing and pay them well enough, and treat them well enough.
As for any hope that the "new council" will help...Ha Ha Ha.
Its one thing to piss from the sideline. its another to be the one(s) to actually fix it.
State law pretty much dictates how to organize and manage a city budget. And...the state audits the financial activity of the city. The council doesn't manage it, a qualified, comptent clerk treasurer does, with the city council receiving reports with explainations of over and under budget. The city council makes a big mistake if they think they can micromanage it.
Hire good managers and let them do their job. City council members and mayors come and go. The institutional memory is with the staff.
It seems the role of the budget committee and the city council is to ask the right questions of the clerk treasurer.
It is also the role of the citizens to ask if they are.
I for one would like to be asked questions if I were on either the committee or the council.
I was told that Shirley Cox passed the buck back to the City Council when asked about growth assumptions. The council was sitting on the committee and NO ONE RESPONDED. Let us be not afraid to ask.
Maybe the best thing is for an independent audit to be done and then publish the results. I don't know when the last one was done, a current audit would give everyone the same information as opposed to all the finger pointing and speculation. I still don't feel that people can hold the council responsible for this mess.......the budget is the responsibility of the clerk/treasurer and then the council makes their decisions based on the information they receive. Can you realistically expect a council person to inspect the books in addition to all the committees and council meeting committments?
Beatledawg
Ok Ha ha ha, it's for doggone sure the past council did nothing to help the budget. Let's not be too hasty with sarcasm until we see what happens. The last council meeting I attended was like a breath of fresh air compared to the previous ones. It tokk almost 10 years to get into the shape we're in so I'm sure the new council can't wave a magic wantd and make everything all better with just a month in office.
Blue Bell
I think we now know that the person hired to do the job was not qualified or trained properly to do it. Now, I think after Jan Brending gets as much of the backlog done as she can, the city needs to bring in an auditor. I think they need to know where they stand.
Here is another thing that piggy backs on SqueekyWheel's comment about the clerk/treasurer job.....I am wondering, if the clerk/treasurer position is such an important one, then why did the city only advertised for this position in The White Salmon Enterprise. If we want someone qualified to do this job, shouldn't there, at the very least, be ads in the Hood River News, Work Source, The Oregonian and the Seattle Times? The only place I saw an ad for this position was The Enterprise under "Help Wanted". By the way Blue Bell, There was no sarcam in my earlier post. If there is someone here that knows the mayor or has his ear, maybe that would be a good suggestion to make......wouldn't we want to try to hire the best qualified person for the job and get some stability back in that position? Let me know if you think I am off base here.
Beatledawg
Beatledawg, you are absolutely correct. I question why the position was not advertised outside White Salmon. Kelly Ingraham who held the position until June 2003 was a CPA. Margie Ziegler was quite experienced in accounting, but I don't know if she held a CPA. From previous personal experience, I can tell you that to locate someone having the experience needed to do the job Kelly & Margie did, is not easy to find. And, that isn't to reflect on the person hired to do the job, but those who hired him.
I think an audit should be done.
Reading the minutes of the meeting from October 17, 2007, it appears the auditors were at City Hall. I would imagine that any problems will soon surface.
Here is something I don't quite understand and maybe some of you can help me understand why this is news.
The Enterprise recently had an article about the most recent city council meeting where the focus of the article was the fact that the city had a $500,000 grant that was given to them by the county in 1999to help with the pool, and then they ended up appropriating it for the city water system.
The article made it sound like this was a new development much to council member's and the public's astonishment.
I don't get what was so "startling" about the announcement since it bas been a matter of public record for 8 years.
Why does the mayor consider the money "lost" if it went towards the city's water system.
Mayor Poucher said. "This is the type of thing we've had to deal with. We're living with our past history."
"The city administration decided to put it into the well water project, and we lost that money,"
Maybe the mayor was misquoted..... I don't see that the money was lost or misappropriated since it went for a public service that was(and still is) badly in need.
Why was this even news worthy? Since the city was under a boil order back then.......wouldn't it have been negligence on the part of the city administrator and the council not to use those funds for anything other than a priority item like the public water system?
Why are we continuing to play monday morning quarterback with White Salmon city politics? Let's move on and fix the problems as opposed to keep pointing fingers?
Beatledawg
Right on Beatledawg,
This has been a theme. Pile the blame and innuendos on decisions that were made in the past. It is so easy to think that some how we would have been so much smarter than the ones who made those difficult decisions. I think it is completely irresponsible for the mayor to make such a statement in the tone he did.
Now to sound like I am back tracking.......I do want to say in fairness to all, these are quotes from The Enterprise, so you may have to wonder if anything was paraphrased, taken out of context or lost in translation by the reporter. Controversy sells and anymore I am becomming increasingly jaded in my view of the press.
Also Mr. Poucher has never been a mayor of a city, so he might make statements from time to time with out realizing he is a public figure and what he says will end up in the local newspaper paper.
Maybe from this point on with regards to matters from the city's past, The Mayor and council members should comment that it is "water under the bridge and that the people that made decisions in the past did their best" and move on from there.
None of these people get paid enough for what they do.....and I don't think anyone should forget that.
I will point out as well, that I like what I have seen from Mayor Poucher thus far. I think he is genuine and committed to do a good job.
Beatledawg
Post a Comment