County Auditor

The following text contains minutes of the 1/3/08 organizational meeting and the discussion held around the County Auditor position.

"On motion of Mr. Troy, second by Ms. Price Agenda No 4 was introduced. Mr. Williams made a motion that this be tabled for a month due to the confusion with the job description and what the Auditor does. Mr. Willcox seconded motion. Mr. Williams referred to County Law and the evaluation prepared by the County Administrator stating that Mr. Whitt has served as the key staff administrator to two previous Chairs. He said he is not looking at getting rid of anyone, just a definition of what this position does and if he is working out of title, review the position, create the proper title that embraces what he actually does.

He requested that the Personnel Officer review the position and report back to us in a month. Mr. Troy said that was addressed in caucus and these issues need to be addressed through the Personnel Committee to insure the job description comes in line with exactly what he does. He said that Mr. Whitt has done a fine job for the County and it is important to move forward with the appointment. Mr. Williams asked Mr. Suben in light of County Law 600, can we change that position after appointment is made under our term of the legislature. Mr. Suben said it depends on what you mean by change. I don’t think you can change the duties but believe you can limit what type audits are made rather than change it to a non-audit position. Mr. Williams said that he believes much of what he does now is non-audit and we need to look at what he does and align his job description with reality.

Mr. Tagliente said the reality is that somebody has been doing the audits and Mr. Whitt does the internal audits. Mr. Tagliente further said that we can procrastinate on this forever and if there is an axe to grind so be it. Mr. Waldbauer said that he is new to the legislature however has heard Mr. Whitt performs duties unrelated to his job description and may do it well, however believes what is being discussed is that it should be incorporated into his duties and responsibilities.

Mr. Schrader said that any office of the County is going to have duties and responsibilities assigned by the legislature. If you want the County Auditor to just focus on financial matters, that is your prerogative. Ms. Wilcox asked if we can also rein him in to do just the job of County Auditor. Mr. Schrader said absolutely, his duties and responsibilities are outlined in the law and you can restrict anything outside of that.

Mr. Willcox read from the evaluation that the Auditor’s job description under typical work activity “is to provide to the County Administrator and Legislature copies of all reports”. In the 4 years that I have been here I can remember 3 at the very most. Mr. Schrader said he was surprised because there were instances where Mr. Willcox met with Mr. Whitt to perform an audit of the Sheriff Department vehicle repair work. Mr. Willcox said that is one. Mr. Schrader said there are numerous instances of that type that have occurred. There have been departmental audits conducted by the state and reports have been generated to the legislature. The single audit is another instance where much work was done by Mr. Whitt to generate the report to the legislature.

Mr. Williams again referred to County Law 600 and asked Mr. Suben if he thinks that we have the ability to have this position do whatever we assign. Mr. Suben said he appreciated the opportunity to correct his prior advice. After rereading County Law and hearing Mr. Schrader’s view, the law’s wording states “in such other matter as may be deemed appropriate”. It seems that clause would give you the opportunity to define additional duties (in addition to audits) that you deem proper.

A roll call vote to table the appointment was taken with Ms. Arnold, Mr. Ross, Mr. Waldbauer, Ms. Wilcox, Mr. Willcox, Mr. Williams voting aye and Mr. Cornell, Mr. Dafoe, Mr. Daniels, Mr. Hartnett, Mr. Loomis, Mr. McKee, Mr. Piombo, Ms. Price, Mr. Spaulding, Mr. Steger, Mr. Tagliente, Mr. Troy, Ms. Tytler, voting nay. Motion defeated. The Chairman called for a roll call vote on the appointment of Mr. Whitt with all members voting aye."

THIS is the job description for the position:

COUNTY AUDITOR
Jurisdiction: Cortland County
Jurisdictional Class: Competitive
Adopted: 6/20/03
DISTINGUISHING FEATURES OF THE CLASS: The work involves responsibility for conducting internal auditing of county departments and agencies, monitoring vendor contracts and payments, and reconciliation of reimbursement claims. The position is responsible for insuring that all account keeping procedures and contractual services are carried out in accordance with applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and policies governing local governments. The incumbent will provide technical oversight and coordination of account keeping activities for county departments. The work is performed under the general supervision of the County Administrator. Does related work as required.

TYPICAL WORK ACTIVITIES (illustrative only)

• Audits all such claims, accounts, and demands which would otherwise be audited by the Legislature in accordance with County Law;
• Interfaces with county department heads and senior personnel regarding improvements in departmental accounting practices and ascertains that existing practices are accurate and workable;
• Conducts audits of county departments, receiving or dispersing money;
• Conducts audits of non-profit agencies that receive county funding;
• Conducts audit of hotels and bed & breakfast establishments for compliance with hotel tax;
• Trains subordinate staff in office procedures;
• Audits financial records and accounts of all units of county government charged with duties relating to funds of the county;
• Specific audit and monitoring duties related to expenditures of federal/state financial assistance provided to sub-recipients by the county in accordance with applicable laws and regulations;
• Reviews financial claims against the county with emphasis on contracted service agreements;
• Reconciles county claims in all departments for state and federal aid reimbursement;
• Audits payroll records;
• Conducts internal audits of county departments for compliance with federal and state regulations and county policies and systems;
• Monitors delinquent and aged receivable accounts for collection;
• Assists with internal account reconciliation in the County Auditor's Office;
• Monitors corrective action procedures for department as needed;
• May prepare reports in all accounting areas of county departments under the directive of the County Auditor.
  

FULL PERFORMANCE, KNOWLEDGE, SKILLS AND ABILITES:

• Thorough knowledge of modem account keeping practices and terminology;
• Thorough knowledge of the terminology, practices and procedures of data processing system;
• Thorough knowledge of office terminology, procedures and equipment; County Auditor
• Thorough knowledge of business English;
• Good knowledge of federal, state and local laws and regulations which affect the accounting practices of local governments;
• Ability to develop, effectively implement and maintain accounting systems and procedures in conformance with all applicable laws, rules and regulations;
• Ability to comprehend, analyze and develop procedures to deal with unusual or complex accounting problems;
• Ability to comprehend and analyze problems in the input and output of computer information;
• Ability to understand and carry out complex oral and written instructions;
• Ability to prepare accurate correspondence and reports;
• Ability to read and understand financial statements;
• Physical condition commensurate with the demands of the position.
  

MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS:

• Graduation from a regionally accredited or NYS registered college or university with an associates degree in accounting or related field and four (4) years of full time paid (or the equivalent part-time and/or volunteer) accounting experience with general ledger, balance sheets and expenditure auditing; OR
• Graduation from high school or a high school equivalency diploma and six (6) years of full time paid (or the equivalent part-time and/or volunteer) accounting experience with general ledger, balance sheets and expenditure auditing; OR
• Any equivalent combination of training and experience as described in (A) and (B) above.

THE 2009 ADOPTED BUDGET FOR THIS POSITION - $62,300

FOR A HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATE WITH 6 YEARS EXPERIENCE!!! That is $5,000 more than the County Treasurer and $10,000 more than the Deputy Treasurer.

John Daniels' Political Ad

I wanted to share John's political ad that has been running in the Cortland Standard.

John indicates it in Not a time for political expediency... hmm, let's pause on that for a moment.

Making decisions based upon political expediency

Many politicians make decisions based not necessarily upon what is the best thing to do, nor upon their own ethics and morals, but upon what is best for their own political gain. A politician is dependent upon his or her good standing with voters, as well as an ability to "fit in" with the party political structure. Since a person's time in politics sometimes is short, it is only natural that they do everything possible to continue their career.

Is that why he aligned himself with Dan Tagliente, the two of which wouldn't speak to one another for a year after John was elected Chairman? Was my replacement by John the best thing to do, considering Dan Tagliente's involvement in the failed South main Street deal? How about the removal of Bill Wood, and the Chair's recommendation of and replacement by Tom Brown as Election Commissioner?

I see that John's non-partisanship fought for and eliminated political patronage of the Clerk of the Legislature and the County Attorney. What HAS been done is that the recommendation of these positions has been placed in a MUCH SMALLER group of people, and includes the County Administrator (in case you didn't know). This small group can now be faced with more more pressure and political manuevering from the Chair and the County Adminsitrator. The politics haven't been taken out of the process; on the contrary it is now even worse. Does anyone think that the interview and selection process will be transparent and open to the public?????

And if the Chair was doing his job, he would have carried the appointments done at the Legislature's organizational meeting all the way through to the Auditor.

Take a moment to view the sequence of appointments as set forth by the Rules of Order:
Resolution No. 01 Selecting Chairman of the County Legislature and Setting Official Understanding.
Resolution No. 02 Appoint Clerk of the County Legislature
Resolution No. 03 Appoint County Attorney
Resolution No. 04 Appoint County Auditor
Resolution No. 05 Appoint Veterans Service Officer
Resolution No. 06 Appoint Public Defender
Resolution No. 07 Appoint County Historian

Let's be consistent please. See my separate post on the auditor.

OK, back to the ad.
He voted for the Finger Lakes East Business Park - How is that doing again???
Proposed $3 million austerity budget. Easy pickins there, all Legislators were for it.

Stopped and re-bid DMV project, saving $1 million. NOPE, sorry John. Did you not read the timeline I gave you? And the project re-bid saved about $350,000. I guess that's what you get for not coming to Committee meetings.

Your ad is wrong as well as misleading. I guess that's why you had to buy it and let let the facts speak for themselves.

Our fearless leader

This piece of video was recorded from the League of Women Voter Candidate forum, held on October 8 and the Cortlandville Town Hall. In attendance were John Daniels, Chairman of the Legislature, D-LD14 incumbent; Gene Waldbauer, R-LD13; and Susan Briggs, R-LD14 challenger.

I am posting this for those interested in the response given to a question by Connie Mack asking about communication between a Legislator and their constituents. In this case, the Mack property is in the County Airport RPZ (Runway Protection Zone) and is in the process of being taken to allow for the RPZ to be maintained.

Anyway, there is a lot more history behind this project but is not needed to share here in this post. The post is meant to serve as the way Mr. Daniels communicated with his constituents, claiming that the reason they were bringing up the fact they were losing their home was that this was a"ploy to get more money out of the County for their property".

Are you serious?


A follow up to this is in the October 29, 2009 Letter to the Editor section. John indicates that there was total communication from the beginning of the project... contrary to another letter published the SAME DAY from 7 families in the area who indicate that John has "NEVER talked to us or sent any information as all. He has done absolutely nothing to keep us informed of any developments concerning the airport."

Who are you going to believe?

My Birthday Present to the Legislature - "Little Steps"

Addressed and emailed to All County Legislators on 7/21/09 ---

Good Day,

As Thursday's legislative session approaches there are two topics and three agenda items related to large projects in Cortland County. I wanted to provide comments for consideration by representatives on the Legislature.

First, let me share a common theme that I witnessed in my term on the Legislature - the "little step" approach. As you are all aware, large projects take years to develop, often covering several terms of the Legislature. With Legislator turnover inevitable at election time, many newer legislative members and those who are reassigned to different committees each re-elected term are not privy to the entire history of projects related to multi-million dollar projects including the airport, the River Trail, and the landfill to name a few. Information is not always at the ready and time is not an ally when Legislators research topics, so smaller resolutions with no perceived cost that are brought up for votes do not often appear to have a notable impact on a project. They get lip service by Department Heads and the Administration about their history and the process for accomplishing the task, and reolutions that are prepared for Committee and passed on to the floor have about two weeks for vetting and for follow up investigation. I feel that moving things along in this matter can have drastic long range implications, as decisions that are made at a monthly Legislature meeting can either lay groundwork for or keep momentum going on projects that otherwise would bear detailed scrutiny and often fail to get support and continue if they were presented as a single all encompassing project.

For example, Agenda Items 4 and 5 pertain to further expansion and development of the Cortland County Airport. As a participant on the Highway Committee for 18 months leading up to this vote, I often requested information on the history of the project to assist in the decision making process. This information included a decision making matrix and their associated costs for various options ranging from: continued ownership and development by the County; the sale of the airport to third party operators; and County abandonment and/or closure of the facility. Unfortunately I was never able to obtain those figures and backup. I was told what possible impact would be, but there was no written report or summary to review and discuss as a Committee or a Legislature. My understanding from various discussions at Highway meetings or forums is that sale or abandonment by the County could lead to cost repercussions in that the FAA funding for the last 20 years could or would require payback. This should be confirmed and provided in writing from the FAA by the Highway Department and filed. Unfortunately, it would seem that the current arrangement to operate the airport at a "profit" (using the term loosely as I do not believe the operating and maintenance costs are accurately portrayed) is the easiest one to choose by Legislators. However, one has to consider the long-range impact on the County: more and more County properties off the tax rolls, more indebtedness to the FAA to what appears to be $855,000 per the resolution, etc. Our continued rubber stamp of airport projects without examination of the County needs and costs in these economic conditions is poor governing. I do not think that the airport should be closed; I believe that a third party group (with no financial or political ties to the airport) should investigate options and provide recommendations to the County. There is no deadline for decision for this project that would incur cost or liability to the project at this time. I recommend to table the resolutions or vote them down and take a hard look before we take nearly a million more dollars of federal funds, obligating us to longer operation of the facility at taxpayer expense.

The next topic is in regards to agenda Item #16, which is a resolution authorizing an agreement between Cortland County and Air Energy TCI. This is a major decision that will impact our entire County, and another example of "little stepping". I do not believe that the Legislature as a whole has decided to pursue the project, however the process and resolutions that were passed were done so under the guise that the project can be stopped at any time... Previous resolutions were passed to allow this company to set up wind test towers at the landfill at no cost to the County; now we are using another "no cost" resolution to engage in professional services for the County to serve as SEQR Lead Agency for this project- paid for by the company who would like to locate 50+ windmills here? This certainly gives the impression that the majority of County Legislators are favor of windmills and the project. Is this the case? Would one assume that if the County were to stop the process later in the project that they would be liable for repayment of some of this money as the County might be perceived to be acting in bad faith? Get this in writing please.

I also do not recall receiving any (written) cost benefit summary to the County for PILOT or other reimbursement for this project. The wind power certainly is more expensive than purchasing National Grid utilities, and it simply feeds into the Northeast region electrical distribution system when the wind blows. I am aware that there are landowners who will be receiving monetary sums for the lease of their properties. Are you aware that large substations and transmission lines will need to be constructed to connect these windmills into the electric grid, impacting more than the several acres required per windmill? Access and maintenance roads will also need to be built, and our existing roads will be used to transport the large, heavy equipment to the site. All of these factors will have a signficant and adverse effect on our County. Who pays for all of this? And most importantly, who benefits? We cannot give away our land and spoil our resources for no cost.

In addition, there are publications on the noise, aesthetic and economic impacts (all negative) of windmills for review if you search for them. I have attached a few for your review, and a few links below.

http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/page/2/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26242604/
http://www.windaction.org/pictures/482

Please do not feel that these are light decisions to be made. They require proper planning and discussion. Without concerted effort and big picture discussion regarding the future of our County you are doing the taxpayers an injustice. Thank you for your service to Cortland County.

Chad Loomis

10/12/09 - It's just blowin in the Wind

But somehow the County keeps pushing along on the wind ordinance that would allow for wind farms that would be developed here.

I simply don't get it.

I believe in renewable energy and green power, but this is not the right time or place to install these mammoth machines that only benefit a select few - the developer and the landowner. And judging by the newspaper only the developer REALLY benefits.

Somehow the visit by the Wind Subcommittee found verification in the email I had previously sent to the County Legislature on 7/21/09.