Part IV Scroll up to see previous posts for Parts I-III
12. When I recently asked for an accounting of revenue and expenditures for our two 5-year capital improvement plans, the Mayor said he provided updates regularly.
I only know of a small number of times that we have gotten any kind of written itemized report on the spending of millions of dollars on county buildings, jails, libraries, cupolas, dental clinics, and the county courthouse.
One recent report on a single project, the cupola, showed $150,000 budgeted and $215,000 spent. This was provided after I asked for it.
An earlier report that showed “spending” on various building projects (including some that were not a part of either 5-year plan) was incomplete and misleading.
The column marked “spent” was misleading because not all spending was included in the “spent” totals. Some projects were over the “5-year plan” budgeted amount, but the report said they were within budget because the report just ignored any costs that were paid for by anything other than bond money.
That’s like me paying for a building partly in cash and partly by check and then saying the only amount I “spent” on the building is what I paid out in cash.
Commissioner Osborne has said it, I have said it, and despite a fearful silence in this room, I think every commissioner up here knows that there has been, and still is, no accountability for capital improvement dollars.
When you ask how much was spent on a project, you may get 2, 3, or 4 different answers. On the Russellville sewer grant, there were at least 3 spending totals given. On the Courthouse addition, there was a “spent” total of exactly $2.5 million provided. Upon further questioning, it was said that really $2,670,000+ was “spent.”
What has really been spent for each building project and out of what funds?
It seems that it all depends on what the meaning of “spent” is.
What is left out of the capital improvement bond issue? No one will say.
There may be nothing left. There may be a lot left. There is no accountability for these funds.
Surely, someone has a complete itemization of what has been spent on each project and where that money came from.
With problems ranging from violation of state law to apparently creating a false document and passing it off as an official governmental record to secure release of CDBG sewer grant funds, one thing is quite obvious.
The Mayor will do anything—absolutely anything-- to try and get the heat off of himself.
And that, in a nutshell, is why Mayor David Purkey becomes upset and reacts with emotional outbursts at every financial question.
He can not and will not answer for the above abuses of his office, favoritism shown to certain non-profits, and for his failure to provide an itemized accounting for the use of county funds on capital improvements.
He reacts with invective for the following reasons:
Because I said that county spending was out of control and that there was no accountability for county finances, and I was right.
Because I spearheaded the initiative to bring in the state auditors who issued more findings citing problems in Hamblen County finances in 2003 than in any other county in the state (and the written findings were just the “reported” problems).
Because I have verified information and found out that many misstatements of fact have been made and that the Mayor has taken it upon himself to act as a dictator in selecting certain non-profit friends to cover under the county’s insurance plan, creating false documents, approving change orders and releases of liens without getting commission approval, and shifting money wherever he chooses without the required approval of county commission and without even the courtesy of notification after-the-fact.
Mr. Purkey’s anger and vindictiveness are typical of many, but thankfully not all, of those in positions of power.
The Mayor says that he is the county’s chief financial officer. Well, it’s time for the County Mayor to take care of the county’s finances.
The devil is in the details.
Obviously, in looking at the details of county finances and sorting things out and exposing a lack of accountability, I have angered Mayor Purkey.
Well, my loyalty is to the taxpayers and citizens of Hamblen County, and I will continue to serve them as I complete my term of office and as I return to private life.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment