Giles Free Speech Zone

The purpose of the "Giles Free Speech Zone" is to identify problems of concern to the people of Giles County, to discuss them in a gentlemanly and civil manner, while referring to the facts and giving evidence to back up whatever claims are made, making logical arguments that avoid any use of fallacy, and, hopefully, to come together in agreement, and find a positive solution to the problem at hand. Help make a difference! Email "mcpeters@usit.net" to suggest topics or make private comments.

Saturday, December 15, 2007

Petition to repeal Financial Management Act

The recent audit of the county reveals many violations, some are habitual violations. Most of these violations and each of the habitual violations will be corrected by the next audit for one simple reason, implementation of the Financial Management Act of 1981, overwhelmingly voted for by the people of Giles County in the last election.

From the beginning, when two lone ladies sat in the courthouse day after day getting signatures and explaining the benefits of the Act, it has been under attack by those more interested in their own power and financial gains than in the well-being of the county as a whole. The Act was adopted and efforts to sabotage it began almost immediately. Money was spent unnecessarily (it should have cost a total of less than twenty thousand dollars to set up the Financial Management Office), rumors were spread about the cost, poor communication between governmental offices created fear and resistance, the interview process was twisted and subverted but the people had spoken and those on the commission who could see the tremendous long term benefits to the county persevered and the Act began to be implemented.

Now the Financial Management Act of 1981 is again under attack by a group led by those more concerned about their personal power base than the well being of the county as a whole. Many in the school system have reported feeling intimidated by supervisors seeking their signatures for the petition. Government employees have reported the same feeling of being forced into signing the petitions. Led by a County Commissioner fearful of losing his power to manipulate the budget to benefit his pet projects and friends and a former Highway Commissioner that, through his vindictiveness and disregard for the law and what was decent, already has cost this county untold (only those who won the law suit against him and the county know the price the county paid and they are ordered to silence on the matter) thousands. These men using misinformation, fear and intimidation if successful will cost the county millions and unnumbered audit violations in the years to come. If approached to sign this petition challenge the petitioner to explain how this act will hurt the county when in every county it has been properly implemented in that county has saved thousands of dollars each year and avoided violations in the annual audits. It’s your money why let others spend anymore than is absolutely necessary?

Friday, December 14, 2007

Two Questions Asked At School Board Meeting That Go Unanswered?

In reference to the $10,000.00 fine from the state for a continual tardiness in getting payroll information in on time. "Will there be any disciplinary action taken against the employee responsible for this situation?"

In reference to persons in school management positions going to those who work under their supervision and seeking them to sign their petition to recall the Financial Management Act of 1981.
In light of the conflict of ethics and the employees feeling "pressured to sign" will this Board prohibit this action and inform those managers to stop this behavior?"

2007 AUDIT FOR GILES COUNTY

I realize this is a long post but it is well worth reading. Please post your responses for after all it is your money. Allen Barrett

RESULTS OF AUDIT ENDING 30 JUNE 2007

UNCORRECTED FINDINGS FROM PRIOR AUDITS:
COUNTY: Government wide financial statements were not presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.

COUNTY EXECUTIVE: Office had deficiencies in purchasing procedures.

DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS: 1. Had deficiencies in purchasing procedures. 2. Office had accounting deficiencies.

OTHER FINDINGS: Duties were not segregated adequately in the Offices of Highway Commissioner, Director of Schools, Trustee, Clerk and Master, and Register.

SUMMARY OF AUDITORS RESULTS:

1. An adverse opinion was issued on the financial statements of Giles County.

2. The audit of the financial statements of Giles County and the Giles County School Department disclosed significant deficiencies in internal control. One of the deficiencies was considered to be a material weakness for the Giles County School Department.

3. Audit disclosed significant deficiencies in internal control over major programs.

FINDINGS GILES COUNTY:

Finding 07.01 - Giles County financial statements are not presented in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, thus we have issued an adverse opinion on its fincial statements.

FINDING 07.02 – 1. The office had deficiencies in purchasing procedures. ITEM 2. Office issued purchase orders after purchases were made.

OFFICE OF DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS

Finding 07-03 – The office had deficiencies in purchasing procedures. ITEM 1. In several instances purchase orders were issued after purchases were made. ITEM 2. In several instances disbursements were made without proper documentation of purchases. ITEM 3. Competitive bids were not solicited for sidewalks $15,100 built at two schools during the 2006-2007 year.

MANAGEMENT RESPONSE- DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS: ITEM 1 Board of Education implemented purchasing procedures effective July 1, 2006 to provide more accountability and improved internal control. We are continuing to improve internal controls within our purchasing procedures to insure that purchase orders are not issued after purchases have been made. ITEM 2 We realize this is an area of concern and have established improved internal controls requiring documentation at the time a purchase order is requested.

Finding 07-04 – The office had accounting deficiencies audit disclosed. ITEM 1. Post-employment medical insurance benefits were not paid in compliance with the School Department’s negotiated agreement with employees. The agreement provides for the School Department to pay for retiree’s medical insurance premiums up to a maximum of $2,880.00 per year. Insurance premiums paid on seven retired employees exceeded this maximum by amounts ranging from $324.00 to $2,186.00. The total amount paid in excess of maximum of the year ended June 30, 2007 was $8,409.00. ITEM 2. Our examination disclosed a total of 223 journal entries that were posted to the general ledgers for the four funds maintained by the School Department. Many of these journal entries were not adequately explained. Such a high number of journal entries indicates weakness in internal controls over the recording of financial transactions. Fifty-four of these entries were to correct previous entries. In addition to these entries accounting personnel used the cash disbursements journal and the cash receipts journal to make various adjustments to the general ledger. The cash dispersements and cash receipts journals should not be used to adjust the general ledger. ITEM 3. Financial records of the general purpose school fund reflected a reservation of fund balance for the Basic Education Program (BEP) totaling $697,729.00 at June 30, 2007. However school personnel were unable to provide any documentation to support this reservation of fund balance. Our examination disclosed that there was no reserve for BEP at June 30, 2007. ITEM 4 During the year the School Department opened an escrow account to deposit funds withheld from contractor payments as required by Section 66-11-144, Tenn. Code Annotated. The funds held in the escrow account are paid to the contractor at the conclusion of the project if the contractor fulfills the terms of the contract. At June 30, 2007 the School Department had deposited the proper amount to the escrow account, however subsequent to June 30, 2007 construction billings indicate that the School Department should have deposited an additional $42,294.00 but it actually deposited an additional $109,276.00. Future deposits to the escrow account should be reduced by the overpayment of $66,982.00.

MANAGEMENT RESPONSE - DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS: TO ITEM 2 We made every effort to decrease the number of journal entries made in the general purpose school fund and in the central cafeteria fund. Also we will try to improve the supporting documentation for journal entries. TO ITEM 4 The overall contract was never overpaid, and the project was still ongoing at June 30, 2007. The funds in question were not accessible by the contractor. The excess deposits were corrected with the payment of the next pay request after we discovered the situation. At no time was the contractor over paid. We will be more diligent in the future concerning escrow calculations and deposits during construction projects.

FINDING 07-05 OFFICE HAD DEFICIENCIES IN ADMINISTRATION OF FEDERAL GRANTS

ITEM 1 – The School Department did not designate a person to be responsible for monitoring the request and subsequent receipt of grant reimbursements. This resulted in a May 2006 reimbursement payment ($6,327.00) for the Education Technology State Grants program being mistakenly deposited into the Improving Teacher Quality State Grants program. This error went undetected until discovered by auditors in Oct.2007. ITEM 2 – During the year, the School Department received Hurricane Education Recovering Act Grant funds of $21,780.00. These funds were posted to the School Federal Projects Fund however these grant funds should have been posted to the General Purpose School Fund. School Department personnel were not aware of this error until notified by auditors in Oct. 2007.

MANAGEMENT RESPONSE DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS – ITEM 1 Federal projects grant administrators will monitor the projects that they are responsible for to ensure accurate reporting. ITEM 2 We will try to be more detail oriented in the future in regard to revenues. Sometimes there is a problem identifying specific non-recurring revenues due to revenue being reported on the monthly trustee’s repost as a total.

FINDING 07-06 EXPENDITURES EXCEEDED APPROPRIATIONS

ITEM 1 Expenditures exceeded total appropriations by the County Commission in the Central Cafeteria Fund by $19,915.00. ITEM 2 Expenditures exceeded appropriations in the Vocational Education Program ($546.00) and other Student Support ($25,998.00) major appropriation categories (the legal level of control) of the School Federal Projects Fund.

MANAGEMENT RESPONSE – DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS ITEM 1 This has not occurred in the past in the Central Cafeteria Fund and every effort will be made to ensure that this does not happen again.

FINDING 07-07 GENERAL LEDGER PAYROLL LIABILITY ACCOUNTS – ITEM 1. General ledger payroll liability accounts were not reconciled with payroll reports and payments. The failure to reconcile payroll liability accounts on a regular basis allows errors to remain undiscovered and uncorrected. Records of the School Department reflected negative account balances in 23 payroll liability accounts at June 30 2007. The failure to reconcile these accounts led to these negative account balances not being corrected.

FINDING 07-08 OTHER FINDINGS DUTIES NOT SEGREGATED ADEQUATELY IN THE OFFICES OF HIGHWAY COMMISSIONER, DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS, TRUSTEE, REGISTER AND CLERK AND MASTER.

ITEM 1 In the Director Of Schools and employee who was responsible for preparing and posting disbursements to the accounting records and reconciling disbursements with the trustee’s report also had access to the mechanical warrant signing machine for all funds administered by the Director of Schools. ITEM 2 In the Offices Of Highway Commissioner, Trustee, Register and Clerk and Master employees responsible for maintaining accounting records were also involved in receipting, depositing and/or dispersing funds.

MANAGEMENT RESPONSE

DIRECTOR OF SCHOOLS – Giles County is now under a centralized system of accounting resulting from the adoption of the County Financial Management System of 1981. This new system should ensure the segregation of duties for all county departments including the Office of Director of Schools.

REGISTER – The cost of hiring enough employees to segregate each step involved is not feasible for the Register Of Deeds Office. The budget will not allow us to increase our staff to comply with these guidelines.

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Fine For The School System???

There has been a very disturbing report that the school system recently received a $10,000.00 fine from the state for continually failing to get their payroll numbers into the state on time. If this is true, will the fine be paid from school funds? Will there be any disciplinary action taken against anyone? Will anyone be held personally responsible?

Referendum on Tax Increase

The city agreed today to hold a referendum to increase the current sales tax to a full ten cents on the dollar. Their plan is to use the increase to pay for a Five Million Dollar loan to renovate Sam Davis Park. Now, according to the Mayor, County Executive Mrs Vanzant has agreed to not seek this same increase throughout the county thus the full increase would go to the city. Now under this agreement, as it was stated today in the City Council Meeting, If the county were to impose this increase at some future date the county would reimburse the city for any lost revenue. That lost revenue would be a result of the schools and highway department being required to share in any county wide sales tax. While I appreciate Mrs Vanzants' unwillingness to impose an additional tax on the county I certainly am shocked, if it is true, that she would enter an agreement that would hog tie the county's ability, at some future date, to raise the sales tax and leave only the option to raise property taxes or service fees. Allen Barrett