How to handle the Seperation of Duties from the remedies offered in the 2014 State Audit

fdorwanjuly46Submitted by Dennis Orwan(935)
Contributor
October 31, 2015 - 9:29am

How is the next City Council & Mayor going to handle and create a policy for the Seperation of Duties remedy stated in the 2014 State Audit that the current Council & Mayor agreed to and was accepted by the State?

This is a big question for the next Council & Mayor! This type of oversight issues determines the credibility of the City as a whole!!!!!

It is really hard to start on this type of problem when the current City Council  appointed a City Clerk without doing a background check, reference check, completing and signing a declaration sheet, or signing a confidentiality agreement with the City. All of the information I found on the current City Clerk was on the internet and is public information. The rest of the information was gathered by calling the towns that she was  removed from her appointments. It is clear that the City of Lorimor and the elected officials dropped the ball on this one!

The remedy  in the 2014 Audit was clear and to the point. The City has to create oversight on anyone handling public funds. I don't know how you can have a full time City Clerk and create the oversight needed. I believe there needs to be a part time City Clerk, part time Utility Clerk and a Secretary to set up the agenda, attend any meeting that is set, and take an accurate set of minutes to be published, put on assigned bulliton boards, or handed out in the Utility Bills which are signed by the City Clerk and Mayor before distribution. The minutes have to be signed by the City Clerk to certify the minutes and by the Mayor to certify that everything is in the Minutes per State Statute!

The person recieving the funds collected can not be the person dispersing the public funds. The person balancing the accounts can't recieve funds or disperse the funds.  The person or group assigned to balance the accounts is responsable for initialing the accounts to show the audit has been completed and a written report should be done as a matter of record.

You could do this with two part time appointees if some one on the council would be assigned the duties. This is a big problem and should be solved before the review audit is done.

This is one of the reasons I am running for City Council!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

 

Groups:

Comments

Dennis Orwan25 weeks 3 days ago

Seperation of Duties and Oversight

After having a meeting with the new City Council that will be taking office in January (2016), it sounds like having 2 part time people in the City office who handle public funding will be enough to cover the seperation of duties and create the oversight needed if the Mayor takes control of the city appointees and city employee. This is the major area in all of the state audits that I have read up to this date that needs to be corrected to satisfy the state, the insurance company, and other agencies that control how a city entity should operate.

A written hiring policy put into place by a resolution of the City council and adopted into are ordinances, should be put in place for this Council and any future Council to adhere to. One of the reasons for the petition for a State Audit and change of Council and mayor, was lack of oversight in appointing a City Clerk and City Worker without a background check, referense check, and not having a declaration sheet signed by City Clerk or City Worker.

The City Clerk at the time didn't have a bond as required by State statute. It was obtained after the fact. I believe the current City Council shouldn't have accepted that bond. If the City is going to accept and pay for the  bond, it should be with the Insurance company that provides the insurance for the City. The City didn't even have the insurance coverage for employee theft or dishonesty in place for anything the current city clerk handled. The insurance company wouldn't under-write that part of the policy. The lack of this coverage left the City and City Council people individualy liable for anything the current City Clerk or City Worker did wrong. That part of the insurance coverage needs to be put back in place. If the only way that coverage is put back into place is by removing the current City Clerk, that is just going to have to be the way it is. The bonding issue should also be put in and be part of the Hiring Policy language. The City should have the choice of paying or having the appointees for handling public funding pay for their own bond.