I am thoroughly confused at this point.  "We" hired an accountant (with no accounting degree).  "We" knew of the problems already and yet have still not reconciled the books.  The BOS were not notified of any problems.  This is the part that I am confused about:  Is Andrews now hiring someone to research further how screwed up the books are? 

As an aside, if the accountant (with no degree) was using old practices, that is NO excuse.  Clearly if there is a problem you don't continue to go about business in the same 'ole fashion!  But the problem here is that she reports to somebody.  Someone who reports to the BOS who also report to US the taxpayers.  How is it that no one knew there was such a serious problem?  Clearly there is a disconnect here.  Ofcourse we all know that sh*t rolls down hill...


Ah, and of course for all the die hard Begley and Schneider fans:  Let's not forget, they think we are have great fiscal responsibility!

Menrva wrote:

Could the new accounting firm be like our lawyers and say what ever Andrews wants them to say -- result a nice coverup.

Nice catch, Menrva. Yes, look at the recent history of Wall Street, which cratered and cost taxpayers billions when regulators and rating agencies, who knew which side their bread was buttered, pretended they saw nothing. Bernie Madoff was prosecuted and no one else.

Last edited by billw (2011-04-02 13:11:17)

Larry, I am always impressed with how clearly you can see and assess things. I don't know what you do for a living (I know its a long commute) but if we are going to look for a new TA, I wonder if you could take the job. It would probably be a lot of work until things were straightened out but it would be close to home. And think how many people it would drive over the edge when Larry McDonald takes the reins.

http://www.southcoasttoday.com/apps/pbc … 015/TOWN14



By ANIKA CLARK
aclark@s-t.com
April 02, 2011 12:00 AM

A Wareham selectman has called for the dismissal of the town accountant and/or the resignation of the town administrator after a draft audit report showed a six-figure fiscal discrepancy.

"There's a $919,000 variance between the treasurer's cash balance and the accountant's general ledger. That's the ... financial deficiency that currently exists as of June 30, 2010," said James Powers, a partner at Powers & Sullivan Certified Public Accountants, the Wakefield company that performed the fiscal year 2010 audit. "We're not sure exactly how that occurred," he said, although he said it represents a problem with internal controls.

Regardless, "the treasurer's balances were correct. The general ledger balances needed to be adjusted," Powers said. "You needed to reduce cash on the general ledger to match the treasurer's balance."

While the roughly $919,000 could have resulted from "insufficient cash procedures within fiscal year 2010," the issue is most likely the result of "many years of insufficient procedures," according to the auditor's report that was given to the town recently.

Selectman Cara Winslow said she was "stunned speechless" to learn of the matter Wednesday at a joint meeting of the Board of Selectmen and Finance Committee.

"The real issue here ... is not about the $919,000. The real issue is that we were not advised of this deficiency," said Winslow, who called for Town Accountant Elizabeth Zaleski's dismissal and/or Town Administrator Mark Andrews' resignation in a letter to the editor of the Wareham Week.

"During the audit, the auditor informed us that to date, in the current fiscal year, FY '11, the town accountant is still not reconciling and we were not advised of that either," Winslow said.

Zaleski could not be reached for comment.

Saying he has no intention of resigning, Andrews called the problem "a most serious matter."

But "the cash is in the bank. It's not like ... somebody came in and took the cash and absconded with it. That's not the case because otherwise it would have been turned over to the appropriate agency," Andrews said. "I've commissioned Powers & Sullivan to do a thorough investigation, which has begun, to research further the accounting links and to begin to put in a fiscal recovery plan with the town accountant's office."

The investigation should yield more information in coming weeks, according to Andrews, who said he didn't immediately know how much the probe would cost.

"As a result of the multitude of errors discovered with in (sic) the general ledger we have been working with the Town to conduct a complete reconciliation of all special, capital, trust and agency accounts," a draft management letter written by the auditor states. " ... A further refinement of the reconciliation process may uncover additional adjustments in FY2011."

Selectman Stephen Holmes commended Town Treasurer/Collector John Foster. And while saying it's not his personality to have a "trigger finger," he said the discrepancy needs to be resolved before this month's Town Meeting.

Meanwhile, Selectman M. Jane Donahue took issue with part of Winslow's letter.

Winslow's description of a $919,000 financial deficiency "is a mis-characterization of the problem. It makes it sound like we are short $919,900 in cash and the auditor very carefully explained that that was not the case," she said. "I think that what happened is that we had a system that was set up incorrectly. ... We had taken action to correct that system and we're looking forward to FY11's results."

Bonnie Cottuli, a member of the Finance Committee, similarly pointed to historical problems with the town's accounting system.

"With the upgrade to the accounting system, going into the future, these things won't happen," she said. "At least that's the goal."

As for the call to dismiss Zaleski or ask for Andrews' resignation?

"They inherited this problem. They didn't make the problem," Cottuli said. Zaleski "was handed what I thought was a mess and she has done the best she can possibly do with that. She has solved issue upon issue upon issue."

Asked how big of a problem the discrepancy was, Powers' response was short:

"I think the numbers speak for themselves."

No surprise to me at all that Cottuli's "opinion" supports the Donahue's (again). I don't think I've seen one time she made a decision that didn't "just happen" to agree with them .. And when I once tried to "make light" of her irritating tendency to speak "condescendingly" to people who disagree with her..and say "m'kay?" every eighth word or so...who went on Bobo's site to "defend her honor"? John "Boy" Donahue (that's who). I expect more from a FinCom member than loyalty to the Donahue's on every important issue. You want a FinCom member who will "tell it like it (really) is"? Ask Bronk or Paulsen next time..(Not Cottuli).

Thanks Liz..for posting the story.

Last edited by DDPTRO (2011-04-03 11:02:40)

another person to go should be miles burke ,either get the proper licences or you will have to go.                                                                                             lLETTING THE TA GO IS A PROBLEM IN GETTING A  GOOD TA BECAUSE WE HAVE LET A LOT OF  TOWN ADMIERSTRATORS  GO, BUT WE WILL HAVE TO BITE THE BULLIT.                                                                                      I THINK THE CIVEL SERVICE SHOULD SENT A TEMP. POLICE CHIEF TO WAREHAM INSTEAD OF PUTTING SOME ONE FROM WAREHAM IN TEMPORALYAND KEEP THE POLITICS OUT OF THIS , THE EXAM SHOULD BE OPEN TO THE WHOLE STATE.                                                                                      ALSO PEOPLE ON THE  FINANCE COMMITE LIKE COTTUI AND OTHER JAYNE AND BRENDA BUMB KISSERS  SHOULD RESIGN.

Great post, Larry.