#1 2010-11-04 11:58:56
Jaime Rebhan wrote:
The results of the controversial town computer audit were presented to the Board of Selectmen last week. Here's a summary of the information in an easy-to-read format.
What did the audit uncover?
Neither the town computer audit, nor the Police Department audit, uncovered anything clearly illegal...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Are current and former town officials satisfied with the results?
“I feel the results of the audit justified the audit,” said Selectmen Chair Jane Donahue. “There were more reasons to do it then not to do it.” Donahue added that she hoped there would be process and policy improvement as a result of the findings.
“My response is that forming an opinion on the results of the audit is premature at this time because we don't have the complete results yet,” former-Selectman Bruce Sauvageau said in an e-mail, indicating that further reviews of the Police data by Acting Chief Richard Stanley could reveal more significant issues. Sauvageau was the chair of the Board that initiated the audit. “The preliminary results do prove out at least two things; the majority of Wareham employees are good hard working and ethical producers and some are not, and there was in fact a pattern of very disturbing employee behavior in some instances.”
“I'm glad it's over,” said Selectman Cara Winslow, who was not on the Board at the time the audit began. “I think that Mr. Torres said it best himself when he said that, for the most part, people are abiding by the rules.”
“I'm satisfied that we closed the process down, that we have the records that we requested, so now it's a part of systematically going through those records,” said Town Administrator Mark Andrews.
Last edited by P-SPAN (2010-11-04 11:59:22)
Offline
#2 2010-11-04 12:28:31
Thousands of taxpayer dollars flushed down the toilet on a confirmed witch hunt that didn't even find a witch.
Offline
#3 2010-11-04 12:48:06
Far be it from me to add fuel to the fire......
What baffles me is that we have a Director of IT for the town, Matt Underhill. The former BOS and interim TA completely bypassed this department head, essentially ignoring the advice of the one person who could have suggested a less expensive and more competent approach. The Director of IT could have also discussed the pitfalls of the BOS approved approach, saving the town thousands of dollars in the short term and possibly thousands more in the long term. Instead, the BOS and interim IT, in their infinite wisdom, chose a more expensive path with perils at every turn.
Folks, this is why I question the leadership of our town. The path they chose leaves you scratching your head and asking why?????
Offline
#4 2010-11-04 14:21:57
What was the money spent on?
Someone should ask for a full accounting of the hours billed, and full disclosure as to the scope of the "audit".
It sounds like a joke to me. What could you spend so much money on when every question is answered with "That wasn't within the scope of the audit."?
What WAS within the scope of the audit?
If it is so limited as to prove absolutely nothing after 6 years of computer use by how many hundreds of employees, then what in the hell did you pay for?
You could have made that a civics project at the local high school for nothing.
Get your money back from that clown lawyer and whoever else took you for a big ride.
Offline
#5 2010-11-04 14:46:43
By the way, P-Span...where did you get that story? I try to go on the WW website and they say it is under repair. Is it me?
Offline
#6 2010-11-04 17:39:35
Two questions anyone..........
Are we not supposed to put large expenses out to bid? I'm sure the BOS didn't think it would be this expensive, ahem, but I would like to see the wording as to how they are able to spend like this. I'm sure there is a way to go with a no bid process, but how is that worded.
Thanks to Dan O'Connell, this phrase is constantly in my head. "Follow the money". Who chose this audit company? The Yellow Pages? Friends? Does anyone know the answer to this?
Offline
#8 2010-11-04 21:10:16
WTF?
Offline
#9 2010-11-04 22:12:36
Quick question. Audit story after audit story and never once has a "newspaper of record" sought to interview the audit's proven target and its primary victims.
Sorry, one more question. Why are y'all swallowing this shit?
Offline
#10 2010-11-04 22:22:10
You're right, Bill. The only thing in the newspapers has been that the BOS had an audit done on town computers, when all workers were given the day off, because they were looking for a variety of things, blah, blah, blah.
Why didn't anyone contact you for an interview? Why wasn't MAS asked what got her so upset? Why not interview Gifford or Joyce? Hell, why not ask each member of the BOS and Sanguinet for interviews - in depth?
You've made a good point.
Offline
