According to a story in The Spokesman-Review out of Spokane, Washington, a recently retired Chief Deputy Clerk in the Kootenai County Clerk’s Auditor office has been accused of embezzling a “sizable” amount of money. (Addendum 12-29-2010 at 06:18: From today’s Coeur d’Alene Press — Kootenai County funds stolen.)
Here are some questions for which county taxpayers ought to be demanding answers from Kootenai County Clerk Dan English: Exactly when and by whom was the alleged embezzlement detected? Who conducted independent audits (if there were any) of the County’s financial records? Were audits done by an internal auditor or a contractor* ? When were the audits done? Why wasn’t the alleged embezzlement detected before now?
* According to the LeMaster Daniels’ website, the company is now known as LarsonAllen, LLP.
One of LarsonAllen, LLP’s webpages explains the company’s services in embezzlement investigation as one component of its larger forensic accounting and fraud investigation services.
Mary, see above, I rest my case.
Comment by rochereau — December 31, 2010 @ 9:54 am
NICE was preceded by PAT (Panhandle Area Transit). If memory recalls well, a former PAT “executive” did very well using “inside connection” type self-dealing. These soi-disant “public-private” partnerships are scams, they act as slush funds to funnel monies in unaccountable fashions. The whole Panhandle Area Council structure is set up to “administer” the byzantine collection of Federal, State, Regional, County and special taxing district funds. It is a combination pork-barrel and sewer where dank smelling deals get done that would never pass scrutiny in public. At least in my humble opinion.
Comment by justinian — December 31, 2010 @ 2:19 pm
With regards to the BOCC and their “public-private partnership” with NICE:
Sayeth uber apologist for the political class, “JohnA” at another forum. In praise of stealing from all to give to the few crumbs while “public servants” or “public employee” (for those “not crazy about the term servant”) get salaries, pensions and other goodies and the very special folks with “inside connections” get to profit from the land deals and other “perks” of office.
These are the folks who have created the bubble that is bursting right in front of us. Watch as Chapter IX of the Federal Bankruptcy Code gets rolled out over the next few years and the bubble bursts. Government employment will start shrinking, and like the rolls of bankers in this last bubble or dot-com employees in the last, they will be standing in employment office lines looking for the next big deal. Good riddance, again ibn my humble opinion.
Comment by justinian — December 31, 2010 @ 2:49 pm
Justinian: At least in my humble opinion.
Your opinion should be humble because you’re full of, well that should be apparent.
You beat up the Panhandle Area Council with nothing to back it up. All PAC has done over the last 37 years is create jobs, build and develop infrastructure and build fire and police stations to protect the public. PAC is also the top grant administrator in the State, providing the expertise to fund millions of dollars of infrastructure for cities and counties throughout north Idaho. PAC has also created nine urban renewal districts, stimulating the economny of large and small cities from Riggins to Bonners Ferry.
You should keep your limited opinion to yourself, and let PAC’s record speak for itself.
Comment by JohnA — December 31, 2010 @ 6:52 pm
The Uber Apologist shouts:
Typical.
And?
Comment by justinian — December 31, 2010 @ 7:37 pm
JohnA, we are welcoming of your opinions here though many of us do not agree with you at all, so I think you should be more tolerant of our new commenter Jutsinian, even if his views differ from yours.
With that in mind, what is the connection, JohnA, between your job at PAC and the public transit fiasco that just left numerous older citizens literally standing out in the cold?
Comment by mary — December 31, 2010 @ 7:39 pm
Mary, I had two functions at PAC. For eight years, I’ve been under contract with the Kootenai County Commmissioners to be the grant administrator and planner for public transit. In that time the transit system has grown from 3,000 riders a month that had to call in when they wanted a ride to over 55,000 riders a month accessing the CityLink system for free.
I approached KMC in 2003 to keep NICE operating their demand response system, and I got the Tribe to commit to a fixed route public transit system in 2005 that is growing faster than any other in the nation.
Although you didn’t ask about urban renewal, in the meantime I’ve had the fortune to work with eight cities to create urban renewal districts from Riggins to Oldtown.
As far as the county’s contract with NICE, the latter chose to cancel it because the state of Idaho stopped their rural funding. That left the Commissioners with the daunting task of finding someone to offer paratransit services that are required of the CityLink fixed route service. I worked hard in the last few weeks with KMC to take over the special needs clients NICE was serving and I’m proud that those seeking medical transport will still have a free way to get to their treatments, via KMC.
I hope this sheds some light on my function at PAC, a company that serves the five northern counties of Idaho with economic development, grant creation and administration and SBA 504 loans.
Comment by JohnA — December 31, 2010 @ 8:02 pm
JohnA,
It sounds like all you have created is bigger government.
Comment by concerned citizen — December 31, 2010 @ 8:45 pm
And more government employees, and more government pensions. That is the nature of government. It grows.
Comment by justinian — December 31, 2010 @ 8:58 pm
Thank God that the government is here to save capitalism!
Comment by Dan — December 31, 2010 @ 9:17 pm
Indeed. Save the village – by bombing it. Save the small business, by regulating and taxing it out of existence. Gack. The sophistries of the government apologists can be hard to take.
“Your opinion should be humble because you’re full of, well that should be apparent.”
Such eloquence, such graceful language, such elevated discourse, and from one who has sucked at the public teat for decades.
An example of the sophistry – “…to over 55,000 riders a month accessing the CityLink system for free.”
FREE? What kind of juvenile idiot believes that 55,000 people ride every month for FREE? The riders didn’t pay, but the ride cost real money. And now that the audit shows the system our “Masters” arranged for us failed, they are scrambling to find more “free” money to keep the scam going.
It is time for good people to treat the scam artists and grifters who have been abusing us for decades with the scorn they deserve. And work towards an honest Grand Jury so that their ill gotten so called pensions get tapped to reimburse the taxpayer for the nasty defalcations that have been ongoing. No mercy. None.
Comment by justinian — December 31, 2010 @ 9:33 pm
So I guess government is to compete with private sector capitalism? I have to disagree, the purpose of government is NOT to grow, it is to provide “basic” service. Any more than that is socialism.
Comment by concerned citizen — December 31, 2010 @ 9:34 pm
“Any more than that is socialism.”
Simple. Succinct. Correct.
Happy New Year!
Comment by justinian — December 31, 2010 @ 10:08 pm
Let us all take a big breath, and be thankful we still have the freedom to post our thoughts.
HAPPY NEW YEAR, 2011
Comment by CC — January 1, 2011 @ 12:45 am
Like the full moon that eclipsed last month and then disappeared in the clouds, so did the civil discourse on this site. A unique and shining moment once again obscured by clouds of cynicism and critique.
I hope the new year will bring each of you some measure of happiness and good cheer.
And, by the way, for the thousands of people in Kootenai County who aren’t as blessed as we are, living in our million dollar houses and driving our big, fine vehicles, public transit is their only mode of conveyance. If that is socialism, I’m glad I ‘sucked at the public teat’ long enough to make it happen for them.
Comment by JohnA — January 1, 2011 @ 6:30 am
“… so did the civil discourse on this site.”
by the same poster who attacked my opinions with “Your opinion should be humble because you’re full of, well that should be apparent.”
Yeah, right.
As for this sophistry, “And, by the way, for the thousands of people in Kootenai County who aren’t as blessed as we are, living in our million dollar houses and driving our big, fine vehicles, public transit is their only mode of conveyance.”
What did these people do before government funded “free” transportation? Hmmm? Well, taxis, friends, and feet. That is reality. “FREE” stuff from government is not “FREE”. Worse it creates two special classes of people that rip the social fabric – a political/government employee class that now feels insulated and superior to the free market and a dependency class that feels like the free market cannot work for them.
If reality includes “…clouds of cynicism and critique.” perhaps it is because of the the swarms of government employees that harass we the people, and eat out our substance. I might add that the complainer has regularly and often defended Dan the Blind former County Clerk and every other government official ever held up to “critique” on this site. After decades in government finance he simply cannot see anything wrong in government. I wonder how long it took to clean up the books at the City?
Comment by justinian — January 1, 2011 @ 7:34 am
John A.
People on this site appreciate the information you are sharing with them. You ask for civil conversation and then you put yourself above everyone and speak down to them. Your are not “walking the talk” Mr. Austin.
John, I read your statement, “All PAC has done over the last 37 years is create jobs, build and develop infrastructure and build fire and police stations to protect the public”.
Does PAC administer construction, hire builders, lay water lines, and/or pave streets, or are they just the money people for projects?
Comment by LTR — January 1, 2011 @ 8:29 am
JohnA, I appreciate your information but I need some clarification please. I’m trying to understand what happened to leave people waiting for the NICE bus. You say the NICE bus was canceled because the State of Idaho stopped the rural funding. Why did the State do this? How much notice did the NICE people have? Did they notify their riders that this service would end?
Comment by mary — January 1, 2011 @ 9:37 am
Mary, evidently NICE funding was stopped because of an “unsatisfactory audit”. That’s all the bureaucrats have said. Heaven forbid that they give us a reason the unwashed could understand.
Comment by Ancientemplar — January 1, 2011 @ 10:05 am
Mary, the Idaho Transportion Department oversees rural funding for public transit, and they stopped that funding to NICE based on the results of an audit performed in November. Their audit has not been released. NICE notified the Commissioners that absent the rural funding they were no longer a viable company and would terminate their agreement in the urban area as of 5:00PM last Thursday.
I believe NICE made an effort to notify their rural riders of the service termination. The Commissioners likewise held a news conference to inform NICE’s riders in the urban area of the KMC phone number to call to qualify and schedule service. They are trying to make this as seamless as possible for all riders, but the abruptness of the terminations caught everyone off guard.
LTR, PAC acts like a general contractor on buildings we construct and then lease back to governments (fire and police stations) and businesses. We prepare the RFPS for the architects and engineers and supervise the construction and flow of money. When we built the maintenance facilty for lease back to Empire, it kept over 100 jobs in north Idaho.
Finally, if Justinian is referring to my time as Finance Director at CDA, he (she) should note that the city was in great shape when I left. We built up a $2 million fund balance over my nine years there, and left $1 million more in the city’s foregone tax balance. The latter occurred because we didn’t raise taxes in any one of those nine years. In the meantime, we invested millions in the city’s infrastructure, including constructing Ramsey Road and Government Way to four lanes, plus making improvements to East Sherman and Northwest Boulevard. We also removed thousands of septic tanks from the acquifer by hooking them up to the wastewater plant we expanded for that purpose. We also built a new police station and two fire stations, and acquired vast new parkland. We also put in place the funding mechanisms for the new library and Kroc Center.
The city was in great shape when I left and it remains that way today.
Comment by JohnA — January 1, 2011 @ 10:09 am
Mary,
An Idaho Public Records Law request to ITD for the November audit would be a good starting point. Presumably, PAC received a copy of the audit, so although it is not required to by law, in the spirit of transparency it should be eager to give you a copy, particularly in light of all the public officials who are listed on the PAC Annual Report for 2011 filed with the Secretary of State.
Comment by Bill — January 1, 2011 @ 10:16 am
3,000 rides a month in a county of 100,000+ people. Figure that represents both sides of the round trip, then 1,500 round trips. OK, assume that they are all daily users (probably not, but string along with me), that represents 50 people daily. So assume that the reality is 10 times that number of regulars who maybe do 2 or three trips a week – we are now up to 500 people that regularly benefit from NICE/PAT.
What was the total annual budget, including the costs of the people like John A who shuffled the papers necessary to get the grant monies from the various government who took those same monies from people like us by force? Assume – and until John A or someone else with insider knowledge speaks up, that is a number to work with is a million bucks. That comes to a subsidy of $2,000 per year per rider. We could buy them all cars for that. Or contract with taxi cab companies. Why not? Oh yeah – no government employees would be needed then. No pensions, no voter block gets built.
I would love to see real numbers – hey John, any chance you have those available?
Comment by Pariah — January 1, 2011 @ 11:11 am
The numbers for December are not out, yet, but so I don’t have the total 2010 ridership, but based on the 11 months (from memory) through November, I’m expecting roughly these numbers for the year:
TRIBE (CITYLINK) 524,000 rides
KATS (NICE) 42,000 rides
KMC 13,000 rides
So, with a budget of $1,104,000 from FTA and matching share of $425,000 from the CDA Tribe and $86,000 from the cities in the urban area, and total of roughly 579,000 rides equals a cost per federal dollar of $1.91 per ride and total cost of $2.79. That’s the lowest cost per ride of any system in Idaho and one of the lowest in the U.S. It’s even more remarkable when you figure as a free system there are no fares to lower the federal and match costs.
We expect by restructuring the former NICE contract for a new provider that we can add new fixed routes for about the same cost, which means we should see much higher numbers in 2011 and even lower cost per ride numbers.
Comment by JohnA — January 1, 2011 @ 11:46 am
Bill, PAC does not administer the ITD rural funds that NICE received, so there’s no reason for us to have the audit. We got involved only because NICE notified us that they were terminating their urban agreement with the County.
I encourage you to call ITD on Monday to see if the audit is available.
And, as a Council of Governments for the five northern counties, PAC’s Board is comprised of elected officials from those counties. PAC’s members receive free grant writing from us and other finance-related assistance.
Comment by JohnA — January 1, 2011 @ 11:53 am
FREE grant money !
It comes from TAXES. It is NOT free.
Comment by concerned citizen — January 1, 2011 @ 12:04 pm
John, is PAC a private, for-profit business? I’d appreciate it if you would post your answer on the new thread about the bus. Thank you.
Comment by mary — January 1, 2011 @ 12:23 pm
CC, as I mentioned earlier, it is a federal allocation that gives us the $1.1 million. If we don’t spend it, the money will go somewhere else. If you don’t like how your federal taxes are being spent, that’s one thing. But, to suggest that we not go and get everything that is available to us, and work with a partner like the Tribe to keep it free, is ridiculous.
Comment by JohnA — January 1, 2011 @ 12:24 pm
John you never answered Pariah’s question about NICE. You blended the answer with Citylink.
Comment by Ancientemplar — January 1, 2011 @ 1:25 pm
John I think it would be interesting to ask my question a bit differently. You are a serious booster for how everything is done in KC and CDA. At least that is how it appears. However, nothing is perfect. And as far as LCDC goes, that is spending tax dollars without a vote from the citizens. And we’re talking millions. Why is this acceptable? And why do you support, unreservedly, both KC and CDA govts. (Which certainly is your right)
Comment by rochereau — January 1, 2011 @ 1:56 pm
579,000 “rides”? Over 1,400 “rides” daily? Really?
“If we don’t spend it, the money will go somewhere else.”
Let it. We do not need either the dependency class nor the government infrastructure around it, nor the fraud and/or mismanagement that caused this “free” service to shut down or the fraud that accompanied Panhandle Area Transit – the predecessor agency. What we need are far fewer of these “grants” and the shiftless, amorphous bodies that skulk around enabling the malfeasance and misfeasance that typifies this kind of “free” operation.
Comment by justinian — January 1, 2011 @ 2:13 pm
JohnA, Please forgive me but that %1.1 million did not appear out of thin air. It was TAKEN from the taxpayers to enrich those of the “IN” crowd.
Comment by concerned citizen — January 1, 2011 @ 5:13 pm
Sorry that was supposed to be a $ not a % lol
Comment by concerned citizen — January 1, 2011 @ 5:14 pm
The following numeric references are to Idaho Code. Title 57 chapter 1 is the public depository law. 57-128 requires public moneys to be placed into a approved and designated depository by the supervising board and certified every six months 57-127. At least two accounts knowingly existed neither in a approved depository or ever certified.
57-135 requires the treasurer to submit a monthly report to the supervising board of all monies in all banks, which reports shall be examined by the supervising board at the next regular session following the filing of the same that just never included all monies in all banks and the KC BOCC knew this. Three monthly BOCC/Treasurer monthly meetings were canceled in 2010 leaving the counties finances on autopilot. When reports are made they are not timely and are generally months out.
31-2307 requires a annual statement of financial condition of county before the second Monday in January of each year, under oath, to be filed with the BOCC. This just didn’t happen at all January 2010.
31-2113 requires each county treasurer must make a detailed report at every regular meeting of the board of commissioners of his county. As stated above this did not happen every month in 2010 known to the BOCC.
31-2112 requires the treasurer must settle his accounts relating to the collection, care and disbursement of public revenue, of whatsoever nature and kind, with the auditor, on the first Monday of each month. This does not happen at that time and if it happens it is months later.
31-2112 also requires he must also make a full settlement of all accounts with the auditor annually on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of October, in the presence of the commissioners, who have a supervisory control thereof. This hasn’t happened for years known to the BOCC.
31-2304 requires the auditor must keep accounts current with the treasurer. The Counties accounts are anything but current.
31-1511requires warrants payable on demand and drawn by order of the board of county commissioners on the county treasury shall be jointly issued and signed by the county auditor and the county treasurer. The BOCC knowingly allowed an account to operate at the Auditors office with no signature of the treasurer.
31-2101.Duties of county treasurer. The county treasurer must: 1. Receive all moneys belonging to the county, and all other moneys by law directed to be paid to him, safely keep the same, and apply and pay them out, rendering account thereof as required by law.
31-2119.Custody of county money. The county treasurer must keep all moneys belonging to this state or to any county of this state in his own possession until disbursed according to law. He must not place the same in the possession of any person to be used for any purpose; nor must he loan or in any manner use or permit any person to use the same, except as provided by law; but nothing in this section prohibits him from making special deposits for the safe-keeping of the public moneys.
Known to the BOCC the Auditors office was allowed to operate a account not controlled by the Treasurer.
57-135 – – – and compared by it with the books of the treasurer at least twice a year, I have diligently searched and have not found this happened for years with again the counties finances left on autopilot.
31-2101.Duties of county treasurer. The county treasurer must: Enter no moneys received for the current year on his account with the county for the past fiscal year, until after his annual settlement for the past year has been made with the county auditor. Another Statute not followed.
31-1701 The board of county commissioners of every county shall cause to be made, annually, a full and complete audit of the financial transactions of the county. The BOCC knew all accounts were not being audited without question.
This is not the complete list does it sound like a conspiracy to you – this is a total disregard for following the law pure and simple. JohnA is this who you want and support at the helm of your organization someone who is very aware of such ongoing violations and as is much a part of it?
Comment by Appalled — January 2, 2011 @ 8:46 pm
Duty
31-1503 The board must not for any purpose contract debts or liabilities, except in pursuance of law. They must not allow any account of any county officer while he neglects or refuses to perform any duty required of him by law or is liable upon any official or other bond.
Powers and duties of the BOCC 31-802 To supervise the official conduct of all county officers, and appointed boards or commissions of the county charged with assessing, collecting, safekeeping, management or disbursement of the public moneys and revenues; see that they faithfully perform their duties; direct prosecution for delinquencies; approve the official bonds of county officers, and when necessary, require them to make reports, and to present their books and accounts for inspection.
Powers and duties of the BOCC 31-809 To examine and audit the accounts of all officers having the care, management, collection or disbursement of moneys belonging to the county, or appropriated by law, or otherwise, for its use and benefit.
The Idaho Constitution Article 18 Section 11 Duties of officers. County, township, and precinct officers shall perform such duties as shall be prescribed by law.
It is unconstitutional to not do ones duty and at the KC BOCC level they are far from it. Again is this who you want at the helm of your organization? With full knowledge this continues and they have had for years a staff of full time attorneys at their disposal doing what I might ask? Those concerned owes the public the wages they have been paid.
Comment by Appalled — January 2, 2011 @ 8:46 pm
WOW It sounds like the County Treasurer Tom Malzahn’s performance should come under the microscope of Opencda.com. Sure looks like he’s a little remiss in performing his duties. Maybe he’s just too busy.
Comment by Ancientemplar — January 3, 2011 @ 3:00 pm
Ancientemplar,
But hasn’t that become the “norm” for ALL government employees hired,elected and/or appointed? To get paid/benefits/retirement even when they do NOT do their job? After all, that IS why they need assistants as well. Not that the assistants do their job either since they TOO are on OUR dime. Yet, we MUST increase funding due to short falls each year.
Comment by concerned citizen — January 3, 2011 @ 3:14 pm
Yes Sadly.
Comment by Ancientemplar — January 3, 2011 @ 7:43 pm
Any word yet on this? I thought a decision would be out by the end of this week?
Comment by Stebbijo — January 7, 2011 @ 10:52 am
concerned citizen and Ancientemplar,
I disagree that all government employees do not do their jobs. There are employees in the City and County who are not only doing their jobs as well as they can, but they’re trying very hard to clean up the neglect and messes left by others. Often we don’t see those good employees, because they are doing what their jobs require and we expect. The good employees want to be rid of the bad ones as much as we want to be rid of them.
Stebbijo,
No word yet. I hope the Bonner County prosecutor is diligently and objectively looking at all the information he’s been given. The decision to recommend charging or not charging is one of the most important decisions a prosecutor can make, and it needs to be done deliberately and objectively.
Comment by Bill — January 7, 2011 @ 11:31 am
“WOW It sounds like the County Treasurer Tom Malzahn’s performance should come under the microscope of Opencda.com” How true that is!
Comment by Appalled — January 7, 2011 @ 11:41 am
The KC Treasurer monthly uses two different single page reports titled “Statement of Treasurers Cash” and “Cash Flow” The October 2010 “Statement of Treasurers Cash” Balance is $352.688.30 and the “Cash Flow” Balance is $354,766.
For months the “Statement of Treasurers Cash” has listed the exact same amount of cash on hand that is always $11,388.00. Apparently that never varies from department to department or officials at the end of any week, month, or year. This report generally lists an area for corrections that is always in the tens of thousands and is always without explanation.
Several recent “Cash Flow” reports lists a flat fee by monthly payroll amount of $1,100,000 and for several consecutive months it is the same exact figure. How does that come out so even and is unchanged when the deputy auditor just retired and others quit, get fired, and also retire? It is impossible and must be some sort of estimate rounded to the nearest one hundred thousandth or something?
Under disbursements is Accounts Payable listing consecutively the following flat fees 10/8/10 $1,377,000 – 10/15/10 $1,044,000 – 10/29/10 $336,000 – 11/5/10 $362,000 – 11/12/10 $1,100.000 – 11/19/10 $810,000 – 11/26/10 $810,000 11/26/10 $484,000 – 12/3/10 $338,000 – 12/10/10 $431,000 – 12/17/10 $647,000 – 12/23/10 $545,000 then finally on 12/30/10 360,257.
No 11/12/10 is not a typo $1,100.000 is listed on that date twice once for Accounts Payable and the other for Payroll. Generally not a rounded number for District Remittance but 12/10/10 lists $1,500,000 and is followed by $1,100,000 for payroll on that same date. How do all of these transactions show up with all of these flat fee amounts? This report is the one that is given to the BOCC to examine and a prosecutor hasn’t attended regular BOCC/Treasurer meetings until last month for the first time still apparently all is well according to their review.
It was the occassional flat fee amounts that first caught my attention with what Sandy was doing and Tom’s results is many times what she was doing in so far as flat fee accounting practices.
Comment by Appalled — January 7, 2011 @ 11:44 am