On a motion from councilman Randall “Chump” Hanvey, seconded by council member Kacie Petrie, the finance committee voted unanimously to retroactively authorize the expenditure of roughly $1.5 million in fund balance and rollover funds and general obligation bond proceeds to pay for the construction of the complex. The committee, which is composed of all six council members, took the action in response to a request from Supervisor Tommy Sinclair who has been conducting research to determine the actual cost of construction for the complex, the funding sources involved and the authorization of financing of the project.
Sinclair said the construction of the complex cost $6,413,793.82, including building of the facility by Sossamon Construction ($5,386,857.32), grading by Gramling Brothers Contracting Inc. ($572,436.50) and the design and supervision of the project by Alliance Consulting ($454,500). Minutes from council meetings presented by Sinclair show council members voted unanimously on Sept. 12, 2007, to award the bid for grading to Gramling Brothers for $559,679.20 and on Aug. 22, 2008, to award the bid for the actual construction to Sossamon for $5,601,000.
The project was financed by a combination of public and private funds including:
• $2,387,857.34 in 2007 General Obligation Bond proceeds
• $2,017,023.38 from the county’s General Fund balance
• $5,000 in Sports Complex funds
• $504,921.08 donated by the Timken Foundation
• $1,479.22 in Park Beautification funds
• $689,164 allocated by the City of Union
• $183,305 in C-Funds
• $100,015.76 in private donations
• $40,000 Playground Grant
• $112,159.28 in Rollover Funds
• $118,126.81 in proceeds left over from a 1991 General Obligation Bond issue
• $110,704.37 in proceeds left over from a 1992 General Obligation Bond issue
• $112,019.58 in proceeds left over from a 2001 General Obligation Bond issue
While council authorized the issuance of the 2007 General Obligation Bond to help fund the construction of the complex, Sinclair said he could find no record of it authorizing the use of the proceeds left over from the other three bond issues or the use of the rollover funds for the project. As for the $2,017,023.38 from the county’s General Fund balance, Sinclair said in an Aug. 13 meeting of the finance committee, the use of up to $1 million in fund balance monies was authorized. He could not, however, find any record council had approved taking another $1 million from the fund balance for the project.
Though the money has already been spent and the complex built, Sinclair said council members never administratively directed the spending of the balance of the funds involved. He said in discussing this matter with attorneys and auditors he was advised council should vote to authorize the expenditures of the monies that were used but never formally authorized. Sinclair added council authorization was not needed for the expenditure of the donations by Timken and other private donors or the grants and other funds used for the complex. He said this was because these had been designated by the parties involved specifically for use in the construction of the facility.
As to why the authorization was never given, Sinclair, who has been supervisor for less than two months, said he did not know. Council’s most senior member, finance committee chairman Dora Martin also didn’t know.
“Maybe it was not brought up to us,” Mrs. Martin said. “Or maybe it was brought up and we just don’t have the minutes to prove it right now.”
Mrs. Martin did, however, defend the cost of the complex comparing it to having a contractor hired to work on a house whose initial cost estimate increases as work progresses. She said, nevertheless, the work proceeds because the house must be completed and the same, she said, was true for the complex.
In making his motion, Hanvey said he was in favor of authorizing the funds because he was proud of the complex.
Located at the intersection of Rice Avenue Extension and Industrial Park Road on land donated by Timken, the complex includes seven baseball and softball fields of varying size; a playground area for smaller children; a walking path; batting cages and set aside bullpens; and concession stands. The complex has not formally opened but people are already using its walking trails and some 20 athletic tournaments are scheduled to be played there.
Clerk Of Court
The committee also voted unanimously to authorize Sinclair to use county funds to make any potential shortfall in a fund administered by the Clerk of Court’s office.
An internal audit conducted by former clerk of court June Miller at the behest of Clerk of Court Freddie Gault has found a shortfall of $28,179.59 in the “bond received fund.” The fund is administered by the clerk of court’s office and financed by fines and fees levied by the General Sessions, Common Pleas and Family courts. The audit was initiated by Gault after he took office late last year and discovered that a report on the fund had not been made in 13 months. It is the responsibility of the clerk’s office to send reports and the funds generated by the fines and fees to the State Treasurer each month.
The reporting process was handled by Gault’s predecessor, Brad Morris, who resigned in October less than a month before being arrested by SLED and charged with embezzling $200,000 from office in the first 10 months of 2009. Gault has declined to speculate on why his predecessor did not keep up with the reports to the Treasurer. He has, however, said he expects the shortfall found by Mrs. Miller to grow as she completes her audit and that while his office is currently able to meet its obligations he may need may need help from the county in the future.
It was with this in mind Sinclair went before the committee to ask for authorization to use money from the county fund balance to help the clerk of court meet obligations if help is required. He said he would make regular reports to council on the situation as it develops in the months ahead.
Sinclair said he will also be going to Columbia to meet with the State Treasurer to discuss the possibility of the state helping the county make good the $200,000 Morris allegedly embezzled. While the county could get back up to $100,000 of the embezzled funds through an insurance policy it has on Morris, the possibility exists that it may have to cover the remaining funds on its own. To prevent this from happening, Sinclair said he will ask that the state share in the cost of making good the losses. He pointed out the state did not notify the county about Morris’ failure to send in his monthly reports and therefore it is at least partially its fault the situation went on as long as it did.
Post a Comment
