Balancing the County’s Budget Deficits
on the Backs of Children By Ray A. March
Part 30
June 30, 2009
June 30, 2010
The Warnings Keep Coming
Note the dates, they appear similar and can be overlooked: June 30, 2009 and June 30, 2010.
An example of fiscal Russian roulette being played in Modoc County can be found in two consecutive outside audits of the Children and Families Commission, now under the flag of First 5.
The audits for fiscal years ending in 2009 and 2010 strongly advise the commission that it runs the risk of losing all its Prop 10. Trust Fund deposits with the county treasury.
For two years in a row the outside audit firm made this repeated exact statement:
“The commission maintains its cash in the Modoc County Treasury, which is not insured or collateralized…the total amount of pooled funds invested by all agencies in the Modoc County treasury exceeds the amount of cash available.
“This is a result of a significant deficit balance in Modoc County’s portion of the pooled cash in the county treasury due to negative cash balances in some County of Modoc funds. The county has been able to provide all funds requested by the commission and is in the process of rectifying the situation.
“However, as long as cash is not available for all pooled fund balances in the county treasury, the commission is at risk for not being able to recover its deposits.” (Italics added).
The total amount of Prop. 10 cash in the county treasury in 2009 was $523,444. In 2010 the amount was $491,626, according to the audit report submitted by Haws, Theobald & Allman of Susanville and Chester.
For the last fiscal year 2010-11 the total revenue received was $434,458.91, according to Treasurer Cheryl Knoch.
Next: Part 31
In summation, an analysis
8 comments:
Isnt there any other news that can go on this site? I only check back on this site rarely and its the same issues with the same 5 or 6 people commenting, mix it up please! This has become a one issue web site!
Also notice from the audits, that First 5 has received new revenues of $ 455,707.00 and $ 441,575.00 for 2008-2009 and 2009-2010 fiscal years, and both years they ran deficits so all received monies were spent. This would appear to mean that no child has been deprived because of the County deficit problem.
However, a question is why First 5 is holding about $ 400,000.00 in the Treasury. Why was this money not spent? I presume that it was accumulated in the early years before any grants were approved (In 1999-2000 they reported about $215,611.00 in revenue and few expenses).
Greg Small
Fort Bidwell
Greg, the First 5 money is being held in in the treasury - not by First 5, but by the county - most likely to provide cash-flow, and to make the books look better than they actually are.
Greg - if there is that much First 5 cash still in the county treasury, it begs a few questions:
1) Why haven't they been paying all along for these more complete audits that would have shown the misuse of funds more clearly?
2) If that amount of taxpayer cash has been found to be just laying around unspent, how much more of the Prop. 10 funds have been illegally borrowed (and not repaid) over the years that we don't know about?
After all, First 5 has been claiming since their inception that they do not have the funds to keep track of the taxpayers dollars as required by law.
Seems like the commissioners and the Auditor/Treasurer/CAO/County school superintendent thought that the county treasury slush-fund may have needed the First 5 money more than the children of Modoc county did.
They certainly have proven that they didn't want it spent on any kind of fiscal accountability.
Greg,
Thank you! 10:48 ditto! This seems to be a bully site.....not actual news...I love modoc.
11:37PM - Not actual news? Then the Attorney General is just vacationing up here, investigating all the bully's?
Modoc is great - but this spending taxpayer cash and putting your neighbors into debt without their say-so is not.
If the local paper had reported this ongoing borrowing which created this debt when it began over ten years ago, we wouldn't be in the crummy financial shape that we're in right now.
"Rural towns aren't always idyllic. It's easy to feel trapped and be aware of social hypocrisy."
~ Bill Pullman
Well 11:37PM, let us look at the definition of bully:
"1. A person who is habitually cruel or overbearing, especially to smaller or weaker people.
2. A hired ruffian; a thug.
3. A pimp.
v. bul•lied, bul•ly•ing, bul•lies
v.tr.
1. To treat in an overbearing or intimidating manner. See Synonyms at intimidate.
2. To make (one's way) aggressively.
v.intr.
1. To behave like a bully.
2. To force one's way aggressively or by intimidation
Looking at the dictionary, it seems clear that the only bullying going on has been done by the county officials and others involved in the misappropriation and its cover-up; and not by any postings that are seen on this blog.
And while I agree with you about Modoc's good qualities, I also agree with the poster on another thread who mentioned that we have had about $20 million dollars too much of these county officials kind of "help."
If people from the county and the newspaper are so proud of their good deeds in overspending our money, then why didn’t they do it all out it in the open in the first place? Why the secrets? And why not explain to us why they did it?
Post a Comment