Stormy sessions continue over finance department

Another Monday, another stormy session with Whitman County commissioners discussing the future of the county’s financial oversight.

Commission Chair Greg Partch, who is also the acting director of the finance department, unveiled a plan to redirect functions from the essetnially defunct finance department across four county offices.

Discussion of the plan came with a heavy dose of confrontation between the three commissioners.

“The finance department no longer is an entity,” said Partch. “We’re breaking it up.”

Last week, Coker revoked consent to have commissioners oversee preparation of the county’s financial statements and preliminary budget.

In doing so, she asked for the authority and funding to fill the four positions in the finance department.

Commissioners then agreed to let Coker hire a new finance director that would work under the auditor.

That position appears to be all the auditor will get.

The plan put forth by Partch would re-apportion the finance department’s four positions and $261,097 budget to the auditor, treasurer, information technology and commissioners.

A county administrator position would be created to act as the commissioners’ finance guru.

Esther Wilson, sole remaining employee in the finance department, identified and apportioned finance department duties at Partch’s request.

Partch noted the plan was a preliminary draft. He said he wanted a document that would “push” forth the process of restructuring the finance department.

“I don’t want to be pushed,” said Commissioner Michael Largent.

Largent said he appreciated efforts to advance the situation, but wanted to confer with Auditor Eunice Coker and Treasurer Bob Lothspeich before committing to a course of action.

“To me, input from those other officials is critical,” he said.

Under Wilson’s proposal, budget for the auditor’s finance director would be $64,323. The plan dedicated a budget of $89,453 for the commissioners’ finance director.

More duties would be performed by the recently-created systems administrator position in the IT department. Another position would work for the treasurer.

Coker Tuesday criticized the plan as being insufficient.

“One person is not enough to do this,” she said. “There’s no reason for a finance department under the commissioners to exist.”

Prosecutor Denis Tracy late last month advised state law puts responsibility for year-end financial statements and budget preparation on the auditor.

Partch said he wanted another interpretation, so he asked Wilson to review state laws regarding commissioners’ financial responsibility.

“RCW (Revised Code of Washington) clearly gives the commissioners the responsibility of management of county funds and finances and RCW clearly gives the auditor the task of reporting that activity,” Wilson wrote in an e-mail early Monday morning to Partch and Commissioner Pat O’Neill.

Partch said he asked her to look into the law because “she’s a whiz at research.”

The possibility of having another elected official impact those responsibilities means commissioners need their own financial agent.

“We have a good auditor now, but it has happened in the past,” said Partch.

Largent said it is the commissioners’ responsibility to make sure that does not happen.

“If it’s a matter of controlling that position because we don’t work well with the auditor, we need to work on our relationship with the auditor,” said Largent.

Coker said she, as auditor, would not report financial management without verifying its legitimacy. To do that, she would need more than one employee, she said.

Wilson is running against Coker for auditor.

Largent took umbrage at the fact Wilson e-mailed the plan and her legal findings to Partch and O’Neill.

“I don’t get it with Esther. Why is she excluding me from information?” asked Largent. “She seems to be under the impression that I’m not a part of the commission.”

Partch said he had wanted Wilson to only e-mail the plan to him, adding he was disappointed she sent the plan to O’Neill.

“But I’m not sure there was any ill-intent there,” said Partch.

“I’m not concerned about your intent,” replied Largent. “I’m concerned about her’s.”

Commissioner O’Neill started the meeting by reading a prepared statement that accused Largent of obstructing the finance discussion.

“Commissioner Largent, it seems to me that you must have your own plan to move forward in terms of rebuilding the finance department,” he read. “It also seems to me that you are stalling progress toward solutions.”

As he moved within inches of his face, Largent called O’Neill’s statement, “lacking in fact, disingenuous and self-serving.”

Largent said he has relayed all pertinent information from discussions with other officials, but not all those discussions have been “necessarily fruitful.”

To improve their communication, commissioners changed their meeting procedures Monday.

Discussion of the finance department restructuring will now be held at the commissioners’ official bench, with minutes being taken by Clerk Maribeth Becker.

Previously, such sessions have been held in their conference room.

“In there a lot of times we talk as if you guys weren’t around,” Partch told reporters in the audience.

All three criticized media reports of their meeting last week. News reports, including one in the Gazette, said commissioners had “decided” at the workshop session to let Coker hire a new finance director.

While all three agreed on the proposal, they took no official action.

Those accounts, they said, could have been interpreted as an official decision made in an informal workshop setting.

The state’s Open Public Meetings Act forbids decisions being made outside official meetings.

Partch and O’Neill are currently facing recall proceedings stemming from alleged violations of the act.

A possible vote on Wilson’s plan was added in red ink to the commissioners’ two-week agenda hung on the bulletin board inside their offices. No such revision was made to their agenda posted on the county’s web site.

Largent criticized that revision.

“I have an agenda in front of me,” he said. “And things have changed. We have to make sure the agenda is transparent and known to the public.”