i think we'd find even more disturbing news if they audited the Sheriff and his finances

As I read this article Vince Capell called the county auditor a liar.
Why isn't this commission being audited as a part of the city audit?

because it is not a city government entity? Why should the city be responsible for the entire cost of something affecting the city and the county? That'd be like asking the county to pay for something only benefitting the city, I'm sure your rural communities wouldn't take too kind to that.

Joetowner
Did you know the city only pays 40% of the operating costs of the LEC. They own 50% of the building. You need to get the city to give you a break on your property taxes!

What a perfect example of county and city officials taking political cover from a lack of effective management and oversight that is a primary responsibility of their position.
The internal county audit on the matter in question alone has provided a sufficient basis to request a full investigation by the State Attorney General. The community deserves and requires a definitive answer as to why failures of this magnitude have occurred. Answers that can not be provided by the fluff of an audit.
The time is overdue for people to demand accountability of all those holding elected and appointed positions at every level of government and this is as good a place as any to start given the circumstances.

to quote capell......"AN AUDIT IS ONLY AN OPINION".

Heritage, you seem quite hung-up with that quote. I’ve explained it before. I simply don’t understand. What do you think an audit is?

Do you believe an audit carries the weight of law? Do you think an agency is automatically subject to the penalties of the state should it reject an audit finding? Certainly not. An audit is simply a judgment [that is another word for opinion BTW] rendered with respect to a group of rules called General Accepted Accounting Principles. You may be shocked to know that there are International GAAP and National GAAP. Some countries and regulatory bodies have their own GAAP. Some of the Big Four have their own GAAP. As a result multiple audit firms could examine the same situation and deliver conflicting reports. Horror!

Let us review. An audit doesn’t carry the weight of law. It is non-binding. An audit can be rendered based on multiple rule sets. Different auditors can deliver conflicting findings based on identical circumstances and finally, nothing is going to happen should the audited agency throw the whole thing in the trash. Based on that, here is my direct question to you Sarah: If an audit finding isn’t just AN OPINION, what exactly is it?

On another note,

To publius: The city doesn’t own any of the LEC building. The LEC building is owned by Buchanan County and administrated by the LEC commission. The city leases their space from the county. The LEC commission has no connection to the city, thus they would not be party to the audit of the city conducted by former city council member and current state auditor Susan Montee. This is the same Susan Montee who was county auditor when these mysterious transfers occurred.

Henry - Thank you for making my case! The call for an audit in this case is nothing more than political smoke. Most now recognize this and looking toward finding the answer to the real question; how those in authority failed in their obligation to provide accountability in the use of public funds.
Are we to conclude from your assessment of audits that a formal investigation is in-fact more appropriate and needed?
Wonder if the others on the third floor would agree with you.

h(ELO)lo HENRY how nice to see you!!!!! so...... are you writing a letter at this very minute to the state attorney for a full fledged investigation? mr. capell is utterly disingenuous in his double speak, which is why i am so very fond of his quote regarding the viability of audits. of course, VC only takes the opinion of one person seriously...... his OWN.

Henry
Your ownership information is incorrect.

apmastrangelo: I agree completely with your assessment. If there is any reason to believe there has been malfeasance, misfeasance or anything else rising to criminal behavior at any time during this episode, then a criminal investigation conducted by the state Attorney General’s office is entirely warranted. Do you have any evidence that would establish malfeasance, misfeasance or other criminal behavior committed by the LEC Commission or any other county official? I don’t, but an external audit conducted by a competent third party might be a way to find that evidence. I would also emphasize that Susan Montee’s office would not be the appropriate authority to conduct such an audit. She would have much to explain should evidence of malfeasance, misfeasance or other criminal behavior be discovered. Her fingerprints are all over this deal.

Finally, as an aside, I could play coy and deliberately misunderstand your reference to the “third floor others” but I won’t. I’ll simply say you give me far too much credit. If you had any idea what I really am, you would see the ironic humor in your utterly mistaken assumption.

Heritage: It is very good to be back. I spent six very interesting weeks in the Pacific Northwest. I met some Dot-Com boys with too much money and not enough sense. Now they have quite a bit less of the former and perhaps just a little more of the latter.

I covered a lot of this with your saddle pal above, but at the risk of repeating myself let me just say: I would completely support a criminal investigation by the state Attorney General, or any other competent authority, of Buchanan County generally and the LEC Commission specifically just as soon as there is any evidence of M, M or any other CB. Call me silly, but I prefer the horse before the cart; audit first, criminal investigation next.

Lastly, if I was half the cad I suspect you think I am, I would point out you never did answer my direct question.

publius: Perhaps you were not around several years ago when the city threaten to break their lease with the county and walk away from the LEC building in favor of another facility. It was all a ploy, of course, to force the county to remodel and realign the city’s space. Thus it would follow you weren’t around twenty-five years ago when the original LEC deal went down. Nevertheless let me assure you, the LEC building is owned and operated by Buchanan County and the city leases space. You are, however, very prudent not to believe everything you read on the Internet. Call your county commissioner. I’m sure he can set you straight.

mr allison, since an audit is only an opinion, why would any audit carry weight with the state attorney's office?

i am NO one's saddle pal. mr capell already went down that road in another discussion in this publication in which he tried to tie apm and me together. our esteemed CM went so far as to create not one but two screen names in order to come into this forum and defend his policies. J U V E N I L E.

Henry - I am happy to see that you agree with my assessments on this subject. You do not correctly interpret critical portions of my statements and ask that you do not put words in my mouth or claim conclusions that do not exist.
At no time did I accuse anyone of "...malfeasance, misfeasance or other criminal behavior...". What I have said is the facts themselves point to a conclusion of mismanagement and lack of oversight, which has not been disputed with any affirmative defense.
In addition it was pointed out that the community is entitled to know that no wrong doing has taken place in the administration of public funds.
You also seem to want it both ways in the debate over having an audit. You accurately describe how even multiple independent audits could end with conflicting decisions yet still believe such an examination would provide the answers necessary in getting to the bottom of what happened.
I, on the other hand, believe the time and expense of another audit will lead to nothing but the same unanswered questions. That is why a full and complete formal investigation where individuals must answer under oath, and all associated documentation would receive the scrutiny of authenticity is in order. A process that will provide everyone absolute confidence in knowing what happened and what corrective actions, if any, are appropriate.
Lastly Henry, I do give you credit and always enjoy a stimulating dialogue but as previously stated anonymity is often more perceived than real.

publius: I must beg your most humble apologies. You are right, I am wrong, and I’m big enough to admit it. I have discovered, to my extreme chagrin, the city and county have enjoyed joint ownership of the LEC building since early 2005. I tip my hat to you sir.

heritage: Certainly, even though an audit is only an opinion, and then only as strong as the auditor’s reputation, I do believe it carries a little more weight than a letter-writing campaign. Wasn’t that your suggestion? Write a letter to Jay Nixon? I don’t think Jay is booking anything for at least the next 20 or so days. Even then, I strongly suspect whoever will be our next Attorney General will want to see some smoke before he breaks out his firefighting equipment. We obviously agree the public deserves the Who What When Where and Why. Our only difference appears to be How we get the details. Via la difference.

More fantastical however is your allegation that Vince Capell has posted anonymously to the News-Press website!! If you have any evidence to that effect I would love to see it.

apmastrangelo: We agree that the facts themselves point to a conclusion of mismanagement and lack of oversight, which has not been disputed with any affirmative defense. Last time I saw, although as recent events illustrate I can be wrong, stupidity is not illegal. On the other hand, in most cases it probably should be. I fail to see, as a practical matter, how you are going to get a criminal investigator interested in our mismanagement and lack of oversight when, at the end of the day, he probably isn’t going to be able to make a charge. Betting on someone lying under oath and pressing perjury? Only on TV. Dereliction of fiduciary duty? No way! Abuse of Public Office? Who on the LEC Commission benefited? No dice.

Allow me to repeat: I think we all believe the public deserves to know the Who What When Where and Why regarding the appropriation of public monies. While I have gleefully pointed out the obvious weaknesses of audits in general, I happen to think, in this case, it is the most direct path to the facts of the matter. You advocate a more formalized process with oaths and depositions. I don’t buy it, but I agree it is the sort of thing reasonable people can debate.

Henry - Again, glad we agree on many points. I take exception to your thinking that the A/G has to see "smoke" before an investigation would be initiated. In fact I a strict interpretation of statutes might prove it required upon formal request.
A mentor many years ago provided some sound advice about investigations. Individuals best understand their obligation to provide factual information when there is a vested interest. There are many reasons for things to be done or happen and it does not have to be for personal gain.

One last comment for thought concerning your previous closing remark to heritage. Be careful of what you wish for.

mr. allison..... in an article of sept 13, entitled "st joseph, neighbor not likely to work things out" there was a very lively and intense discussion, joined by "guidosarducci" and later "citizenman". i think if you read the comments you might be surprised, especially in light of the fact that the good "father" created another persona to agree with Himself, and then called for my comments to be edited by the paper when he didn't care for my viewpoint.

watch out apm. you might become my siamese twin in the eyes of HA!!!!!! i think it is very interesting that the notion that the CM would do Such A Thing seems to give "mr. allison" pause........

Well Sarah, I have to admit, that is a amazing tale. It has almost everything. It has mystery. It has intrigue. What is doesn’t have is anything to back it up. I certainly hope you have more reason to believe besides what you have offered so far. I read the exchange. There is nothing there to link any of the principles to any person. There is nothing there that says “Holy Cow!! That is Vince Capell!!” Disagreeing with your view hardly places an individual in a select class, much less proves them to be Vince. By your standard, I could be the man.

If you have any more to offer I’m open. Until then I’m scoring this one in the unsubstantiated column.

it is absolutely true "henry". i find it rather amazing that you would think this so outre' since you employ the same tactics yourself. you have chosen to "OUT" others here but continue to hide behind your obviously false name, your credibility is questionable, and your motive disingenuous. perhaps you should roll over to the CM office and ask VC yourself. i would bet that it would not be something which that office would choose to pursue, largely because i am completely correct.

heritage: You are a hoot, that’s what you are. You are a chip off the ole hoot block if I’ve ever seen one. Gimme two pops!

I have never pretended or tried to convince anyone that my nom de guerre is the name my mother calls me. Then again, 98% of the people using this forum avail themselves of a pen name and yet you seem to accept their choice without comment. Why do I make you wiggy? Why is my character suddenly called into question? What makes my motives disingenuous?

Because I do it for the lulz!!

I’m going to offer you a claim with exactly the same substantiation you offered me, which is exactly none. Not only am I not WHO you think I am, I’m not even WHAT you think I am. In fact, you could even say I play the other side of the street, but I have to admit, the irony is tasty.

you know "henry" i haven't played in the sandbox with "imaginary" people since first grade. you seem content to vilify certain people in these comments without validating yourself by being anything other than a figment. i don't play by those rules. no wonder you are such a big fan of VC.

........... see article in saturday's NP.