For several months now the Charlotte Observer has been investigating what appears to be a case of serious Corruption within the Charlotte-Mecklenburg County Dept of DSS.
This isn't a new case of Corruption mind you, no this Criminal Activity has been in place for about 10 years. Perhaps even longer since none of our County Leaders seem to know the answer to that $64 million dollar question.
You see for years the Charlotte-Meck. County dept of DSS Officials has made it their No. 1 mission to catch "Common Working Folk" in acts of Welfare Fraud.
If an individual deemed eligible via Federal and State Poverty guidelines to receive Food Stamps, Welfare funds, Medicaid, etc., failed to report sometimes even one dollar to his or her Social Worker, that individual received No Mercy but was instead immediately charged with a Felony.
(In other words if you work and make $8.00, $9.00, $10.00 per hour, the State of North Carolina's Dept of Health and Human Services and Charlotte-Meck. County Dept of DSS says your rich, therefore you don't "qualify" for any type of Government assistance.)
Many of those individuals who eventually confessed to Welfare Fraud, signed Plea Deals with the Meck. County's DA Office in order to stay out of Prison with the Rapists, Murderers, Bank Robbers, etc., nevertheless on their Criminal Records lies the charge in boldface scarlett letters FELONY!
Now please don't think I'm a person who advocates defrauding the Government because I don't.
There should most certainly be Legal Consequences for people who intentionally try to live the life of a "Welfare King or Welfare Queen".
However.....
"What's good for the goose is good for the gander" right?
Not according to Charlotte-Mecklenburg County Government/ Political Officials.
After conducting a thorough investigation the Charlotte Observer discovered that more than $162,000. dollars was stolen by Meck. County DSS Officials recently.
We're talking Federal money, State money and Public Funds here! (Foster Care and Social Security Funds)
That information was obtained from an Internal Audit report.
What was the outcome of the investigation?
Acknowledgment by Meck. County Officials of wrong doing but No Action!
That's right folks!
NONE OF THE MECK. COUNTY DSS OFFICIALS WHO COMMITTED THE CRIME WAS CHARGED WITH A FELONY OR WENT TO PRISON.
Better yet when the Meck. County Board of Commissioners met with the Meck. County DSS officials there was NO TRANSPARENCY.
Unlike Congressional Hearings which are televised and open, neither the Charlotte Observer, nor any other local Media organizations were allowed to attend those meetings.
And here's the double-dipped icing on the cake for ya:
The Meck. County Management Team was allowed by YOUR MECK. COUNTY ELECTED OFFICIALS to approve the results of an Audit and the investigation, of which they believed all involved had acted "appropriately".
In laymen's terms: The County Management Team called for the Internal Audit and then approved the results.
WOW!
Can you believe it?
It appears no one was punished because:
1) The individuals who committed the crimes (Embezzlement, Fraud) were probably friends, church associates, frat brothers or Sorority sisters of County or DSS Officials.
Or
2) The individuals know something that the county doesn't want the public to catch wind of and in order to keep things "hush hush", they struck a nice little deal which involves NO Criminal Charges, No Prison time, No lost of pay, etc.,
So much for Equal Justice in Charlotte-Mecklenburg County or within the City of Charlotte.
Thanks to your local Elected Officials of course.
I'd say its time to clean house on the Charlotte City Council, Charlotte-Mecklenburg County Board of Commissioners, County Management's Office and DSS wouldn't you?
Let's not forget Raleigh too.
There is NO way the State of NC doesn't know about this situation but obviously they've chosen to turn a blind eye and a deaf ear.
Charlotte Voters I admonish you to remember this little tidbit before returning to the Polls.
If you or I had stolen that money, we'd be sitting in Federal or State Prison by now.
TRANSPARENCY IS NEEDED!
Foxes or Not, Others Need To Watch County Hen House
There's an obvious conflict of interest going on in Mecklenburg County government, and commissioners should make it a priority to fix it.
The county's Audit Review Committee is tasked with overseeing independent audits of the county and responding to their findings by making recommendations to the full board of commissioners. In carrying out this role, it's not uncommon for the committee to need to review the performance of top county administrators, including the county manager.
Here's where the conflict arises: The committee is made up of two county commissioners, one community member and two members of the county management staff. In other words, the top brass is largely responsible for determining how county management has performed when its performance is in question.
It's evident such an arrangement poses a conflict. Even if the members of county management were to have the best of intentions, the arrangement undercuts the committee's credibility. The public can't feel confident that an independent review has been done.
Most recently, the committee reviewed misspending at the Department of Social Services and management's response to the problems there. Recent financial audits revealed the county cannot account for $162,000 meant to buy Christmas gifts for poor children. Commissioners have said they may never know just how much money is missing or what happened to it.
DSS hadn't been fully audited in 13 years. As county manager, Harry Jones said he deserves to be held accountable.
But Jones himself is on the Audit Review Committee, along with one of his top assistants, John McGillicuddy. The committee's report to commissioners last week agreed with an outside auditor's finding that Jones and his team had acted appropriately in responding to problems at DSS. The primary author of that report? McGillicuddy himself, with the support of Jones, to whom he reports.
Whether management's response was adequate or inadequate, the public's faith in the legitimacy and comprehensiveness of the report should be shaky. As when a police officer is investigated for killing a civilian, the only review that has credibility is a truly independent one.
Supporters of the committee's makeup say it allows management to provide commissioners with useful information. But clearly they can provide that same information without sitting in judgment of it.
We applaud Democrat Harold Cogdell and Republican Bill James for questioning how the committee was designed. Now the full board should vote to have it include four commissioners, two from each party, and one community member – and not have management review itself.
Make-up of DSS Audit Review Panel Is Criticized
The makeup of a panel investigating alleged misspending at the Department of Social Services has come under scrutiny after it concluded top Mecklenburg County managers took proper steps to address accounting failures.
Two of the five members of the Audit Review Committee are county administrators – County Manager Harry Jones and one of his top lieutenants, John McGillicuddy, who helped write the report.
Some commissioners say the arrangement undermines public confidence in the probe and hinders the committee's ability to find out who's to blame. The report was presented to the county board of commissioners this week.
“It seems odd to me that our county manager and an assistant county manager who reports to our county manager would be a part of a committee to make a determination about whether management responded appropriately,” Commissioner Harold Cogdell said. “It undermines to some extent … the appearance of what this committee is charged with having done.”
Commissioner Dan Murrey, a member of the audit committee, said members will look into whether they should remove administrators from the panel in the future.
Supporters of allowing managers on the panel say it does not compromise investigations and allows administrators to provide commissioners with useful information.
The committee is investigating DSS programs, including a Christmas charity that solicited public donations. Recent financial audits revealed the county cannot account for tens of thousands of dollars from spending programs meant to help children and poor families.
Officials said they may never learn what happened to the money because receipts are missing or altered.
Some commissioners have said Jones and other top managers should shoulder some responsibility. Jones met with commissioners in closed session this week to discuss the issue.
County officials established the Audit Review Committee in 1998 to oversee financial audits and make recommendations to the commissioners. The move followed the indictment of former county elections director Bill Culp, who pleaded guilty to taking $134,000 in bribes and kickbacks.
The county set up the committee so it must include two commissioners, two county administrators and a community member.
Jones and McGillicuddy, county general manager, are the administrators on the committee. Murrey, commissioner Bill James and certified public accountant Ward Simmons are the other members.
Earlier this week, the panel presented a report to the board of commissioners that is critical of the accounting practices at DSS and says further investigation may be needed.
But the report endorses reforms county managers made in response to problems found by auditors.
“Management's responses to the audit findings are appropriate and sufficient in strengthening internal controls and addressing inconsistent and insufficient supervision,” the report says.
McGillicuddy wrote a draft of the report and took suggestions on revisions from other committee members.
McGillicuddy and James disagreed about what committee members had concluded during a meeting.
In an e-mail to committee members and officials, James suggested the report say: “Management's responses to the audit findings are not appropriate and sufficient in strengthening internal controls and addressing inconsistent and insufficient supervision because they do not determine who at DSS was responsible for the inconsistent and insufficient supervision (lack of control environment) and because Management cannot determine how long the control environment has missing from DSS Finance.”
McGillicuddy objected, writing back that James' statement was inaccurate. Murrey and Simmons sided with McGillicuddy.
McGillicuddy told the Observer he volunteered to write the report and “provided this draft to all the members for revisions until the members were satisfied with the report that was provided to the Board in its agenda.”
Commissioners originally appointed McGillicuddy to the audit committee in 2004.
“I hope that my participation on the Audit Review Committee has provided expertise and insight from a management perspective that is useful to the overall charge of the committee,” he said.
Jones did not return calls or an e-mail seeking comment.
Commissioners have long debated whether to keep administrators on the Audit Review Committee.
James said he unsuccessfully lobbied to keep county managers off the committee when it was formed. The presence of administrators prevents the panel from conducting fully independent investigations, he said.
In the DSS case, Cogdell said the committee structure could raise negative public perceptions.
“The makeup would have instilled a little bit better public confidence if you had members of this board in conjunction with some type of outside auditing agency and not someone that the outcome of the recommendation is in some way going to impact or show ... you did a good job or you didn't do a good job,” he said.
Former commissioner Parks Helms said he can understand why some say the arrangement represents a conflict of interest. But Helms said he supported putting administrators on the committee to provide intimate knowledge about the daily workings of county government.
“I never thought having members on management would compromise the integrity,” said Helms, who is former member of the Audit Review Committee. “They are just as interested in finding errors as members of the board.”
View Larger Map
Sources: Charlotte Observer, Charmeck.org, Google Maps
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment