WHITEHALL — Fruitland Township Treasurer Justin Roggero reported at the board's regular meeting Monday, Oct. 19, that the township's bank reconciliations have been brought up. The board was informed of the issue in July and turned to a certified public accountant to help rectify it. Fees associated with that move, as well as the additional pay required for the deputy clerk for extra hours worked, totaled $16,575.
The reconciliations were not up to date before the township’s annual audit, which was due in September, a concern of township clerk Alexa Steffes. Primarily due to the lateness of the audit's filing, numerous deficiencies were reported in the audit. The township has been given 30 days to reply to the state with a plan of corrected action. The deficiencies have also triggered extra scrutiny over future audits from the township for at least the next year. The township is currently working on the plan of corrected action.
“Going forward, we are definitely going to be making sure that everything that relates to the audit is going to be timely, and it will be correct,” said Supervisor Jeff Marcinkowski.
At the meeting, Trustee Chris VanOosterhout raised concerns over what sort of assurances or oversight can be provided so the other board members can trust the corrective action response will be submitted on time and followed in the future. He also posed the question if there could be a third-party “advocate” for the board overseeing the treasurer’s work to ensure these issues do not persist. Roggero agreed such a thing could be helpful.
“Me, myself, as much as I feel good, I’d rather know that we’re good and that we’re covered so that we don’t end up on this path again,” Roggero said.
Roggero also informed the board that he had received support training and offered to forfeit a portion of this treasurer’s salary to fund the proposed oversight, as it would be in support of his role. He also invited members of the board to come in and watch the process of completing the bank reconciliations.
Roggero told the board he would report back at November's meeting regarding what options he has researched for an independent oversight, and provide quotes for those services.
This news was of concern to attendees of the meeting, with one Fruitland resident taking to public comment to ask how the township is “going to be able to get things done if the state is looking into us?”
The commenter further asked that if the township was having “a big problem like this, what other inconsistencies are happening in the treasurer’s department?”
The township has gone ahead with the purchase of a replacement server from IT provider VC3, as the township’s current server is soon to be defunct. The supervisor and clerk have researched several different options at various price points, which is further complicated by the fact that any new server would need to be compatible with BS&A software, especially as the software transitions to the cloud in the next year.
There were two options brought before the board. The first was to buy a modified server with only the necessary functions outright at about $21,000. The other option was to rent a server at $876 a month, for a total of $10,517 for the full year, with a buyout cost of approximately $10,482. Considering both avenues would essentially cost the same, possibly more if BS&A’s conversion to the cloud was delayed another year, the recommendation for the board was to just buy the server outright for $21,106.88 - a motion the board accepted unanimously.
Also on the agenda for the meeting was the board’s official stance on the subject of Flock safety cameras, a topic of intense public debate statewide and nationwide, particularly in the last year. A comment received over Zoom urged the board to vote against the use of Flock cameras in Fruitland, citing concerns over the privacy of citizens and documented abuses of the system. This comment was followed by another from an in-person attendee, who agreed with the statement.
Marcinkowski presented the board with the opportunity to discuss and decide their opinion on the matter and what action the board should take, which could then be submitted to the county sheriff’s office. However, Marcinkowski admitted he was unsure where the township’s authority over what was installed in the road right-of-way ended, and requested the township attorney research that particular question.
Said Steffes, “I do think it would be beneficial to have a resolution, because you can have a resolution just stating the board’s stance on something… so I think having a resolution formally opposing Flock cameras in Fruitland Township can at least maybe hold some weight.”
After the discussion, the board unanimously agreed to sign a resolution in opposition to the use of Flock cameras in the township, with the supervisor set to send a letter with this decision to the county sheriff’s office.
