Westfield reader gives background on city ordinance proposal

Letters to the Editor do not reflect the opinions of The Reporter, its publisher or its staff. You can submit your own Letter to the Editor by email to News@ReadTheReporter.com.


Dear Editor:

When I see that there are actions taking place in our local Westfield government that are improper, all Westfield residents should be made aware of those actions.

On the Agenda for the Westfield City Council meeting for Monday, Oct. 11, 2021, is an ordinance up for consideration: Ordinance 21-42, An ordinance of the Common Council of the City of Westfield, Indiana for appropriation of additional funds.

The request is for an additional $668,000 to be paid for legal and consulting fees that have been generated by the administration and the Clerk-Treasurer’s office earlier this year.

Here is where it becomes very interesting. All of the expenses have been charged to Adm-Consulting, the account that is the responsibility of the Chief of Staff, Todd Burtron. He established the budget in 2020, and that budget was approved by the current City Council late in 2020 as per normal procedures. Back to this item shortly.

FIRST, WHY ALL THE ADDED LEGAL AND CONSULTING EXPENSES? It is mainly due to a number of lawsuits between the city and the Clerk-Treasurer that you have been reading about in the local media since the beginning of 2021. Why the need for all the lawsuits?

It goes back to the approach taken by some of the newly-elected council members in early 2020. There were many comments, innuendos, and not-so-subtle allegations that were made that implied the administration was not handling the finances of Westfield properly, especially for Grand Park, which Councilor Patton “accused Bullpen Tournaments, which operates the baseball diamonds of Grand Park, of owing the city money and the city engaging in ‘handshake agreements.,” As a reminder, Councilor Patton and the other freshmen councilors ran on a platform that included “fiscal responsibility” and increased transparency. What we have experienced since that election is far from that.

So, with all the rancor that was taking place in 2020 regarding the city’s financial practices, Mayor Cook announced on Aug. 7, 2020, that he was “initiating an examination of all city financial practices and accounts.” He appointed a three-person board to conduct the investigation, and the names of those individuals and firms for which they work have been well publicized in the local media. That investigation is still ongoing and hopefully will come to a conclusion before the end of the year.

Why has it taken so long to complete the audit? If the Clerk-Treasurer, Ms. Gossard, had fully cooperated with the investigation, it would have certainly been completed by now. In addition, if she would have been cooperative with the investigators, there would have been no need to have the city or the Clerk-Treasurer file lawsuits which have created legal and consulting expenses of well over $668,000, the amount that Ordinance 21-42 would authorize to be paid.

Now, what follows is the real transparency that is needed, for all of us taxpayers to be aware of, regarding Ordinance 21-42 which is to be acted on by the Council on Oct. 11.

The Clerk-Treasurer has the following two budget items for 2021 (Spending Updated as of Oct. 8, 2021):

  • Legal fees: Budget $5,000; Actual Spend $59,885
  • Consulting expenses: Budget $132,500; Actual Spend $126,933.66

Under Indiana law, an additional appropriation must be requested when spending goes over the budget showing how much will be appropriated and from where the funds will be obtained.

In the appendix that is attached to the ordinance (see the link that is in the Agenda for the City Council meeting for Oct. 11, 2021 that is posted on the City of Westfield website), the invoices that represent the fees incurred by the Clerk-Treasurer from Webster & Garino due to the lawsuits she filed are highlighted in yellow. They total another $197,874.98 in legal fees, over and above the $59,885 I showed earlier.

Some quick background first on financial integrity processes within the city. When an invoice comes in to be paid by the city, EACH invoice must be approved by the department head responsible for that budget item before it can be paid by the Clerk-Treasurer. The department head is responsible for setting the budget the previous year for this year and is also responsible for the spending for that budget item as the year goes along. In this case, Todd Burtron, the Chief of Staff, is responsible for the consulting and legal fee accounts for the administration budget.

What did Mr. Burtron do when he saw Ms. Gossard charging the invoices to the Administration’s budget? He rejected the invoice, informed Ms. Gossard that the invoice needed to be charged to the Clerk-Treasurer’s account, and it will not be paid out of the administration account. She incurred the fees and was responsible to charge it to the proper account in the Clerk-Treasurer’s office: Legal Fees.

Did Ms. Gossard comply and follow the approved payment process the city has established? No, she did not. Maybe it was just a mistake. Anyone can make a mistake at times. No, she proceeded to do exactly the same thing with a total of 10 invoices, totaling $197,874.98.

She was instructed not to pay the invoices by Mr. Burtron, but all of those invoices to her attorneys have ALREADY BEEN PAID! Is making the payment even legal? I would not think it is legal to make a payment from the administration account, when the department head specifically said, DO NOT PAY THIS INVOICE FROM THE ADMINISTRATION ACCOUNT. Mr. Burtron stated that not once but 10 times.

Now, the question for the City Councilors is, what are you going to do with Ordinance 21-42? Perhaps you should consult with your City Council attorney that you hired for a $83,000 annual retainer (not in the original 2021 budget, since we have a city attorney in the form of Taft Law), as to what you should do Monday evening. Will you condone the really questionable actions of Ms. Gossard by approving the ordinance you submitted, or will you side with the taxpayers that elected you to do the right and legal actions that will put the expenses where they belong? Here is where the rubber hits the road for real fiscal responsibility and transparency councilors.

What is next?

If these types of questionable activities are of concern to you, and they should be, get active. The first step is to attend the City Council meeting at 7 p.m. on Monday, Oct. 11, 2021, at City Hall. The agenda is posted on the city’s website at westfield.in.gov and learn about what is going on. There is a place on the agenda for members of the public to speak before the Council.

Let’s fill City Hall and demand the fiscal responsibility and transparency they promised the residents of Westfield.

Joseph Plankis

Westfield

4 Comments on "Westfield reader gives background on city ordinance proposal"

  1. Troy Patton | October 10, 2021 at 2:49 pm |

    Joe, who is an appointee by the Mayor, once again, shows why this Administration is completely lost and has no understanding of the people who actually pay taxes. Bullpen did not do anything wrong, they were not accused of anything, and that by the way has nothing to do with the Clerk having someone investigate the Administration putting spyware on their computers. The latter is the reason for the current lawsuits which Joe clearly does not understand. He also forgot to mention that appointment he was given is who oversees the “handshake” agreements (RDC) that were given which the State Board of Accounts in Indiana also said were inappropriate. He also forgot to mention they went back and “corrected” the areas they acted on inappropriately. I get it, Joe is feeling the heat because he is supposed to be in charge of the RDC which was not doing things correctly.

  2. David Graham | October 10, 2021 at 8:57 pm |

    Speaking of “not doing things correctly”, Mr. Patton presides over the finance committee which held a meeting this week that was clearly not posted correctly and he couldn’t even articulate whether it was a finance committee meeting or a special city council meeting or what type of meeting he had called and posted and was actually presiding over. Mr. Patton shrugged it off as no big deal because he only holds other branches of the city government to be accountable but doesn’t appreciate anyone holding him to the same basic standards. Several troubling things happened during the meeting. First, the finance committee members seemed to have no awareness of key budget timelines nor the fact that the budget is supposed to be voted on by the Council this coming Monday. How can the finance committee be so clueless about these basic timelines? Secondly, Mr. Patton and the other members pontificated ad noseeum about their desire for fiscal responsibility and their pledge to not use general obligation bonds as a funding source for capital investments going forward. In place of issuing bonds, Mr. Patton instead encouraged the city to use millions of dollars of leases in lieu of GO Bonds to pay for fire trucks, vehicles, and most inexplicably, road projects. His claim in the meeting was that leases are more economical than bonds. He offers no proof to back this assertion but he was confident the cost of leasing these capital expenditures with Huingtingon Bank was the best deal for taxpayers. I don’t buy it, if leasing through any bank is more economical than municipal debt, let us see the proof. Show us the math! There was a time I naively believed this new council was committed to bringing more transparency to the city government and that they had the taxpayer’s best interests at heart. The more I watch the meetings and observe their words and behaviors, I’m convinced they are more interested in just tearing things down and are not up to the job and should be replaced. They are more interested in pressing their ego contests with the administration and grandstanding than progress. I encourage residents to and watch the last 3-4 city council and finance committee meetings and draw their own conclusions, but to my eye, they have become an embarrassment to Westfield. We deserve better from our elected leaders. They should drop all their petty ego contests and start acting like adults. If they aren’t capable of better behavior and cannot find a way to work together then we should replace all of them when the time comes. I cannot imagine we would do any worse than the last couple of months under their “leadership”.

  3. David Graham lets his opinion get in the way of facts. For those of you who are interested, they actually record the meetings and you can listen to them. It was a finance committee meeting, everyone knows the timelines. Another Carnival Barker for the tax and spend.

  4. Do you guys realize how it looks when you play ‘point, counterpoint’ & trade insults publicly ?
    You should ..

Comments are closed.