Truth or consequences
To the editor:
On Dec. 1 Mr. Stewart and I had a disagreement about statements that were made by him on Nov. 24, 2008. One of the statements was and I quote, “I would like to take us back to the time when the city council made the request to the representative’s office to go to the state and ask for this audit.”
My reply was this is perception not a fact. This is only one example of many questionable comments made by the city manager that night.
Mr. Stewart presented me with a copy of a letter written by Mayor Arnold Kempe dated Jan. 5, 2005 addressed to then-Rep. Jeff Kottkamp.
The first sentence of the letter reads “I enclose certified copy of the city council resolution concerning a request for a limited State audit of the City’s sewer and water accounts from 1995 to date and it’s storm water for said period.”
In view of this letter and the other paper work I could gather, the scope of the audit would have been quite narrow. Mr. Sal Grosso lobbied for a “compliance and performance” audit through then-Rep. Jeff Kottkamp and members of the auditor general’s staff. What Mr. Grosso sought and got was a much broader audit than what was called for by the City Council. Mr. Grosso provided the Auditor General with 24 separate packets of information dealing with specific City operations.
The point is the state audit provided was not the audit the Council requested and this, in fact, does not agree with Mr. Stewart’s comment.
Look at Mayor Kempe’s letter and the minutes from the meeting of Dec. 13, 2004 and then look at the scope, as stated in the actual audit. You might say I’m splitting hairs, but you can easily ascertain that the city’s request and the actual audit are not one in the same.
On Nov. 24, Mr. Stewart made another statement and I quote, “There were those within the community Mr. Grosso, Mr. Sullivan and who if they didn’t come right out and say that there were illegal, felonious activities going on by staff that they at least inferred it.” What this document from the Auditors Generals Office validates is no such things ever occurred”, unquote.
I would offer another view. The Auditor General’s report validated that multiple state statues and our local laws were being violated, i.e., “illegal” activities had occurred.
It is further my view that only a “full and complete” forensic audit would “validate” whether there were any or no “felonious” activities. This has not yet been allowed to occur. The unanswered question is: Why? (Note: The Auditor General’s original and follow up reports did not state that there were no “illegal” or “felonious” activities found.)
The comment by Mr. Stewart is itself a distortion, but what really bothers me is that the mayor and the council allow the city manager to make comments that are skewed and sprinkled with fallacies and misrepresentation, since not a peep comes from the dais. I feel, we must step up, as concerned and active citizens point out the problematic situations and not let the establishment deny them. The city must build on its strengths rather than sugar coat inefficiencies and must tackle problems that need to be addressed.
While Mr. Stewart creates perception the reality is that there were 24 findings against the city and seven of these were related to state statutes or city ordinances.
Look it up! It’s public record. Some of the problems still have not been fixed. I also challenge Mr. Stewart to bring forth any documentation or proof that Mr. Grosso or myself ever used the word felonious or anything meaning felonious in the context that Mr. Stewart used it.
It’s no wonder why the public trust is in the tank?
John Sullivan
Cape Coral Minutemen