INSIDE

Fire district receives audit refund

At the March 14 regular meeting of Whatcom County Fire District 5 chief Bill Skinner reported that, following a meeting between auditors, himself and commissioner Bill Meursing, the state auditors office would be giving the district back $1,886, representing 24 hours of auditor’s time.

“That’s ridiculous,” said commissioner David Gellatly. “Someone should be auditing them.”

At the conclusion of the recent audit, which covered the fire district and its financial relationship with the Point Roberts Aydon Wellness Clinic from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2005, auditors issued a finding that the district was not careful enough with income from patient fees.

The report is the second time in almost back-to-back audits the auditor’s office has expressed concern that the fire district, as the agency responsible for the administration of a federal grant to start the wellness clinic, gave control of patient fees to the clinic board, when the federal grant requirements gave that authority to the district.

After the first finding was issued in 2005 the fire district board issued a response saying a complete turnover of the district board and management had left gaps they were focused on filling, and announced measures would be put in place to address the auditor’s concerns.

In the most recent report auditors claimed that “the district made some improvements to its processes over the collection and safeguarding of patient fees,” including setting up a separate district account into which they were deposited. “However, a number of concerns continued during 2005 and 2006.”

Authority for the Wellness Clinic was officially transferred to the local hospital district in April 2006.

District commissioners disagreed with the findings of the most recent audit, responding that “we disagree with your overall assessment of our lack of financial oversight …We feel that we adequately addressed your previous audit concerns and managed the funds received here appropriately.”

Where district commissioners think there has been sloppy accounting has been in how the auditor’s office is keeping track of the time it spends on the audit, charging the district $78.50 an hour to review its records and procedures.

Meursing said the early March meeting with auditors was an effort to resolve an almost six-month audit process, and he had asked for an anticipated completion date as well as an accounting of hours spent on the audit. “I wanted them to know we were watching them too,” he said.

Mindy Chambers, communications manager for the auditor’s office, confirmed they had “initially erroneously billed the district 120 hours. We should have billed for 96 hours. We corrected the billing and charged the district $7,536.” Chambers was not available to clarify if the 96 hours billed reflected hours actually spent on the audit or an estimated completion time, and what the basis of the estimate might be.
“The initial info we were given by the auditor’s office said the audit would include 80 hours for the district and 40 hours for the clinic,” said Skinner, who speculated the billing was based on estimated time to complete the audit, rather than actual time spent.

In an email from audit manager Christine Blake to Skinner, Blake said the district would now be put on a three-year audit cycle, “at 48 hours for the audit.” That audit is scheduled for 2009.