Paul working for you.

Sunday, January 3, 2016

Stolen public funds: Municipal thefts in Central Mass. near $1M

  • Stolen public funds: Municipal thefts in Central Mass. near $1M


  •  Zoom
  • By James F. Russell Correspondent
    Posted Jan. 2, 2016 at 5:14 PM
    Updated at 6:32 AM


    The indictment last month of a former Hubbardston woman brought to nearly $1 million the amount allegedly stolen in recent years by municipal employees in the area, and those thefts raise questions about how effectively local and state officials are dealing with these crimes of opportunity.
    Cynthia Washburn-Doane, who had been on the job a quarter-century, pleaded not guilty to charges of embezzling more than $500,000, starting in 2004, at the Dec. 23 arraignment before Judge Shannon Frison. However, no detailing of how the alleged crimes occurred was revealed in open court. Her next court appearance is scheduled on Feb. 8. No trial date has been set.
    Brimfield's former Town Treasurer, Kirsten Weldon, pleaded guilty a year ago in Hampden County Superior Court to stealing $80,868 from the municipality, was sentenced in April to 90 days in jail, and ordered to make restitution.
    A former Brookfield municipal clerk, Beth Conant, was sentenced in February to a year in jail, the result of a plea agreement, and ordered to make restitution. An investigation revealed she stole $43,947 from the town.
    And concerns about Marcia Langelier, 63 – the indicted former Barre tax collector charged more than two years ago with stealing in excess of $300,000 - that prosecutors say funded a casino gambling habit - began popping up no later than 2010, when town officials said there was $1.2 million in uncollected taxes.
    She resigned the next year when the town began a forensic audit, and she was charged with the crimes in 2013. Her alleged pilfering began around 2005, authorities say, but as of yet, no trial date has been set in Worcester Superior Court. A compliance hearing is scheduled for Jan. 22.
    In some instances in these cases, local officials were reluctant to tell the public what was going on when they first suspected trouble and declined to provide information to shed light on what was happening. Prosecutors who were called to investigate also disclosed little to explain the problems, saying they did not want to jeopardize the probes, even as litigation in one case has dragged on for years.
    The most recent indictments in the region extend a troubling pattern of public corruption from the not-too-distant past. A former Bay Path Regional Vocational Technical School District treasurer/business manager, Paul R. Blanchette Sr., was convicted in 2001 of stealing $5.46 million from the 10-town district. An ex-Ashburnham-Westminster Regional School business manager, Anthony J. Katter Jr., was convicted of embezzling $1 million from the district in 1993.
    Besides prosecution, there remains the question what is being done to address the latest fraud cases in the region and whether recommendations from the state Department of Revenue to help communities end the fraud are being followed.
    A spokesman for the DOR, Daniel S. Bertrand, said the agency has developed a number of “best practices” they share with the commonwealth’s 351 cities and towns. They include the need for annual audits. The DOR also strongly recommends that local officials, such as tax collectors and treasurers, who handle money, be appointed instead of elected to ensure qualified individuals and accountability in those offices.
    Some cases take longer to investigate and prosecute than others, but resources are not the reason for the pace of these probes, assures Worcester District Attorney Joseph D. Early Jr.
    Explaining the delay in moving the Barre case along, Paul Jarvey, spokesman for Mr. Early, said Ms. Langelier did not procure legal counsel right away, despite “being ordered by the court to do so. When an attorney was appointed for her, she wasn't satisfied with his work and a new lawyer had to be appointed. She also filed a motion to dismiss. That is certainly her right, but it accounts for part of the delay.”
    Attempts by the Telegram & Gazette in 2012, via public records requests to obtain the management letters to Barre’s annual financial audits from 2005 onward, were rebuffed.
    The town’s counsel, in August 2012, said that portion of the document is not a public record. The counsel, attorney James Baird, cited a state law that states: “Memoranda or letters relating to policy positions being developed” are exempt, to deny the request.
    However, the DOR, in a four-page letter detailing best practices for cities and towns, related to audits, says otherwise: “State law requires communities to submit completed audits to the DOR Director of Accounts . . . It should be noted, as well, that an audit report is a public record.”
    On Wednesday, the newspaper submitted to the DOR a public records request for the management letters involving the Barre audits.
    “Effective use of the audit report recommendations can assist the community in improving its financial controls and practices. The result will be protection of community assets, potential upgrades in a community’s bond rating, and increased public confidence in the government,” the DOR says in the letter, which is titled “Annual Audits.”
    The agency “encourages communities to have an independent audit performed by a certified public accountant each and every year.”
    However, in smaller communities that receive less than $500,000 from the federal government, there is no requirement for an independent audit, the DOR letter says.
    The independent audits are contracted by the board of selectmen. Barre, Brimfield and Brookfield have three-person elected boards; Hubbardston's has five members.
    An acknowledgment there may have been substantial looting of Hubbardston town coffers occurred when then-selectman Matthew Castriotta, at a candidate’s forum in May 2014, mentioned problems with ex-tax collector Ms. Washburn-Doane. He did not provide additional information during that event.
    At the time, Mr. Early's office would only confirm an investigation had begun, and Town Administrator Anita Scheipers acknowledged Ms. Washburn-Doane had abruptly resigned but would not elaborate, saying it was a confidential personnel issue.
    The newspaper made a public-records request last year to obtain the Washburn-Doane resignation letter, but the administrator refused to provide it. However, Ms. Scheipers, at the time, said the collector’s resignation was related to revelations from a Scanlon & Associates town audit that discovered tax collection rates substantially less than the norm.
    While law enforcement is often reluctant to provide information during investigations to prevent harming a potential prosecution, part of the reason the public is often in the dark is a failure for local government officials to obey public records laws.
    According to a watchdog group, the public records laws should be reformed to eliminate a perception that it is OK to keep the public in the dark, according to the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance.
    “A lack of transparency is a problem,” the MFA’s executive director Paul Craney said in an interview.
    “Crimes with taxpayer money being taken is wrong and egregious,” he said. “We need to streamline how the public can obtain information – there has to be best practices to keep the cost low.”
    The MFA website describes the organization as “a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization committed to improving the quality of life in Massachusetts by advocating for fiscal responsibility and good government solutions.”

11 comments:

  1. "WOW" So why not in Templeton too?
    Do our people in high places have to keep quiet to bag those who could be under investigation's. Are there investigation's behind the scenes? Small towns have a way of letting out the information. Slow to the surface but none the less sooner or later it comes out.Will Winchendon be added to the list of towns in this blog?
    Will they sweep it under the rug for fear of a law suite? Like Winchendon did in the water and transfer scandals. Pay the former manager and let him go?
    Your tax dollars hardly at work for you. Careful who you elect that's what you could get.
    In the case of Templeton light commission you can't say we didn't tell you so.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Part of the reason the public is often in the dark is a failure for local government officials to obey public records laws.

    ReplyDelete
  3. So when will we find out we have clean theft free books?
    When will the audit take place and Templeton finds out where we stand.
    Or should we say fall down?

    ReplyDelete
  4. There was a ton of resistance to calling for an "Investigation" into many financial issues in Templeton.

    Like the purchase of 252 Baldwinville Rd... in all its boondoggled-ness.

    Like Chapter 93 Acts of 2000 wherein the Light department assumed control of Templeton's public water supply through a "citizen petition" whereby the the Light Department gathered the signatures on behalf of the "citizens" of Templeton.

    Like the Waste Water Treatment Plant Contract and lawsuit and the negligence involved in allowing the Writs of Attachment to lapse( 8 million dollars).

    Like the selectmen voting to return $369,000 from the water department back to Casella - it was a "gift" to the town. No town meeting vote taken to "give " this money to the water department for a zone II delineation study. So why return it 3 months before it would be free and clear ?

    As George Carlin would say, "Nobody seems to notice. Nobody seems to care..."

    Of all the towns listed in the article above, not one has had their bond rating revoked. So why did Templeton lose its bond rating?

    Prior to the fiscal mess, Templeton had audits performed on a regular basis. The DOR has reviewed every tax rate. It appears the safeguards put in place ...like regular audits are not enough to prevent the alleged theft and/or mismanagement of public money.

    There were many years when we had the same accounting firm produce the same management letter over and over. Templeton was paying good money for these audits ($27,000 - $28,000 per year). Even though the finanical team had enacted many of the suggestions in the management letter, there were no changes to the management letter itself. Very strange.

    In Templeton's case, our financial people have NOT been acting inappropriately. Templeton's books have been mismanaged for a long time.

    Some progress is being made. Templeton has a town administrator. Our Treasurer/collector is appointed; not elected.

    Unfortunately, our form of government is decentralized. There are lots of turf wars going on which will continue.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Honestly the town not be able to spend one red dime on anything other then previously negotiated contracts until we have an audit.

    How far could we be in the whole after 3 years?

    We need to adjust our form of government.

    If town agencies cannot work with one another the management needs to be changed, period. We cannot allow each department to run like an island.


    Dave, we the townspeople voted against borrowing money to buy an excavator. What gave town officials the idea the town wanted a "found" $300k used for an excavator.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The mystery will be solved when the audits are complete.

      There was a form of government committee a few years ago, but they needed money and none was available.

      Chapter 90 money can be used to purchase equipment. The town has done this for a long time.

      We need to fund a capital plan, but there has been no money to do that.

      Delete
  6. When the little guy steals money from the government this is big news. When big corporations steel money from the government it is not reported by the media and the court systems look the other way, go figure.

    ReplyDelete
  7. We voted not to allow a prop 2 1/2 over ride to fun it.
    Chapter 90 funds allow the use of funds to purchase equipment and a list of other items as well.
    Don't like the way we run the town now ,please run for selectmen and change it.
    "All" comments are welcome and opinions are as well.
    We just need to know from who!

    ReplyDelete
  8. With the cash washed light commission telling us they wanted to fund road projects it would free up the chapter 90 dollars for equipment needs. Like in the past when they say one thing to cover another and when they say one thing and do another who would be surprised. Are we paying higher rates to allow solar to be profitable? You betcha we are.
    We should know who gets money from the solar deals and how much they get from our rates.
    As we see a list of all power providers in the report we so to should see all amounts paid to people who have solar array set ups at home. We can better understand how our commission allows our light department money and rates to be what they are.
    Does the sewer generator get started to keep peek power use down at times?
    Should they get a better rate for the generation ability?
    Should your tax money be spent to subsidize things that are not part of one departments costs?

    ReplyDelete
  9. David,

    My issue is this. The town spent money to vote for an override which failed. Then the town "finds" money in a chapter 90 account and decides it should go for excavator, rather than roads. Did that fund repay the towns costs? Did the idiot who "lost" the funds and forced the town to spend the money on the election get fired?

    So not only was the towns money spent on something they didn't feel important enough to pay more for, but they were required to pay for an unnecessary vote.

    All spending needs to stop until we know if we have any money???? 3 years without an audit! We are "loosing" and "finding" money, that scares the hell out of me............

    ReplyDelete
  10. Chapter 90 money was never in question. As you may recall we also voted to not fund extra road work when we could have voted to over ride for that. We did go ahead and do road work anyway. The point of the leadership in small towns is to do what needs to happen to keep the town in check with reality. To vote no to a over ride for road work to me is like not knowing the outcome of your vote. It would seem to me the reality has been lost for the dollar scare. The audit will come and if you have followed the towns story it started with the town not being involved and letting a lone selectmen run ripsaw in my opinion. Voted into office?

    ReplyDelete