Audit questions Union County office makeover

County judge: Mistake fixed

A prosecuting attorney making the transition to circuit court judge paid to renovate the judge's office out of the prosecuting attorney's expense fund before moving over, according to a legislative audit report released Thursday.

The report also questioned thousands of dollars in expenses, saying they were documented improperly or served no public purpose.

Robin Carroll, a judge in the 13th Judicial Circuit, spent $12,771 in 2012 while he was the prosecuting attorney for the same circuit to remodel and decorate the judge's office, according to the audit. Carroll had been elected after running unopposed for the circuit court position during the May 2012 nonpartisan judicial elections.

The Legislative Joint Auditing Committee's panel on counties and municipalities heard dozens of reports Thursday auditing counties, water districts, cities and city agencies around the state. The committee also heard from Nevada County Judge Mark Glass about a project that should have been bid out, illegal donations using county money and work awarded to relatives of county staff.

The audit committee reviewed the prosecuting attorney's office audit without comments from individual legislators.

June Barron, a deputy legislative auditor, said Union County paid back the cost of the renovation to the prosecuting attorney's fund in May because the judge's office is in the Union County Courthouse, which is owned by the county.

Union County Judge Mike Loftin said auditors made him aware of the mistake, and the county took steps to correct it quickly.

"The funds were just paid out of the wrong account," Loftin said. "The money got paid out of the prosecuting attorney's account when it should have been paid out of the courthouse account, so we paid it back. That's what the auditors recommended, and that's what we did."

Carroll, who was reached by phone Thursday, said after a whirlwind of different judges holding the seat for the two to three years before he took office, the office lacked some of the basic items needed to function properly. He explained that the judge who held the seat in 2010 died, and the judge appointed to fill out her term subsequently was appointed to the federal bench. Another judge, whose office is in a different county, filled out the remainder of the term.

"So, after I knew for sure that I would be unopposed, I spoke to the county judge about renovating the office," Carroll said. "These were things that needed to happen so that I could start work. I couldn't walk in on Jan. 1 and have no desk, no working phone system, no computer ... just nothing."

Carroll said Loftin agreed, and the two worked out a funding plan to use some money from the county's budget and some from the prosecuting attorney's expense budget to pay for the fixes. Carroll said the understanding always included the county paying back the prosecuting attorney's fund.

"It's the only way I could have been ready to start working in January," he said.

The auditor's office also noted other problems inside of the expense fund, including $17,221 in payments that were not "adequately documented," $2,684 in expenditures "in apparent conflict" with state laws that require public money to be spent on items that benefit the public, and $225 paid to a credit-card company for interest and fees.

Carroll said all of the expenditures were documented thoroughly. He said he started a new accounting system for the expense fund so it would be more transparent when he took office.

"Before, the checks would just come straight to the prosecuting attorney in their name, and I never felt comfortable with the checks coming in my name because there was no accountability," he said.

Carroll said he set up a system where the checks would be issued to the office and kept by the office's financial manager, who would track expenditures, require receipts and keep records of the bank account.

"We have all of the receipts for records for the money the auditors are talking about. I don't know why they would say there wasn't enough documentation," Carroll said. "It was for travel reimbursement for witnesses, conferences for staff, office supplies. I've always had a good relationship with the legislative auditors, but there are some things we're going to disagree on."

He said one of those disagreements arose over the $2,684 in expenditures not in line with the state's public purpose doctrine. He said they were for things such as Rotary and Chamber of Commerce memberships for the office. He said another line item for $606 for nonbusiness-related advertisements was also related to work, in his opinion.

"The local papers will call around sometimes to all the elected officials, and that's for those advertisements for things like Veterans Day when they'll run these ads with pictures of elected officials and list your office under a banner that says, 'Our elected officials support our veterans.' I can only assume it was for things like that," he said.

The credit-card payments were for an office credit card that was used to book travel arrangements when a check can't be issued upfront, he said.

Auditors also questioned several expenditures made in Nevada County during 2012. According to the audit, the county spent $1,372 on auto repairs at a business owned by a sheriff's deputy and another $150 for construction services provided by the deputy county clerk's husband.

The county also violated state law by donating $1,455 to Prescott, $500 to Arkansas Children's Hospital and spending $343 on food for an employee Christmas party.

The county's emergency management department spent $26,977 on new radios without putting the purchase out for a bid, which is required by Arkansas law for all purchases of more than $20,000.

"The emergency coordinator approached me and said he wanted to buy the radios. He said he had money he needed to use or we would lose it," Glass said. "We plan on following the correct process in the future."

Metro on 06/06/2014

Upcoming Events