“Scrap Issue”
FACT 1:
FACT 1:
The Town of Alma supervisor filed a claim for “theft” with
New York Municipal Insurance Reciprocal (NYMIR) before BCI Investigator Jacob
Opala’s investigation was completed. In the police report the town supervisor
falsified a statement about seeing the images of two (2) Town of Alma trucks at
the scrap yard and the receipts prove that only one (1) truck went to the
scrapyard, the other load of scrap was picked up from the Town of Alma Highway
Department and a charge of $175 was taken from the total. As the Town of Alma
did not and still does not have a policy concerning revenue from scrap material
Investigator Opala found nothing criminal about the handling of the scrap
funds. He informed the town supervisor of his findings and the case was closed
on January 30, 2019. The report then went to the Allegany County District
Attorney who accepted Investigator Opala’s findings.
FACT 2:
NYMIR paid out $2,509.32 for the claim that the town
supervisor submitted as theft despite the total from the two (2) receipts being
$2,275.24.The Highway Crew not only had receipts for purchases made with money
from the scrap but money left over and once NYMIR discovered this, the town
supervisor was instructed to repay the claim that had been paid out.
FACT 3:
At the May 2019 board meeting, the Highway Superintendent
and his attorney handed over the receipts and leftover money ($1,815.62 in
cash) from scrap to the town clerk and bookkeeper. On June 4, 2109, the town
supervisor drew a check (attachment B) from the Town of Alma Highway Fund in
the amount of $1,815.62 payable to New York Municipal Insurance Reciprocal as
repayment for the claim he submitted for “scrap theft”.
FACT 4:
The check that was drawn from the Town of Alma Highway Fund
for payment of $1,815.62 to NYMIR was done via Claim #88. This claim number was
included in the May 2019 Highway Department Abstract that was created by the
town clerk and submitted for filing Claim #88 was actually paid out from the
Town of Alma Highway Fund in July 2019 to Blue Cross and Blue Shield
FACT 5:
Money from the sale of scrap material has always been used
for necessities such as bottled water and shared services, NOT “personal use”.
“$44,000”
FACT 1:
The prior town board initiated an investigation into payroll
and time cards, submitting them and the Highway Department Employee’s
Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) to an accounting firm called Stone Bridge
Business Partners, a division of EFPR Group CPAs, PLLC, without providing
context. This investigation was done at a cost of approximately $2,750. The
Highway Superintendent maintains records of the day-to-day operations
concerning the Highway Department and those records include days off, vacation
days, sick days, personal days, no lunch, accidental missed punch in/punch out,
et cetera. In the case of ‘no lunch’, federal labor laws state that if you are
on the job site or are in your equipment, which is not considered as a lunch
break. Given that information, the Highway Department Employees have worked
through their lunches on many more occasions than they were paid for.
FACT 2:
Stone Bridge/EFPR Group found, based on the information they
were provided (with no context) that there was a “potential exposure” of
$44574.06.The majority of sick, personal, and vacation days used closely
together and as half days, (received cancer treatment in morning and worked the
second half of day), were due to two of the Highway Department Employees
undergoing treatment for cancer, one of which spent six (6) months in the ICU.
Other considerations for their “potential exposure” were from the improper
understanding of guaranteed paid days off under the CBA (they get both Good
Friday and their Birthday off with pay).
FACT 3:
After the first firm found no criminal activity the prior
town board contacted SDC CPA Global Investigation & Forensic Accounting
Services on or around January 4, 2019 concerning a loss of $44,574. 06 and
submitted a claim to SDC CPAs, LLC Wright Public Entity / New York Municipal
Insurance Reciprocal for this amount. There has not been evidence made
available to the public that this claim was paid to the town for any amount.
“Union”
FACT 1:
The town supervisor altered certified payroll and withheld money
for hours worked by Highway Department Employees in 2018 and 2019.
FACT 2:
The deputy supervisor was assigned duties as “Union Liaison”
yet has been very vocal about his disdain for the union and the union
members.
FACT 3:
Despite the town supervisor’s claims that they won in
arbitration, it came down to a technical issue concerning the timing of when
the grievance was filed.
“Fiduciary Responsibilities”
FACT 1:
The former town board rejected the County Snow and Ice Contract
for County Roads, a reduction in over $60,000 to the Highway Department budget.
FACT 2:
Because of the refusal of the County Contract, the Highway
Department is driving sixteen (16) miles of County Roads to get to three (3)
miles of roads that are on the outer boundaries of the Town of Alma, and
sixteen (16) miles back for a total of thirty-two (32) miles round trip at a
cost to the taxpayers of Alma to plow those well-traveled roads. This
expenditure had been covered by the County through the Snow and Ice Contract.
FACT 3:
In 2018 the town supervisor managed to have six homes
removed from the Town of Alma tax roll and we lost that tax revenue.
FACT 4:
Despite a 31.1% cut to the Highway Department budget, our
property taxes have gone up.
FACT 5:
The town supervisor refused to pay vouchers submitted by the
Highway Superintendent for materials and services from vendors incurring late
fees, penalties, and potential negative impact on the town’s credit rating.
FACT 6:
For two consecutive years, the town supervisor, town clerk,
bookkeeper and the town board has received raises.
“Illegal Resolutions”
FACT 1:
At the February 4, 2020, Town of Alma Board Meeting, the
town supervisor and the deputy town supervisor walked out of an active meeting
where three (3) resolutions were legally passed by the majority vote.
FACT 2:
The town clerk was in attendance and accepted all three
resolutions but as of today’s date, it is not clear if she has filed these
resolutions.
FACT 3:
The money that the deputy supervisor claims will be a burden
on the taxpayers is money that exists within the Highway Department Accounts
but was moved by the town supervisor and the former deputy supervisor without
authorization from the Highway Superintendent. The town supervisor willfully
admitted this in a speech he gave before walking out of the February 4, 2020
board meeting. When addressing the resolution reinstating a Highway Department
employee he said (about the current town board) “They can do what they want,
they have to find out how to fund it”, he went on to say “...Our board moved
the money to reserve accounts to head this problem right off.”
FACT 4:
Budgets can be amended and the changes (moving money back to
their proper accounts) were filed with the New York State Comptroller.
FACT 5:
The legal problems associated with the Highway Department
are due to the decisions made by the current town supervisor and despite what
he said in the following text that was sent directly from his phone to all
board members on December 28, 2018 (attachment I), there were only two
applicants for the vacant HMEO Highway Department position and the only
qualified applicant was hired.
