First Prev
of 9
Next Last
A Wright

Cleveland, GA

#1 Oct 29, 2013
Why don't we do it?
Our County leaders should not be afraid of one, unless they have done something wrong?
Lemar

United States

#2 Oct 29, 2013
We got it hid already . We ain`t scared one bit . No records . They got lost .
Just Sayin

Sheridan, AR

#3 Oct 29, 2013
As I have read in an article where one of the County leaders were questioned regarding missing funds it was called "Just sloppy book keeping" to the tune of 250K.
Just Sayin

Sheridan, AR

#5 Oct 30, 2013
an audit is only as good as the information given to the auditor.

There is one done by an "Independent Firm" and is available to citizens to see. Take a look. Its a joke.
tmv post

AOL

#7 Oct 31, 2013
An "UNAUDITED" Audit simply means they take the numbers given to them and make sure they add up, are in the correct columns etc.

In the case of the 2012 Audit - almost $17,000,000 didn't and wasn't.

The ONLY way that the Citizens of Union COunty get the real facts is to get a real "AUDITED" Audit...

... which is a FORENSIC AUDIT.
tmv post

AOL

#8 Oct 31, 2013
PS... I have created a Web Page that has links to the 2012 Audit Documents. It contains...

* The Actual 97 page Audit
* The 37 Page Addendum <<GOOD INfO / READ!!!
(Had to get this via Open Records)
* 4 Page Auditors Letter

Here's the page: http://tinyurl.com/ombmq2p

Lamar can say I am printing lies, but he can't argue with the Auditors own comments, which is where almost the entire "Audit Section" of my News Report came from. So don't believe me. Don't believe Lamar. Read it straight from the Auditor!
oink oink

Upper Marlboro, MD

#9 Oct 31, 2013
tmv post wrote:
An "UNAUDITED" Audit simply means they take the numbers given to them and make sure they add up, are in the correct columns etc.
In the case of the 2012 Audit - almost $17,000,000 didn't and wasn't.
The ONLY way that the Citizens of Union COunty get the real facts is to get a real "AUDITED" Audit...
... which is a FORENSIC AUDIT.
are you saying this type of audit will reveal all of the taxpayer.supported tit on the county sow and the piglets that are gourging on the taxpayer supported tits?

“Our Cause Isn't Lost”

Since: Jan 11

Blairsville, GA

#10 Oct 31, 2013
oink oink wrote:
<quoted text>are you saying this type of audit will reveal all of the taxpayer.supported tit on the county sow and the piglets that are gourging on the taxpayer supported tits?
Maybe, I think what he is and has been sayin is --- this is just the tip of an iceberg, that has been visible just above the water for quite a while.

Nonetheless, the really poor and struggling folks of Blairsville/Union County have been duped. In my view, the Commissioner and his elite group, will use all at their disposal to exploit our home, for their own selfish pleasure, enjoyment, and self-serving agendas.

As for the link, and supporting documents: visit it quickly, download the PDF Public Records and Documents. The information, I’m sure was only obtained through determined, costly, and pain staking pursuit through the Freedom of Information Act, and given to us for our benefit. As usual, I’m sure if you don’t obtain the information now, it will conveniently disappear.

Personally, to make informed decisions, it is crucial to consider viable creditable information. Therefore, take a look at the public record itself, for yourself. It has been offered upon a silver platter.

Do that and, I believe, all but the complicit or insane will come to the same conclusions; Our local government is being mismanaged, is inefficient, and open to abuse and misappropriations.

The Time Is Now to end this cycle.

VOTE NO SPLOST
Just Sayin

Sheridan, AR

#11 Oct 31, 2013
Anyone know what Forensic Audit would cost? And is there any out there with integrity that could not be Paid off.

js
Heh

Danielsville, GA

#12 Nov 3, 2013
It would not cost a thing if the citizens insist enough that the GBI or FBI instigate.
Heh

Danielsville, GA

#13 Nov 3, 2013
"investigate"
tmv post

AOL

#14 Nov 3, 2013
After this election is over we move to Phase 2.

Petition Drive is one possibility. It's hard to get the FBI in on these things. I have already spoken to them. In a nutshell, they have a lot on their plate, and putting together a prosecution can take years. It was clearly indicated to me that the GBI would be the agency for this.

PROBLEM: I spoke to someone in the Governors Office about this. The person was very sympathetic to the situation in Union County, however, they pointed out a huge problem, and made a case for changing the biggest problem that exists in the County: Sole Commissioner.

I was told that according to State Law, the GBI can only legally enter into a County investigation IF THEY ARE INVITED TO BY A LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COUNTY.

Gues what defines a "Legal Representative of the COunty" in this scenario?

1) Commissioner (Lamar Paris)
2) District Attorney (Jeff Langley)

Obviously you can see the problem Union COunty is in. There is no outside Commissioner to go to, and the worthless twins mentioned above don't seem like they are going to do anything. It is my understanding that even the Sherriff COULD NOT invite the GBI into an investigation.

I WAS TOLD that in a situation like this, there is really only one thing the citizens can do... Make the biggest, loudest stink possible. Seriously, this was straight from the Governors Office.

2ND PROBLEM: Ken West & Charles Duncan are basically as good as TRAITORS TO THE CITIZENS and by not reporting on the facts, not investigating the facts, and as you see in the past week - allowing hte same ole same ole whitewash by Lamar Paris - they are basically complicit in the Coverage Coverup.

So we're left with "Make the biggest, loudest stink possible".

I think we are off to a good start. Might be an old fashioned Petition Drive, with door to door walkers asking for signatures is what it will take.

The EASIEST thing would be for peope to start showing up at Every Single Meeting Paris has, and start demanding answers.

I think the Tax Evasion may be a criminal matter citizens could even swear out warrants for arrest on.

I know you have a good Sherriff up there now. My guess is that he is in a heck of a tough spot right now.

At the right time, and I see that day coming - the Sherriffs of this Land will be the only thing that will save you.

Support your Sherriffs.... but the citizens must do their part. Start making noise about all this.

Lamar and Langley OWN the town right now. They OWN you. You are absolute prisoners to their legal whims. Fixing things won't come without a fight.
local

Dahlonega, GA

#15 Nov 3, 2013
NGN, 2-27-13
In other business, Com-
missioner Paris approved
a three-year contract with
Mauldin & Jenkins, Certi-
fied Public Accountants,
LLC to conduct the annual
audit for Union County.
The actual written contract is
pending review, he said.

“There were three
bids, Walker and Assoc.
$34,910, RL Jennings & As-
soc.,$38,000 and Mauldin &
Jenkins at $37,000. Although
Mauldin & Jenkins were the
second lowest bidder, we felt
that their size, experience and
references were superior," he
said.
“I want to publicly thank
R. L. Jennings for accurately
and successfully completing
our audit for the past several
years,” he said.“We were not
dissatisfied with their work
product, but they were simply
unable to produce the product
in a timely manner.
"Our audit has been
late for the past two years and
we would receive a penalty
should that happen this year.,"
he said. "They simply seemed
to have more work than they
could complete, but we very
much appreciate their past
work with and for the coun-
ty.
trail90

Morganton, GA

#16 Nov 3, 2013
I guess this means its ok for the fox to guard the hen house.

“Our Cause Isn't Lost”

Since: Jan 11

Blairsville, GA

#17 Nov 3, 2013
tmv post wrote:
... It's hard to get the FBI in on these things. I have already spoken to them. In a nutshell, they have a lot on their plate, and putting together a prosecution can take years. It was clearly indicated to me that the GBI would be the agency for this.
PROBLEM: I spoke to someone in the Governors Office about this. The person was very sympathetic to the situation in Union County, however, they pointed out a huge problem, and made a case for changing the biggest problem that exists in the County: Sole Commissioner.
I was told that according to State Law, the GBI can only legally enter into a County investigation IF THEY ARE INVITED TO BY A LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COUNTY.
Gues what defines a "Legal Representative of the COunty" in this scenario?
1) Commissioner (Lamar Paris)
2) District Attorney (Jeff Langley)
Obviously you can see the problem Union COunty is in. There is no outside Commissioner to go to, and the worthless twins mentioned above don't seem like they are going to do anything. It is my understanding that even the Sherriff COULD NOT invite the GBI into an investigation.
I WAS TOLD that in a situation like this, there is really only one thing the citizens can do... Make the biggest, loudest stink possible. Seriously, this was straight from the Governors Office.
2ND PROBLEM: Ken West & Charles Duncan are basically as good as TRAITORS TO THE CITIZENS and by not reporting on the facts, not investigating the facts, and as you see in the past week - allowing hte same ole same ole whitewash by Lamar Paris - they are basically complicit in the Coverage Coverup...
The EASIEST thing would be for peope to start showing up at Every Single Meeting Paris has, and start demanding answers.
I think the Tax Evasion may be a criminal matter citizens could even swear out warrants for arrest on.
I know you have a good Sherriff up there now. My guess is that he is in a heck of a tough spot right now.
At the right time, and I see that day coming - the Sherriffs of this Land will be the only thing that will save you.
Support your Sherriffs.... but the citizens must do their part. Start making noise about all this.
Lamar and Langley OWN the town right now. They OWN you. You are absolute prisoners to their legal whims. Fixing things won't come without a fight.
You are indeed correct that there have been recent efforts to limit the powers and scope of authority of local Sheriff's within the States.

However, to the best of my knowledge in many Counties in Georgia, the Sheriff is designated, as its Chief Law Enforcement Official.

If that is so, Sheriffs, in all Georgia Counties as provided by the Georgia Annotated Code, would be the most powerful person in the jurisdiction. With the D.A., of course, falling within the Judicial System.

I haven't researched any relating code changes. So I don't speak with certainty.

Nevertheless, I do know this. The Sheriff we have chosen is a seasoned Veteran. He has already restored a level of Professionalism and confidence in our local Law Enforcement.

He is no ones fool. And I'm sure with the continued support of the good people of our community, he is more than capable of acting appropriately if and when criminal activity can be identified, through an undeniable time consuming process of indisputable evidence.

The struggle we face upon these mountains is to maintain our way of life and preserve our heritage, as we strive to weed out those vestiges of unfairness and/or corruption, and that remains a long battle, but as always, only through our continued vigilance can we prevail.

Personally, I don't believe the Sheriff will allow one's status to stand in his way in his pursuit of justice.

Should you discover specific Georgia Code to readdress the Sheriff's Constitutional authority or limitations thereof, please let us know.

“Our Cause Isn't Lost”

Since: Jan 11

Blairsville, GA

#19 Nov 4, 2013
Last week the NGN printed a Letter from the Commissioner with a disclosure claiming individual payment for the letter by the Commissioner. The unsavory letter itself was provoking, but is a separate issue of unpleasantness for another posting.

Several blaring observations of blatant impropriety are instantly obvious. The letter’s payment disclaimer, also references the Commissioner’s adjacent Q & A column favoring his proposed SPLOST IV. The NGN, obviously, didn’t offer, nor do I suspect solicit any opposing point of view, particularly in such mass, and in such premium placement. But, yet most of us understand that unbiased reporting, news, or fair and equal access certainly isn’t a priority for the NGN.

There are obvious errors in the Q&A article, that need rebuttal, in that they confuse SPLOST III and SPLOST IV, possibility inadvertent, possibility not.

Most of us realize proofreading isn’t the papers strong suit, and normally overlook it. But it is confusing, so one begins to be unsure and inquire; was this really an error or an intent to confuse, and if so by whom?

Who knows, but the Commissioner intentionally or not doesn’t provide enough fact and figures. Although, he provides some numbers (if you accept them) apparently upon SPLOST III, he alludes to the Jail construction (no numbers), and generally the numbers for SPLOST III simply just don’t add up.

Then he kinda sorta confesses to what I would call some gross unfunded manipulations.

First, Urban Redevelopment Authority Bonds (loans) he claims were used for the construction of the Community Center, apparently in excess of $5,000,000, and then a still remaining balance of $1,755,000 from the original $5 Million loan on SPLOST III: both of which he is proposing to pay from the NEW $10,000,000 in Bonds (loans) he intends to make as soon as the NEW (extension) SPLOST IV is approved.

Sounds confusing don’t it. Well apparently its meant to be, and remember this is just a very brief summary trying to interpret the little information, and few figures he felt he would intrigue us with.

The problem remains there are still many unanswered questions upon just which projects were completed, which were not, which approved by voters, which were not. And, it’s now clear that if SPLOST IV is approved; another $10,000,000 will be borrowed immediately to pay for pass debit from previous expenditures, and SPLOST III.

So, I guess, the question really is if SPLOST IV were approved, could it pay for those past expenses upon those projects that were promised before, and as well actually produce the remaining $11,000,000 over the next 6 years to pay for the same projects previously promised again, along with new ones?

I can recall SPLOST was once sold as a temporary TAX.

So, with the Commissioner now declaring SPLOST “our lifeblood” being “critical to the operation and maintenance of the County”... we must now understand that we were undeniably lied to from the start, and that the various SPLOST(s) were never meant to be TEMPORARY from the beginning.

But, didn’t many of us see that from day one? The Time is Now to stop this insanity, enough, is enough, close the purse strings.

VOTE NO SPLOST IV
Conrad

Cleveland, GA

#20 Nov 4, 2013
GA-LAW-FF wrote:
Last week the NGN printed a Letter from the Commissioner with a disclosure claiming individual payment for the letter by the Commissioner. The unsavory letter itself was provoking, but is a separate issue of unpleasantness for another posting.
Several blaring observations of blatant impropriety are instantly obvious. The letter’s payment disclaimer, also references the Commissioner’s adjacent Q & A column favoring his proposed SPLOST IV. The NGN, obviously, didn’t offer, nor do I suspect solicit any opposing point of view, particularly in such mass, and in such premium placement. But, yet most of us understand that unbiased reporting, news, or fair and equal access certainly isn’t a priority for the NGN.
There are obvious errors in the Q&A article, that need rebuttal, in that they confuse SPLOST III and SPLOST IV, possibility inadvertent, possibility not.
Most of us realize proofreading isn’t the papers strong suit, and normally overlook it. But it is confusing, so one begins to be unsure and inquire; was this really an error or an intent to confuse, and if so by whom?
Who knows, but the Commissioner intentionally or not doesn’t provide enough fact and figures. Although, he provides some numbers (if you accept them) apparently upon SPLOST III, he alludes to the Jail construction (no numbers), and generally the numbers for SPLOST III simply just don’t add up.
Then he kinda sorta confesses to what I would call some gross unfunded manipulations.
First, Urban Redevelopment Authority Bonds (loans) he claims were used for the construction of the Community Center, apparently in excess of $5,000,000, and then a still remaining balance of $1,755,000 from the original $5 Million loan on SPLOST III: both of which he is proposing to pay from the NEW $10,000,000 in Bonds (loans) he intends to make as soon as the NEW (extension) SPLOST IV is approved.
Sounds confusing don’t it. Well apparently its meant to be, and remember this is just a very brief summary trying to interpret the little information, and few figures he felt he would intrigue us with.
The problem remains there are still many unanswered questions upon just which projects were completed, which were not, which approved by voters, which were not. And, it’s now clear that if SPLOST IV is approved; another $10,000,000 will be borrowed immediately to pay for pass debit from previous expenditures, and SPLOST III.
So, I guess, the question really is if SPLOST IV were approved, could it pay for those past expenses upon those projects that were promised before, and as well actually produce the remaining $11,000,000 over the next 6 years to pay for the same projects previously promised again, along with new ones?
I can recall SPLOST was once sold as a temporary TAX.
So, with the Commissioner now declaring SPLOST “our lifeblood” being “critical to the operation and maintenance of the County”... we must now understand that we were undeniably lied to from the start, and that the various SPLOST(s) were never meant to be TEMPORARY from the beginning.
But, didn’t many of us see that from day one? The Time is Now to stop this insanity, enough, is enough, close the purse strings.
VOTE NO SPLOST IV
Sure wish this could be posted next to voting machines . Well put and valuable information . Thank you again .
Right Wing Nut III

Toccoa, GA

#21 Nov 4, 2013
GA-LAW-FF wrote:
Last week the NGN printed a Letter from the Commissioner with a disclosure claiming individual payment for the letter by the Commissioner. The unsavory letter itself was provoking, but is a separate issue of unpleasantness for another posting.
Several blaring observations of blatant impropriety are instantly obvious. The letter’s payment disclaimer, also references the Commissioner’s adjacent Q & A column favoring his proposed SPLOST IV. The NGN, obviously, didn’t offer, nor do I suspect solicit any opposing point of view, particularly in such mass, and in such premium placement. But, yet most of us understand that unbiased reporting, news, or fair and equal access certainly isn’t a priority for the NGN.
There are obvious errors in the Q&A article, that need rebuttal, in that they confuse SPLOST III and SPLOST IV, possibility inadvertent, possibility not.
Most of us realize proofreading isn’t the papers strong suit, and normally overlook it. But it is confusing, so one begins to be unsure and inquire; was this really an error or an intent to confuse, and if so by whom?
Who knows, but the Commissioner intentionally or not doesn’t provide enough fact and figures. Although, he provides some numbers (if you accept them) apparently upon SPLOST III, he alludes to the Jail construction (no numbers), and generally the numbers for SPLOST III simply just don’t add up.
Then he kinda sorta confesses to what I would call some gross unfunded manipulations.
First, Urban Redevelopment Authority Bonds (loans) he claims were used for the construction of the Community Center, apparently in excess of $5,000,000, and then a still remaining balance of $1,755,000 from the original $5 Million loan on SPLOST III: both of which he is proposing to pay from the NEW $10,000,000 in Bonds (loans) he intends to make as soon as the NEW (extension) SPLOST IV is approved.
Sounds confusing don’t it. Well apparently its meant to be, and remember this is just a very brief summary trying to interpret the little information, and few figures he felt he would intrigue us with.
The problem remains there are still many unanswered questions upon just which projects were completed, which were not, which approved by voters, which were not. And, it’s now clear that if SPLOST IV is approved; another $10,000,000 will be borrowed immediately to pay for pass debit from previous expenditures, and SPLOST III.
So, I guess, the question really is if SPLOST IV were approved, could it pay for those past expenses upon those projects that were promised before, and as well actually produce the remaining $11,000,000 over the next 6 years to pay for the same projects previously promised again, along with new ones?
I can recall SPLOST was once sold as a temporary TAX.
So, with the Commissioner now declaring SPLOST “our lifeblood” being “critical to the operation and maintenance of the County”... we must now understand that we were undeniably lied to from the start, and that the various SPLOST(s) were never meant to be TEMPORARY from the beginning.
But, didn’t many of us see that from day one? The Time is Now to stop this insanity, enough, is enough, close the purse strings.
VOTE NO SPLOST IV
It is said before: If you give a politician money, they will spend it all and borrow more if the voters are not looking.

You would think that SPLOST would have LOWERED our property taxes significantly if used properly. We have Lamar so of course he spent it all and borrowed a lot more than he had to boot.
questions questions

Jefferson, GA

#22 Dec 15, 2013
A Wright wrote:
Why don't we do it?
Our County leaders should not be afraid of one, unless they have done something wrong?
Well of course they haven't done anything wrong! Mr Paris will show these people. I for one cannot wait until he calls their bluff and calls for the silly ole forensic audit. That will shut them all up. You teach em Mr Paris!
tmv post

Jefferson, GA

#23 Dec 16, 2013
tmv post wrote:
PS... I have created a Web Page that has links to the 2012 Audit Documents. It contains...

* The Actual 97 page Audit
* The 37 Page Addendum <<GOOD INfO / READ!!!
(Had to get this via Open Records)
* 4 Page Auditors Letter

Here's the page: http://tinyurl.com/ombmq2p

Lamar can say I am printing lies, but he can't argue with the Auditors own comments, which is where almost the entire "Audit Section" of my News Report came from. So don't believe me. Don't believe Lamar. Read it straight from the Auditor!
~EXCERPTED FROM PAGE 14 OF THE UNION CO NEWS REPORT~

Below is a partial list of Adjustments and Restatements and Problem Areas noted in the 2012 County Audit.

A. We start with one 2012 Audit Entry related to an old SPLOST, SPLOST 1 also known as the 1998 SPLOST, which actually sums up the situation and gives a perfectly clear example of the accounting confusion that exists. At the bottom of Page 63 in the 2012 Audit it lists the following:

“Transfers to Debt Service funds, funded with remaining 1998 SPLOST funds…$411,259”

The 1998 SPLOST (SPLOST 1) ended in 2004. This seemed very strange that $411,259 had just been sitting around unused for the past 9 years. We reviewed all of the previous annual Audits, and all the previously required SPLOST publications, and we couldn’t find any reference to leftover SPLOST monies. An Open Records Request was put in requesting to see the records regarding this newly discovered money. The following is the response provided by the Commissioner on October 7, 2013:

“We do not have any records indicating left over monies or remaining balance from the 1998 SPLOST. Again, any information in an audit may not necessarily match or coincide with our records. In this case, the 1998 SPLOST was 15 years ago, way past our records retention requirements.”

QUESTION: Where did the Auditor “find”$411,259 of old money if there are no records? It appears to be a conveniently “made up” audit entry in order to balance funny money accounting practices - perhaps maybe balance out “missing money”?

COMMENTARY: Audits are based on mathematical science, not creative writing such as one might expect in a Science Fiction Novel. Auditors are not expected to make up creative stories for where monies come from and go to. Audits are based on factual records. If you have a record that says $10 came in, then it is reflected as $10 of income. If you then write a check for $6.50, then you have an entry that shows $6.50 going out. And if there is no record, then there is no entry. In this case, there are no records, but there is an entry for $411,259, which is interestingly a very specific dollar amount. That is a lot of money, but Mr Paris seems rather lackadaisical and unconcerned that the Records and the Audit don’t match.“No big deal” seems to be his attitude. Trust me… it’s a big deal, and it is a LOT of money, and it is reflective of the entire County Finance situation, which is closer in substance to a Science Fiction Novel, than it is a scientific accounting.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 9
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Blairsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Cooks only shot 1 hr Advocate4Clean 7
BRMEMC Director Candidates 16 hr Curious is stupid 28
Re-Elect Lamar Paris 2016 16 hr Observation 372
Full throttle 19 hr Apostle Paul 7
Are there any blacks in Blairsville? (Oct '08) Mon tellico 396
Where can I find a fresh meat market? Mon Hanging Meat 5
Hillary Clinton for President ! Aug 20 dgd748 83

Blairsville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Blairsville Mortgages