Published: May 08, 2008 03:10 pm         

State gives plan of action for county and school board relations

DOE tells finance department to improve customer service

The customer is always right.

Whether that's always the case, the Tennessee Department of Education has sided with the customer on at least one issue in telling the Cumberland County Finance Department it needs to improve its customer service.

The statement is one of the 12 recommended actions given by the state DOE to the finance department and the Cumberland County Board of Education.

At the May 6 Cumberland County BOE meeting, attorney Earl Patton provided an update on the state Department of Education's handling of the school board's request to be removed from the Financial Management Act of 1981.

Dated April 11, Patton explained the letter gave 12 items the department recommended for action, noting only one recommendation was made to the BOE to change anything.

Dan Schlafer, 9th District representative, said, "The only recommendation to the board is to hold our meetings later in the month so we can get financial information."

Patton added, "I think that would be a wise thing. If you look at the scheme of this thing and what the department is looking to do, it would be good faith showing on behalf of the board of education."

The board spoke of having the policy committee look at changing the regular date of monthly meetings to the last Thursday of the month rather than the first Thursday.

Addressed to Aarona VanWinkle, director of schools; Shirley Parris, board chair; Brock Hill, Cumberland County mayor; and Nathan Brock, finance director, the letter containing the plan of action was sent by Timothy Webb, acting commissioner of the Tennessee DOE.

Speaking to the board's request to be removed from the financial management act, the letter explains the department is "deferring a decision on the board's request until the school department and finance department have had time to work toward implementing the actions discussed in the March 7 meeting and additional action needed."

The letter requests both the BOE and finance department respectively submit progress reports within 60 days from April 11. The 12 issues and actions stated in the letter were as follows:

• The school board does not have viewing access to accounting data. The state recommended the finance department allow BOE and staff inquiry-only viewing rights to accounting data, where the BOE will be responsible for necessary hardware or software.

• As line item changes to the budget were having to be approved by the budget committee, which the state says is a violation of the act, the state recommended the finance department stop imposing this condition before issuing purchase orders.

• With the board's concern of the finance department making errors in charging salaries and supplements to appropriate funds and codes, the state recommended the BOE make a master list of employee salaries and supplements from where they're paid. The finance department should then load this data in its payroll/accouting system and make prompt corrections when errors are found.

• The school board had a similar concern with the errors in employee insurance expense. The state gave a similar recommendation as above to fix errors.

• With the DOS claiming not to have received notification of a large audit adjustment and the county mayor and finance director claiming to have sent it by the courier, the state said in the future, the DOS should be notified in person or by phone when a large adjustment is made to school funds.

• The board's concern that the finance department does not provide accounting reports on a timely basis results in data not being available at meetings was addressed by the state recommending the board meet later in the month since the delays were likely a result of normal processing.

• The state recommended the finance department and BOE meet monthly to review issues and concerns as the board has had trouble getting errors corrected. The recommendation stated, "The finance department needs to improve its customer service."

• The BOE claimed the finance department and county mayor distributed "incorrect and misleading information" on school system employees to the county commission. The DOE suggested the mayor and the finance department refer information requests to Central Office.

• With the claim that Cumberland County has not complied with GASB 34, the state instructed the finance department ensure the county's efforts comply with the law and stated the BOE should provide any needed data to ensure compliance.

• The BOE claims the finance department applied a signature stamp for the DOS on July 26, 2005, without authorization from the director. The state stated the finance department should not do so unless authorized.

• The 2006-'07 single audit report for county government included several findings related to school funds. The state recommended the finance department take a leadership role in correcting such findings and the school system should help in their areas of responsibility.

• In December 2007, the board claims the finance department did not provide payroll checks for substitute teachers. At a later search of the finance department, the checks were discovered and had not been sorted correctly, which caused delays in distributing checks to employees. The state said payroll checks should be provided in a timely manner.

In implementing the action plan, the BOE decided to hold its next monthly meeting on June 26, the last Thursday of the month.

On May 12 and 13, the BOE will hear one-hour presentations from four companies pertaining to energy performance contracting. Following the May 13 meeting, the board will decide when it will hold a special-called meeting to vote on what action they will take. The special-called meeting could take place immediately following the May 13 presentations or on a later date. With two presentations each, the meetings are scheduled to last from 5 to 7 p.m.