Clark County Commissioners suesauditor

Clark County

Related Photos

R. Monty Snelling

Discussion

Add a comment on this story

September 10, 2012

Clark County Commissioners suesauditor

Case seeks to get courts to review funds that don’t require appropriations

By MATT KOESTERS matt.koesters@newsandtribune.com The News and Tribune Mon Sep 10, 2012, 06:01 AM EDT

JEFFERSONVILLE — The Clark County Commissioners have filed a lawsuit against the county auditor, but their real intent is to get the courts to weigh in on an issue that has been a sticking point between the commissioners and the Indiana State Board of Accounts for years.

On its face, the lawsuit filed by County Attorney Greg Fifer against Auditor R. Monty Snelling seeks to get Snelling to pay a claim for $47,045 to Owens Communications, from which the county purchased radios for highway department vehicles to fulfill an unfunded mandate, out of the county’s information technology fund.

When the commissioners re-established the county’s information technology fund in August, they included a clause in the ordinance that gave the commissioners authority to spend money out of the fund without an appropriation. A representative of the board of accounts advised Snelling not to certify any claims paid without an appropriation, despite the ordinance. However, Snelling is permitted to pay the claims.

“Notwithstanding the [commissioners’] approval of Owens’ claims and the availability of appropriated and unappropriated funds within the IT fund, the auditor has wholly refused to pay the Owens’ claims from the IT fund on the grounds that the Clark County Council denied an additional appropriation for such purpose in May 2012,” according to the complaint filed by Fifer.

Snelling says he doesn’t recall the claims ever being sent to his office to be paid.

“They never did give me the claims to certify,” Snelling said. “I just made the statement that I wouldn’t certify them, so this is what happened next.”

The commissioners brought the claim before the county council in June, and the council tabled the issue on the grounds that the highway fund would be a more appropriate fund from which to pay the claim, according to County Councilman Brian Lenfert. Minutes from the June meeting reflect that the appropriation request from the IT fund was tabled.

This isn’t the first time that the board of accounts has taken issue with a Clark County fund not requiring an appropriation from the County Council. The board explained its audit position in a report covering Jan. 1 through Dec. 31, 2009, filed Jan. 7, 2011.

The lawsuit filed by the commissioners seeks to get the court to acknowledge that the commissioners acted properly when they re-established the IT fund.

“The IT fund ordinance does not conflict with any constitutional or statutory provision regarding the necessity of obtaining appropriation from the IT fund before making payment of approved Owens’ claims to be drawn on such fund,” according to the complaint. “The IT fund ordinance, to the extent that it permits the Owens’ claims to be paid without necessity of appropriation, is a valid and sufficient ‘law’ that fully authorizes and permits such payments to be made.”

Essentially, the commissioners want the courts to recognize that they can legally re-establish funds with similar clauses.

“Nobody in this proceeding is claiming anybody’s done anything wrong,” Fifer said. “We just need to find what the proper legal authority is for how to proceed.”

Snelling has retained Fishers-based attorney Doug Church. Church did not return a phone call seeking comment by press time.

Fifer initially filed the suit in Clark County Circuit Court No. 1, the court of Judge Dan Moore. Moore is a former county attorney. Fifer said Church has asked for the case to be tried in a different court.

“We’ll either agree to a new judge, or once a new judge is appointed, we’ll get a new hearing date,” Fifer said.