Dear Editor,images

I wanted to offer some observations about the plans announced by Councilmen Friend and O’Daniel to have Russ Lloyd appear at the City Council finance committee meeting just prior to the regular council meeting on Monday, June 9.  He is allegedly going to answer questions about the 2012 SBOA audit. I think this is being done in response to our call for a Day of Accountability concerning the 2012 SBOA audit findings, although they have not acknowledged that in any way.  My guess is that it is meant to be a diversionary tactic to drown out our calls for an explanation of the $29 million worth of “restatements” from the 2011 audit.

We can’t let them get away with that, so I am redoubling my call for everyone who wants an answer about where the money went to show up at the Civic Center on June 9, in Rm. 301, but we need to be there by 5:10 pm in order to hear what the City Controller has to say now that he didn’t say to the auditors when the time was at hand.  Now is NOT the time for us to back down.

I can truly say that I hope I am wrong. I would like nothing better than to leave that meeting with confidence in the City’s accounting  practices are solid now, when they weren’t at the time when the SBOA conducted the 2012 City audit review.

Thank you,

Laura Blackburn


posted without opinion, bias or editing


  1. comeon_man Reply

    June 9, 2014 at 6:50 am

    Kudos to you lkb for taking the initiative for writing the original letter calling for a “Day of Accountability” concerning the 2012 SBOA audit.And by Russ Lloyd showing up to answer questions about the audit findings, I assume your initial goal is going to be accomplished. But, now that Russ Lloyd is showing up, presumably at your behest, you are now calling his presense “a diversionary tactic” to drown out any questions about the 2011 audit. Really? What was stated by Lloyd or someone from the Administration that would justify your accusation? Nothing? You are lowering yourself to their level by playing their brand of politics. Or are you attempting to anger the CCO readers to encite that mob that you originally stated you hoped would not happen. Shame on you.

    • fog Reply

      June 9, 2014 at 6:57 am


      I didn’t read it the way you did. I think what Ms. Blackburn was trying to say is that this is just a symbolic, ‘nip-it-in-the-bud’ move by the City Admin.

      Looking at the schedule for today’s meetings, I think she’s right. The Finance Committee starts at 5:10 PM, and the Council is supposed to take on the Good Neighbor ordinance at 5:25 PM.

      Wow, a whole 15 minutes to address the numerous audit issues ? At least 1 hour is needed, and likely much more, to delve into any level of detail.

    • elkaybee Reply

      June 9, 2014 at 7:34 am

      Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear in the above letter. The “powers that be” are bringing in Mr. Lloyd to answer the “softball” questions THEY plan to ask, not to respond to the real questions we have. They are also going to see if they need to hire him some more help to prepare for the 2013 audit, which is due to begin soon.
      As for the accusation that I am try to whip up emotion and cause disorder in the chamber, I take that as a deep personal insult. If you know me, you know that is NOT a thing I would ever do. My philosophy has always been that “bad actors” turn off the public, no matter how worthy their cause is.

      • fog Reply

        June 9, 2014 at 10:11 am

        Ms. Blackburn,

        If you are saying that the format is softball questions asked by City Council, or just a script read by R. Lloyd, then yes, that is wrong !

        This “Fraudit” as esteemed poster Brains Benton has coined it, deserves and must have needed time for citizens to ask questions. Anything less than that will be a continuation of this COVER UP.

        • Brains Benton Reply

          June 9, 2014 at 10:16 am

          It wasn’t me that made that term up, but I wish I had!

          And I fully support the use of it.

        • elkaybee Reply

          June 9, 2014 at 11:53 am

          I have no faith that the Council members who would ask the questions the voters want answered will be recognized and allowed to speak. I have no idea if Mr. Lloyd has a prepared statement, but I suspect he will know all of the questions that Councilpersons will ask. My guess is that his letter in yesterday’s C&P is representative of the “answers” he will give.
          We need enough people in that room to make Council understand that this can’t be “tamped down” by imposing unrealistic time constraints.

  2. Robert Rich Reply

    June 9, 2014 at 10:04 am

    Show me the MONEY!

  3. Pressanykey Reply

    June 9, 2014 at 10:24 am

    It would be an excellent idea for an individual, with the ability to do so, to make a video recording of the financial committee meeting, and to upload that video to this website, thus elimination any editing or ownership issues that usually surround the local media coverage of these meetings.

    It is perfectly legal to record these public meetings.

    • Pressanykey Reply

      June 9, 2014 at 10:32 am

      I have always taken issue with WNIN “owning” the rights to the video recordings of these meetings. They also miss a lot when they do not show what is happening by all the members of the council during the entire meeting.

      The quality of WNIN’s recordings is sub par, in my estimation.

    • elkaybee Reply

      June 9, 2014 at 3:02 pm

      That is an excellent idea, Press. I hope some of those in attendance will do that.

  4. disaffected Reply

    June 9, 2014 at 4:03 pm

    I don’t believe Laura needs or desires to incite anyone to action against the administration or city council. They seem to be quite capable on their own of rallying the citizenry against their less than spectacular leadership.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>