Earle Council keeps fixed asset inventory threshold at $500

Earle Council keeps fixed asset inventory threshold at $500

City was considering lowering dollar amount as an accountability control tool

news@theeveningtimes.com

Earle will keep the limit of its fixed assets for auditing purposes at $500 rather than lowering it to include an inventory of all city property.

Currently, the city must keep a list with the City Clerk of anything with a value of $500 or higher to show state auditors to ensure accountability of taxpayer property. However, some on the city council had proposed lowering the amount as a way to keep better track of other city property items which seem to constantly turn up missing.

“I think we need to keep a list of every single piece of equipment that we have,” said Councilman Kenneth Cross. “That’s why a lot of equipment is getting away.

Nobody is responsible or accountable for anything.”

Cross said the city is constantly having to buy new equipment like weed eaters and rakes because they disappear and nobody knows what happened to them.

“We have to keep buying stuff over and over and over again,” Cross said.

“It’s not like we have deep pockets. This needs to be kept of everything. Even if it just costs $40. It adds up every time. We can’t keep doing this. Nobody is accountable.”

Councilman Donnie Cheers agreed.

“I want to lower it because I want people to be accountable and responsible,” Cheers said. “I know stuff is going to walk off. But somebody needs to keep track of it. I want to get to a point where if anything turns up missing, somebody ought to know its been taken and be responsible.”

City Treasurer Cynthia Conner told the city council that while she doesn’t have a problem holding people accountable for city property, she recommended the council keep the limit the same.

“It can be whatever you want to set it at,” Conner said. “But it creates more work for me if you want to set it at $200. That’s just too much. And I’m the one who is going to have to worry about it.”

Conner said if they lower the limit to five dollars to include items like rakes and parts on cars, she is the one who will have to show the auditors where each rake and nut and bolt is if they include it on the list.

“Don’t get me wrong when you say you want to take it under $500,” Conner said. “I totally understand that. But if it is on the list, I am the one who is going to have to find it even though I’m not the one using it. If we put it on the fixed asset list and they want to look at it and that part is on a tractor, I don’t even know how we would be able to keep up with that. If we put it on the list, we have to show it to them. If it is not there, I am the one who gets the write up no matter whose department it is. How can I show them where that part is?”

Mayor Sherman Smith also agreed that the limit should stay at $500 and said the fixed asset list should not be confused with an inventory list.

“I don’t have a problem with having them sign it in or out and making an inhouse inventory list,” Smith said. “But as far as the auditors go, you don’t want to go too low. If we say we have 20 rakes, a sign-in is fine. But the auditors are not interested in every little rake or nail.

That’s petty to them. If you set it too low, then that’s what they are going to have to look for. That’s not the reason for a fixed asset list.”

Smith added that if something on the fixed asset list turns up missing, the city needs to file a police report which shows that it was stolen for auditing purposes.

“If you spend $500, then they are going to look at the asset list and see if it’s there,” Smith said. “If you have something over $500 and you know it’s missing, what you do is go to the police ad get a police report.

When the auditors look for it, they will see the police report and at least it’s accountable by the police report.”

Cross said he would still like to see department heads be required to keep an inventory list with each one being responsible for the things on the list.

“You don’t see a problem of having to buy stuff over and over again? Cross asked Smith. “ All this stuff we keep buying over and over again, it’s ridiculous.

Don’t you think it adds up over the years? This needs to be dealt with. We need more accountability.”

“I agree with you,” Smith answered. “But my thinking is this isn’t the place to do that.”

Smith said the City Council can come back later and implement an inventory policy for employees.

“This is just for the auditors,” Smith said. “That would give you guidelines too, policy-wise.”

Councilwoman Jimmie Barham said equipment disappearing is a problem and asked Conner what she thought the limit for the fixed asset list should be.

“Every spring when we start mowing we don’t have any machines and we always have to get a new one. And that’s not good,” Barham. “So what is the amount that you think will help us keep track of what is in and out and not be too nitpicking?”

“Five hundred is good,” Conner replied.

A motion to keep the limit at $500 passed with Cross being the only no vote.

Cross said city officials need to let department heads and employees know that there will be consequences if property turns up missing.

“We need to start letting them know that this is no joke from this point on and if something happens and it’s not accounted for, there will be repercussions,” Cross said. “We need to let them know this is serious business. We can not continue to spend money like we are. We have to start putting teeth into this that they are going to be accountable.”

By Mark Randall