Motion on J.Co.Commission Agenda to Oust Surkamp! [Archive]

Kensey

10-30-2007, 03:48 PM

UGH Who didn't see this coming down the pike???
People fear change, and hate it when someone speaks the truth and their mind!

Speaking as a newbie, the exact same thing happened in IT going on 13 years ago. There was a development team working on a product called NetBSD. A fellow named Theo de Raadt, one of the team founders, was pretty vocal about anything he saw as incompetence or slacking off. The net result was he eventually got kicked out of the team, and ended up going off and creating his own product called OpenBSD which (after a rough start) is now very successful and has driven some very important software development.

Now, Mr. Surkamp can't exactly go off and create his own county government, but if the worst happens and he gets removed from office or is outmaneuvered into resigning, perhaps he can serve as the focal point for a complete slate of county officers running for election together. I myself, if I may be bold for a moment, wouldn't mind serving the county in the capacity of a commissioner with technical portfolio -- that computer services contract in particular seems to bear watching...

Starbuck

10-30-2007, 03:57 PM

Oh Heallll naw! More following...........

lar

10-30-2007, 04:00 PM

How about one of those online petitions?

Kensey

10-30-2007, 04:11 PM

How about one of those online petitions?

Unfortunately an online petition is the next thing to useless. Any bozo can sign them, and many do. What works better is a letter-writing campaign and a show of force. If a dozen (or even three or four) of us show up at the next county meeting, to present our view against Mr. Surkamp's ouster, we could well represent the largest single-issue voice in attendance. That gets noticed because constituents P.O.'ed enough to show up at meetings vote for the other guys at the next election, and those who are writing letters are still likely telling everybody in sight who NOT to vote for even if they don't vote themselves.

Starbuck

10-30-2007, 04:24 PM

Jefferson County Commissioners don't have an individual email, but according to the clerk in the office, if you send an email to the following address, a copy will go to each commissioner: [email protected]

Here is a copy of the email I just sent. Since I'm busy and a little PO'd at the entire turn of events, I don't know how well it gets my point across, but anyone on here wishing to can plagarize and send it to the email above.

Esteemed Commissioners:
On your posted agenda for Thursday’s meeting is an item of extreme concern for me. Item #3 under New Business discusses a three-part plan to remove Mr. Jim Surkamp from the County Commission. I find this ugly turn of events to be extremely disconcerting.
As a registered voter, I voted for Mr. Surkamp in the last election. As a resident of Shannondale, I feel that Mr. Surkamp is sometimes the only one paying attention to our issues. Obviously Jefferson County is bigger than Shannondale, but every time there is an issue east of the Shenandoah River, Mr. Surkamp is in attendance at meetings and available for whatever advice is needed. None of the other commissioners have done so with such alacrity. So what is your alternative for taking away my duly elected representative in county government?
I am aware of the allegations surrounding Mr. Surkamp’s actions. And while he perhaps has not always conducted himself with the utmost professionalism, he has raised issues which none of the rest of you have, and which still have not been answered. Why is there an over-$30,000 discrepancy in video lottery monies? Why did a contract review take nine months? I guarantee you that as a registered voter, I am greatly interested in answers to these questions…far more interested than Mr. Surkamp’s supposed unprofessional behavior.
Furthermore, the motion seems to be thoroughly researched and documented. It seems obviously this has been quietly recommended as a good course of action; and by quietly, I mean out of the voting public’s eye. Why else would no word of this appear until two days before the Commission meets? This gives the voting public no time to respond via letter; little time to make arrangements to take off to attend the meeting; and therefore little recourse to provide comment, since there are no individual e-mail addresses for the County Commissioners. That such a thing would be done in such a dubious manner is despicable and shows a general lack of caring on the part of the Commissioners for the voters of this county.
I urge the County Commission as a whole to vote No to this Item. Additionally, I would personally like to know whose idea it was to bring it before the commission, so I will not make the mistake of voting for him/her again. Please direct all correspondence to me regarding this matter to <email address removed>, or to the following mailing address:
Respectfully,

LazerFlash

10-30-2007, 05:55 PM

Here is a copy of the email I just sent. Since I'm busy and a little PO'd at the entire turn of events, I don't know how well it gets my point across, but anyone on here wishing to can plagarize and send it to the email above.Good letter, SB. Rather than trust in email delivery - which this Commission generally chooses to ignore - I'll be hand-delivering my letter to the County Commission office tomorrow.

BTW, for those interested, the following is snipped directly from the WV Code and defines the terminology in WV § 6-6-7 (which is the section detailing removal of public officials):

"The term 'neglect of duty,' or the term 'official misconduct,' as used in this article, shall include the willful waste of public funds by any officer or officers, or the appointment by him or them of an incompetent or disqualified person to any office or position and the retention of such person in office, or in the position to which he was appointed, after such incompetency or disqualification is made to appear, when it is in the power of such officer to remove such incompetent or disqualified person. The term 'incompetence,' as used in this article, shall include the wasting or misappropriation of public funds by any officer, habitual drunkenness, habitual addiction to the use of narcotic drugs, adultery, neglect of duty, or gross immorality, on the part of any officer. The term 'incompetent person,' as used in this section, shall include any appointee or employee of any officer or officers, including county court, municipal bodies or officers, and boards of education, who willfully wastes or misappropriates public funds, or who is guilty of habitual drunkenness, habitual addiction to the use of narcotic drugs, adultery, neglect of duty or gross immorality"

In my opinion, none of these describes Jim Surkamp's actions in any way. OTOH, the other members of the Commission could certainly be accused of "willful waste of public funds", since they seem more interested in hanging one of their own than they are in finding out where money is going within the County. ;)

STR1KER

10-30-2007, 10:24 PM

Well Done!!!!
Exceptionally Well Done!!!!!!!!!
F-yeeeah!!!!!

T Mac

10-31-2007, 08:12 AM

And while he perhaps has not always conducted himself with the utmost professionalism,

Oh my goodness! I'm totally shocked! Someone on the S&B Forums has actually admitted that Mr. Surkamp is less than perfect! Good for you. Honestly, I think small concessions like that totally increase your credibility, instead of the usual "Jim is an angel here on Earth" babble that takes place here.

The "professionalism" quote above is also the understatement of the decade, by the way.

Starbuck

10-31-2007, 08:44 AM

TMac, I know of no one in a professional setting, myself included, who conducts him/herself, with the utmost professionalism all the time. And since I was not present at any of the alleged "attacks," I cannot say what was done.

I'm upset that the issues Mr. Surkamp raised have not been addressed. And as I stated in my email, I'm extremely upset that the other Commissioners are attempting to remove my "voice" in County government. The issues raised are waaayyy more important, IMO, than someone's feelings getting hurt. If you don't want hurt feelings, then don't work for county government.

KatherineA

10-31-2007, 08:49 AM

The fax number for the Commission Office is 304-7257916 - a way to get your letters in by Thursday since rumor is that the Commissioners do not treat emails as "correspondence."

KatherineA

10-31-2007, 09:22 AM

The Article from the Herald Mail today. Apparently, this is Corliss' idea. Manuel says he is against it. Ms. Morgan is noncommital as usual (I used to be a huge fan, but she's losing me lately)

The Journal's version can be found here: http://journal-news.net/page/content.detail/id/500293.html?nav=5006

Jefferson Co. Commissioner to consider law that would oust Surkamp
By DAVE McMILLION [email protected]

CHARLES TOWN, W.Va. - Saying that embattled Jefferson County Commissioner Jim Surkamp "is not the messiah" and needs to be "brought under control," County Commissioner Greg Corliss is proposing that county officials consider state law that could be used to remove Surkamp from office.

Corliss said in a telephone interview Tuesday that his proposal is "not a big deal" and said it could be removed from the agenda Thursday by the other commissioners.

A removal proceeding might not be enacted against Surkamp, but Corliss said maybe the possibility of such an action would have a "therapeutic effect" or "put him on notice."

Surkamp declined to comment in detail Tuesday, other than to say that he reiterates comments he made Sunday about his work on the commission.

Surkamp said dealing with government issues sometimes leads to conflict and he said he thinks the criticism of him has been an intense overreaction.

"It's the very same issue," Surkamp said.

Surkamp has been at the center of controversy at times since he was elected, and the issues have centered around his interaction with other county officials, his comments about county programs and staff, and other areas.

An agenda item for Thursday's regular county commission meeting includes a motion to consider three steps to remove Surkamp from office.

The agenda item, placed on the meeting schedule by Corliss, seeks clarification if a state law can be used to remove public officers for misconduct, malfeasance or neglect of duty.

It was the same state law that was used when several developers tried unsuccessfully to remove Jefferson County Planning Commission member Todd Baldau from office, Corliss said.

Corliss said he wants the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney's Office to determine if the law can be used to remove Surkamp from office.

If the prosecuting attorney's office decides the commission has such authority, prosecutors can review Surkamp's actions since being elected, Corliss said.

Based on the review of Surkamp's actions, the Prosecuting Attorney's office could possibly draft a petition for the removal of Surkamp, Corliss said.

Then it would be up to the commission to approve or disapprove the petition, Corliss said.

If the commission proceeds with a petition, a three-judge panel would hear the case, Corliss said.

The issues involving Surkamp include an incident earlier this year in which Surkamp allegedly became "verbally aggressive" with the county's director of maintenance.

There have been allegations that he made disparaging comments about the county's corporate community and that he appeared at one time to have a vendetta against county Administrator Leslie Smith.

Corliss said he was troubled over a recent statement that Surkamp made about a proposed judicial annex.

Surkamp accused the commission's attorney of a deliberate delay of a review of a contract for the annex, which caused more than $1 million in increased costs, according to a resolution the commission passed clarifying the issue.

"That was the end for me," Corliss said.

Corliss said Surkamp thinks no one can control him and Corliss said he wants clarification on whether the commission can.

"He sort of views himself as above it all. But he's not the messiah," Corliss said.

County Commission President Frances Morgan said Corliss' move is "highly unusual" and added she did not believe it is an area in which the commission should be involved.

Morgan said she realizes "a lot of bruised feelings" exist in the county, but she feels the commission should simply move on.

Commissioner Rusty Morgan declined to comment in detail about the situation.

"I'll have a position on Thursday. I prefer that it not be out in the press at this point," Morgan said.

If there is any attempt to remove someone from office, it should come from the voters, Commissioner Dale Manuel said.

There is a similar process voters can use, Manuel said.

"But it would be their decision. I'm not soliciting," Manuel said.

Surkamp said the commissioners need to remember that about 9,400 people voted for him in the last election and it comes down to "how do we respect Democracy."

Surkamp was elected to a six-year term in November 2004.

Starbuck

10-31-2007, 09:24 AM

Well, this information will definitely be remembered on election day.

KatherineA

10-31-2007, 09:30 AM

Wow!! and here is an editorial from the Journal -

http://journal-news.net/page/content.detail/id/500107.html?nav=5003

And one response from a reader.

Just as there is not such a thing as home rule or county maintained roads, there is no such thing as a recall vote in West Virginia.

It would be advisable for the individuals calling into Journal Junction recommending a recall vote on Jefferson County Commissioner Jim Surkamp to get their facts straight. It is highly probable that the callers are new residents of West Virginia and the state from where they moved had recall vote provisions.

Instead of assuming that every state has the same laws, new residents should learn about their new home.

If someone wants to remove a county commissioner from a county commission, he or she should refer to Chapter 6-6-7 of the West Virginia Code. The process to remove commissioners from office is laid out there.

A county commissioner can be removed from office for official misconduct, malfeasance in office, incompetence, neglect of duty or gross immorality or for any of the causes or on any of the grounds provided by any other statute.”

In the case of a county commissioner, charges can be brought by the county commission, by an officer of the county or by what amounts to a petition signed by at least 50 people or 1 percent of the total number of voters in the most recent election.

No matter who wants to bring charges, the charges have to be presented to the local circuit court whereupon the judge will issue a summons for the commissioner, in this case, to appear to defend the charges.

The local circuit court judge — without delay, as the code says — is supposed to send a copy of the charges to the state Supreme Court and ask the chief justice to convene a three-judge panel, consisting of three circuit court judges from across the state.

Also without delay, the chief justice is supposed to designate the three-judge panel to hear the case. The statute says that not more than one of the judges can be from the same county as the county commissioner. However, that does not seem to mean that at least one has to be from the same county. It would seem to mean that none has to be from the same county, but one can be.

The three-judge panel then hears the case and makes a ruling either removing the county commissioner from office or not. The ruling can be appealed to the state Supreme Court.

With all that said, we would suggest that the best thing that could happen in this particular case would be for Commissioner Surkamp to resign, although the chances of that we suspect are nil.

When a commissioner’s irrational, childish, embarrassing behavior undermines the credibility of the commission, which Surkamp’s behavior has, that commissioner should voluntarily step down for the sake of the commission’s ability to perform its duties and for the good of the people.

It will not take long, if it has not already happened, for the commission as well as for the individual commissioners to lose the respect of the people whom they are sworn to serve, as long as Surkamp is allowed to continue making a mockery of the Jefferson County Commission.

With what authority will the commission and commissioners be able to act if the integrity and standing of the institution has been destroyed by the absurd, nonsensical, foolish actions of of one person?

None; that is what authority.

Response:
10-25-07 2:56 PM

There are always at least two sides to every story, and we have never really heard the whole story related to these "events" involving Mr. Surkamp. To the extent that Jim Surkamp questions the status quo and the good ol' boy networks around here, he does us a service. West Virginia seems to be rife with people in well-paying state and local government jobs whose primary qualification must be that they know someone. For example, a WV state forestry executive, acting in official capacity, recently suggested I should buy firewood by weight. You don't have to be a forestry expert, or even very smart to know that that is a dumb idea, but this is West Virginia. I don't mind county commissioners demanding accountability and competence from county employees. If Mr. Surkamp's approach to the questions detracts from the questions themselves, he should work on that. But I see no reason for questions not to be raised when they should be.

lar

10-31-2007, 09:35 AM

I think since some recognize that it should be the voter's decision to remove an elected official, even an online petition would be a good way to get the voter's to sign by name through the electronic enviroment to show support of Surkamp even if it is not taken seriously (per Kensey). I personally am not the political type, but I notice a lot of you really do support this man.

This whole thing brings to mind my $43 dollars the tax department is keeping because it is after the tax year. Just another way the County mismanages the citizens funds. Not to mention the tax lien that I just discovered is on my credit report for a $20 late fee. I was just made aware of this from my mortgage company much to my surprise.

lar

10-31-2007, 09:36 AM

I think since some recognize that it should be the voter's decision to remove an elected official, even an online petition would be a good way to get the voter's to sign by name through the electronic enviroment to show support of Surkamp even if it is not taken seriously (per Kensey). I personally am not the political type, but I notice a lot of you really do support this man.

This whole thing brings to mind my $43 dollars the tax department is keeping because it is after the tax year. Just another way the County mismanages the citizens funds. Not to mention the tax lien that I found out about on my credit report for a $20 late fee. I was just made aware of this from my mortgage company much to my surprise.

Willis

10-31-2007, 10:58 AM

I'd say slow down and smell the roses(or whatever your perception of the aroma might be). Attend the meetings , if possible, to show interest. but withhold judgment. The whole affair looks like a classic case of cya in Caps(CYA). The commissioner asking the motion is a lame duck who's announced he's not running next year. The motion and the articles are rife with qualifiers such as " maybe", "possibly", "there's a chance", " subject to interpretation" etc. etc. etc.

The comments about the illegality may well be valid and this is just a political gimmick to take some of the heat off the one CC up for re-election next November, Rusty Morgan. They can say they looked into the matter and found no basis for action(if that is the final legal opinion). The emphasis is of course added on final since the County PA's office will be making initial assessments after being one of the subjects of Commissioner Surkamp's "Wild, Bizarre, and Crazy Behavior".

I truly, in my 50 odd years in the County don't recall the interest in local politics being such a hot button issue. I can vividly remember past times when certain Commissioners were fast asleep to the point of nearly falling out of their seats. The times, they are a changin'!!! lol

ministerswife

11-01-2007, 01:09 PM

Willis says: "The times, they are a changin'!!! lol"

Although we've only had our home here for a little over 25 years, that is true.

So true, and that was noted by one who attended the CC meeting today. CC removed #3 from the agenda, noting Mr. Surkamp did or said nothing they find worth their pursuing to remove him from the committee. The complete decision discussion is available in the minutes for the meeting today, as they come forth. We do have to look at the fact that the CC was called upon (whether that call was made correctly or not is another issue) to do something, and whether they liked having to do it, they fulfilled that duty (“cya” or not) and they deserve appreciation for that; and this appreciation was expressed.

Let us also look at the Correspondence section on the agenda for the CC meeting today:
#2: "Correspondence received from Jami M. Hadden concerning public water and sewer for Shannondale."
#3. "Correspondence received from Tina and Randy Crelter concerning public water and sewer for Shannondale."
Hope somebody is able to enlighten us on them.

sunpop

11-01-2007, 01:20 PM

Ms. Morgan is noncommital as usual (I used to be a huge fan, but she's losing me lately)

Same here.

This whole thing currently sounds like the "good old boys" not being happy because they can't just do what they want and they are actually being questioned. I don't think Mr. Surkamp has handled it as professionaly as he should have, but then again I do not have a insiders understanding of how things are being run. Maybe he truly feels that the only way to get things done is to do what he has been doing.

Next election will not see me voting for anyone currently on the commission. I had great hopes for Frances Morgan, but she has become a disappointment to me at this point. While she may be trying to soothe things "behind the scenes", that is of no help to those of us who are not there. From the outside it looks as though she does not have the ability to head the commisison and help effect change in this county.

My personal feeling is that when something like this is not working then you get rid of the whole group and start fresh. Get the "old boys" out and let new blood have a chance. Things will never change as long as the same people are there year after year IMO.

Scott T

11-01-2007, 01:53 PM

Jim has my vote. He has been a pointed stick, poking at the bull**** that makes up government. I find Mr. Surkamp to be a breath of fresh air. He may not always use his stick in ways that make others feel comfortable, but so what. This County needs more pointed sticks.

LazerFlash

11-01-2007, 03:34 PM

I had a prepared statement for the Public Comment session of today's meeting. However, Ms. Morgan's motion at the beginning of the meeting to remove New Business Item #3 (sounds like a good title for a book on local politics, doesn't it?) from the agenda without actually voting on it sort of preempted that statement.

However, (surprise), I do have a few final things to say before allowing this to fade away (until the next time)...

I've said it before, while I do not always agree with Jim Surkamp – and can certainly understand how some might be intimidated by his ‘style’ - I do see him as an intensely vocal advocate for transparency and accountability in County government, that for whatever reason appears to be somewhat lacking right now. My hope is that he will continue to challenge the status quo and to raise issues of concern to all county residents, and not to give in to those calling for his resignation and whining about things like bruised egos, petty personality conflicts and perceived damage to the credibility of the Commission.

For the record, this county resident could care less if it’s procedurally correct for a Commissioner to directly query a County employee about things like budget discrepancies and contract reviews, or to suggest that an attorney might not be working as fast as he or she could be to avoid wasting County funds. (FWIW, it did turn out that the attorney accused of foot-dragging wasn't at fault - but Jim's accusation certainly did get to the heart of who had.) As a taxpayer, I say procedure be damned! I’d rather know such things as just where did that video lottery money go and why was a major contract for Internet and computer services given to a County employee's former employer without competitive bid, than to worry about things like perceived “personal vendettas” against said County employee(s).

As a Jefferson County resident, I am far more interested in answers to these and other similar questions raised by Commissioner Surkamp than in any supposed “unprofessional” or “disruptive” behavior on his part. I would much rather have someone in high County office who ruffles a few feathers, than someone who falls asleep in meetings with their constituents, or doesn’t appear to be concerned about wasting hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars, or couldn’t be bothered with a few tens of thousands of dollars of video lottery money, or for that matter believes that the threat of a removal hearing is "therapeutic".

I continue to be impressed by the fact that in addition to his ‘regular’ Commission duties, Commissioner Surkamp not only attends special citizen meetings, but also answers emails promptly and is available for whatever advice is needed. And far from the negative it’s been made out to be, I applaud the fact that he actively participates in our online forums. No other Commissioner, elected official or County employee has done any of these things with the same level of commitment and enthusiasm. (Jane Peters, are you out there?).

After reading and hearing his words in the media, it seems fairly obvious to me that Commissioner Corliss placed New Business item #3 on this week’s agenda intentionally and in a procedural manner that gives the voting public the least amount of time to react and respond. When I factor in his comments today, it also seems pretty clear to me that this action was taken entirely out of spite, in some misguided attempt to try to restrain Commissioner Surkamp. In my mind, the only thing that would’ve been more contemptible would have been if it was done in Executive Session. That such a thing was done at all is loathsome and shows a general lack of caring on the part of the responsible individual for the voters of this county. I am glad that President Morgan took the moral high road and acted the way she did, even though I felt that she should've gone one step further and motioned to censure Commissioner Corliss for placing it on the meeting’s agenda to begin with.

In closing, let me observe that it seems like every time Commissioner Surkamp does or says something, he ends up with a target painted on him. I want to go on record as being behind Mr. Surkamp 100% in this witch-hunt atmosphere against him. We need more people in West Virginia government like Jim Surkamp, not less. As a registered voter in this county, I intend to support Mr. Surkamp should he run again, and will also be watching the rest of the Commission very closely... especially Commissioner Corliss.

WVGeo

11-01-2007, 03:51 PM

It's my understanding from a Surkamp supporter who knew him in another life that he can occasionally be rude and abrasive. That said, my feeling as far as the Council goes is - "Put on your big girl panties and DEAL WITH IT!" Surkamp is aware, attentive, and responsive. And he's asking the questions that he should be asking. The answers to which we are still awaiting. So to Mr. Surkamp: :thumbsup:

And to those responsible for the answers: WHERE'S OUR MONEY?!

Willis

11-01-2007, 04:03 PM

A couple of short comments- LZ has eloquently stated in length a lot of truths, imho, already.

1) You can be assured that the old boy network will be running candidates for both Rusty Morgan's seat(I personally like Rusty and think he's doing a good job as a commissioner but he's a Republican and the old boys were historically democrat-look for some competition there) and the vacant seat that Commissioner Corliss will create when he declines to run for re-election. We might even have a candidate who was on the commission when we were getting into the mess we find ourselves now.

2) Frances Morgan hasn't been in office a year yet and is at the start of a 6 year term. I'd give her the benefit of the doubt. One rabble rouser(and as a rabble I say that affectionately)is enough to keep the pot stirred(excuse me user "stirring the pot") and Commissioner Surkamp is doing that work admirably. Give Commissioner Morgan a chance before passing judgment. The damage being done in the County took years of neglect to accumulate and isn't going to be undone in a moment.

3) Wiping the slate clean is NOT the answer to our problems. Keeping the old guard from regaining control of the commission IS.

John

11-01-2007, 04:08 PM

On the thread dealing with water rates (which we beat!) we had several Shannondale.org posters provide some very helpful financial analysis that may have been crucial in that victory.

With a little help from Commissioner Surkamp I am betting that we can find the answer to Geodesist's "WHERE'S OUR MONEY?!" question.

Commissioner Surkamp has explained that:

Why is there a $38,410 apparent shortfall between the total amount of video lottery revenues, that the State Video Lottery Commissions says it has electronically transferred into the County's account and the amount you get when one adds up the end-of-the-year video lottery revenue figure shown in our published County General Fund for each of the years since 1998?

If he could help us out by posting the information year by year, we could find the years that the difference ocurs in, and then drill down from there. What we would want to see, posted right here, is a table that looks like this:

Year Transfer $ Gnrl Fnd $ Difference
1998 $XXXXX $XXXXX $XXXXX
1999 $XXXXX $XXXXX $XXXXX
2000 $XXXXX $XXXXX $XXXXX
etc.

Would Commissioner Surkamp be willing to post this for us? We promise to raise hell if anyone tries to have you removed for providing the information.

LazerFlash

11-01-2007, 05:25 PM

A couple of short comments- LZ has eloquently stated in length a lot of truths, imho, already.Thanks, Willis...

Frances Morgan hasn't been in office a year yet and is at the start of a 6 year term. I'd give her the benefit of the doubt...
Give Commissioner Morgan a chance before passing judgment.I just wish that as President, she could get better control of the regular meetings. Every meeting that I have attended has made hash of the agenda... the only thing that seems to happen consistently is the lunch break. :p

I'm also a tad bit concerned about her propensity to cut public comment off. Unless there's a rule-of-order that specifically limits comment time, she shouldn't be doing that. While I understand the need to "move things along" (see comment above), there is nothing more frustrating than having a complicated point to make and being told to wrap it up.

jim surkamp

11-01-2007, 06:57 PM

Regards the shortfall in video lottery revenues.

First I received in Excel spreadsheets the figures maintained by the WV Video Lottery Commission from the first year we began receiving video lottery revenue - 1998 - through July 1, 2006.
Then I got hard copies of the Jefferson County General Fund as it was published according to law in "The Spirit of Jefferson" every fall. I also cross-checked the video lottery revenue line for that fiscal year in the published fund with the numbers by an outside consultant and adjusted to their numbers to replace those in the posted numbers. (I did this because an employee at one time made the huge mistake of publishing numbers that we actually for more than twelve months of county operations)

Here's what you get:

State Video Lottery Payment Published Video Lottery in fiscal years: Revenue Line in General Fund:

1998: $429,912 VS. 402,589 - 1999: $912,064 VS. 883,278 - 2000: $1,238,728 VS. 1,257,666 - 2001: $1,777,902 VS. 1,744,087 - 2002: $2,233,793 VS. 2,264,847 - 2003: $2,833,337 VS. 2,811,957 - 2004: $3,485,837 VS. 3,461,763 - 2005: $3,910,143 VS. 3,894,234 - 2006: $4,305,165 VS. 4,368,050 -

TOTAL: $21,126,881 VS. 21,088,471

The amount posted in the total of the General Fund video lottery revenue lines as received is $38,410 less than what the state has recorded as what was electronically transferred to the county's accounts over the exact same time periods. (I could do the more recent year a but have been busy).

The State Video Lottery office told me that there are fluctuations in the comparative totals between what is transferred and what is received near term that are minor that sort of net each other out. They said this is too big and over too long a time to be just a technical, temporary misalignment

Kensey

11-01-2007, 07:51 PM

The amount posted in the total of the General Fund video lottery revenue lines as received is $38,410 less than what the state has recorded as what was electronically transferred to the county's accounts over the exact same time periods. (I could do the more recent year a but have been busy).

The State Video Lottery office told me that there are fluctuations in the comparative totals between what is transferred and what is received near term that are minor that sort of net each other out. They said this is too big and over too long a time to be just a technical, temporary misalignment

I did my chart game again (see attached spreadsheet). The high-level overview is, money disappeared in all years but 2000, 2002, and 2006.

amountz

11-01-2007, 08:16 PM

If I am reading these numbers and looking at the chart correctly then the 3 years without a shortfall actually had more money going in than the state indicates the county was given. Is that a correct reading? If so why is there an excess in those three years? Call me suspicious, but the excess in those years makes me wonder about someone trying to pay back money they've diverted in other years.

Ann

Kensey

11-01-2007, 09:25 PM

John

11-02-2007, 07:26 AM

The variance percentages run from 6.4% in 1998 down to .4% in 2005. Fiscal year 2006 (ended June 30, 2006) was at 1.5% - for a total of $62,885 over.

For our purposes, over or under don't really matter, since what we are looking for is a precise accounting of any descrepancy. Fiscal year 2006 is recent enough that we should be able to get the detail data and an explanation of where the numbers are coming from sufficient to work this out.

Once we have all the data and the definitions we can get our Leprechaun to check it over. He has many years of experience accounting for precise quantities of gold.

Commissioner Surkamp has given us an excellent start on this, but to satisfy a green eye shaded Leprechaun I expect that we are going to need more precise definitions of "published general fund" and "amounts electronically transmitted by the Lottery Commission".

I know enough about ACH transfers to know that they were blowing smoke at our Commissioner when they told him:

there are fluctuations in the comparative totals between what is transferred and what is received

Are they saying that some of the money is still stuck in the wire and they have to shake it or something for the extra change to fall out? I am going to use this phrase when I call the power company after short paying my bill online.

It doesn't work that way. We need better and more precise information.

I am not ready to suggest any sort of fraud or theft. We don't understand it well enough yet.

Leprechaun

11-02-2007, 08:47 AM

Not a whole lot to analyze for now.

If it were simply a timimg issue then the deltas would be all negative since the revenue amounts increase each year. The fact that there are positive variances is suspect. I'd like to know how often the transfers happen ... monthly, quarterly, biannually? Are there fees associated with EFT's? Did the state change banks along the way?

This discrepency needs to be challenged and investigated. Are there fees associated with EFTs?

The beautiful thing about numbers is that they always need to add up and balance!!!

KatherineA

11-02-2007, 08:48 AM

Of course the Journal did not publish a follow-up story - as it probably couldn't find enough negative things to say .... but here is the story from the Herald Mail on Thursday's Co. Commission Meeting.

Jefferson County backs off on Surkamp removal
By DAVE McMILLION [email protected]

CHARLES TOWN, W.Va. - The Jefferson County Commission on Thursday abandoned exploring options to remove Commissioner Jim Surkamp from office, saying it is an issue that the voters should decide and that it poses possible legal problems.

Commissioner Greg Corliss' proposal to consider removal options came after a number of controversies over how Surkamp has interacted with county officials and made comments about county programs.

Among the incidents are allegations that Surkamp became "verbally aggressive" with the county's director of maintenance, that he made disparaging comments about the county's corporate community and that he appeared at one time to have a vendetta against county Administrator Leslie Smith.

Corliss said he wanted the commission to seek clarification if a state law can be used to remove public officers for misconduct, malfeasance or neglect of duty.

It was the same state law used when several developers tried unsuccessfully to remove Jefferson County Planning Commission member Todd Baldau from office, Corliss said.

The commissioners had some issues with Corliss' idea and they detailed their concerns again Thursday.

Commissioner Dale Manuel said voters put the commissioners in office and only voters should be allowed to remove members.

But Manuel said he hopes Corliss' move is a "wake-up call" to Surkamp.

Surkamp was argumentative in last week's meeting when the commissioners discussed his actions, but he was quiet during Thursday's meeting.

Commissioner Rusty Morgan said he believes voters should decide what Surkamp's future role will be.

"I think he's been a complete jerk at times, but it doesn't rise to the level of criminality," Morgan said.

"He belongs to the public and the voters," Morgan said.

Commission President Frances Morgan said she was concerned about any removal proceedings because bringing the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney's office into the issue could raise ethical questions "of great magnitude."

One possible ethical problem is having the prosecuting attorney's office - which represents the commission - taking action against one member, Frances Morgan said.

Corliss said he wanted the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney's Office to determine if the law can be used to remove Surkamp from office.

If the prosecuting attorney's office decides the commission has such authority, prosecutors can review Surkamp's actions since being elected, Corliss said.

Based on the review of Surkamp's actions, the Prosecuting Attorney's office could possibly draft a petition for the removal of Surkamp, Corliss said.

Corliss defended his proposal Thursday, saying suggestions that Surkamp's behavior is not bad is "ignoring the obvious."

Surkamp did receive some support Thursday, including one area resident who told the commissioners that the criticism of Surkamp had troubled him and will cause him to watch the commission more closely.

When Surkamp has raised issues, he "got a little bull's-eye drawn on him in the media," and that is not fair, said Ed Hazarowitz.

Chutney Daftcraft

11-02-2007, 09:15 AM

Here's the most interesting part:

It was the same state law used when several developers tried unsuccessfully to remove Jefferson County Planning Commission member Todd Baldau from office, Corliss said.

Uh huh. That is interesting, isn't it?

Starbuck

11-02-2007, 09:22 AM

Oh, The Journal did publish a follow-up, but to find it you have to go to the web site, click Local News, scroll to the bottom of the page, click View All Articles, then scroll all the way to the bottom of Page 1 to find it. :rolleyes:

http://www.journal-news.net/page/content.detail/id/500377.html?nav=5006

KatherineA

11-02-2007, 09:42 AM

Ahhhhhh Thanks Starbuck .....

my half-hearted apologies to the Journal

LazerFlash

11-02-2007, 11:58 AM

my half-hearted apologies to the JournalAlthough it's a (very) minor point, I noticed that the Journal article leaves the reader with the subtle point that PUBLIC support for Jim Surkamp runs two-to-one:
"During Thursday’s public comment period of the meeting, one county resident said Surkamp should resign and stop embarrassing the county.

Meanwhile, two other residents praised the commission for striking the agenda item and spoke favorably of Surkamp, calling him a proactive leader who is not mean-spirited."
I actually find it amazing that the reporter didn't mention that the one county resident asking him to resign happened to be a former mayor of Charles Town.

JW0916

11-02-2007, 12:04 PM

Update on Mr. Surkamp: http://your4state.com/content/fulltext/?sid=b51eb405c72acdf4be0dbc180f405201&cid=13853

Starbuck

11-02-2007, 12:12 PM

I actually find it amazing that the reporter didn't mention that the one county resident asking him to resign happened to be a former mayor of Charles Town.

Please tell me this wasn't Doc Masters. Please, please, please.

Theresa

11-02-2007, 12:20 PM

It WAS Doc Masters!

LazerFlash

11-02-2007, 12:31 PM

Please tell me this wasn't Doc Masters. Please, please, please.I do not personally know Dr. Master. I'm sorry to say that I did not quite hear the man's exact name, as he initially spoke softly and was introducing himself as he was walking up to the podium. However, from what I know of the history of this area, the gentleman certainly was old enough to be Dr. Master; he was Charles Town's mayor, what, about 30 years ago?

STR1KER

11-02-2007, 06:34 PM

LazerFlash

11-02-2007, 06:38 PM

When do we get to have JCC meetings that are in a timely fashion for those of us working class folk to attend???????

Are there ever EVENING or WEEKEND meetings where the public can actually attend w/o having to take off from work early to voice concerns/suggestions?
Are they always at like 4:30 on a Thursday when people wanting to attend from the city, can't make it because they're stuck at work until 5pm, and can't get home til 6:30/7pm?

I think the JCC should take into account the fact that there are some of us VOTERS that would LIKE to have the ability to attend, but due to JCC's "schedule", get screwed.Actually, they start at 9:30am on Thursday and go all day (with a break for lunch). Not that I'm defending the current schedule, but that's likely a big part of the reason that evening meetings probably wouldn't work. Agenda management is an issue right now. But, even if they somehow managed to get their rampant "agenda-creep" under control, they still have SO much to cover that any meeting scheduled at a time that day-workers could attend would easily run to midnight.

LaRue

11-15-2007, 04:06 PM

I personally like Rusty and think he's doing a good job as a commissioner

Willis: What is it that Rusty Morgan has done as Commissioner that causes you say that he has done a good job as Commissioner? I am curious because I see nothing but indecision and non-commitment on his part on just about every important matter that the Commission is confronted with. He constantly needs to "look further into" or "table" issues so that he can put off actually making tough decisions. I get so tired of the Commission not getting things done and especially now spending all their time blasting Surkamp when he is the ONLY one of the 5 that at least has the guts to bang the table and say let's make things happen here! It was very telling when Rusty jumped on the bandwagon regarding Surkamp's posting on the net when Rusty had not even read the posting - good job calling him on that, Jim. That was the final nail in his coffin for me. I really want to know why I should even consider voting for Rusty Morgan should he run for re-election. Do we really want another 6 years of his waffling? I'm hoping that you can provide some concrete answers since you obviously feel differently about him than I do.
Frankly, in my humble opinion ANYONE would be better than Rusty (and that name suits him well) at this point.

Willis

11-15-2007, 05:04 PM

Willis: What is it that Rusty Morgan has done as Commissioner that causes you say that he has done a good job as Commissioner? ...Frankly, in my humble opinion ANYONE would be better than Rusty (and that name suits him well) at this point.

I've got to say You've certainly called me out on the issue, LaRue, and I don't have any one concrete accomplishment I can cite off the top of my head. I've just read your comment and haven't done any research. I like the guy on a personal level(some say the same about Geo. W. Bush)but I can see that's certainly not a good yardstick an effective legislator or leader and certainly not for a vote. Rusty and I have had quite a bit of contact thru the Landmarks Commission but that body, though critical for preserving history, doesn't generally impact the issues we face here on the Mountain.

Rusty has been one of the Commissioners who have consistently attended S&B's functions on the Mountain and conversationally seems to grasp the magnitude and nature of our problems. I do think some of his actions recently have been the result of his political affiliation-Republican-in an effort to preserve his votes on that side of the fence he's felt it necessary to "act like one".

The last sentence I quoted is hyperbole to the extreme. I don't know how long you've been in the area, but I speak from experience that there are legions of worse choices than Rusty in BOTH parties. Those and their ilk are the ones who have gotten us in the mess that we find ourselves now. One recent Commissioner was quoted in the Post in recent years as saying that he "never met a developer he didn't like". And I think I've mentioned elsewhere of Commissioners nearly falling off their seats sound asleep.

Let's wait till we see:

1) who runs in the primary against Rusty(registered Republicans can make the decision) and
2) what Democrats emerge to vie for the right to challenge the Republican nominee in the General election.

I'll predict a real Donnybrook with a LOT of dough involved from big monied interests. I do know that some of the Public expected BIG changes with different philosophies represented on the Commission. However, one has to just look eastward to see what results precipitous action on the part of newcomers' philosophies has. They don't call them Lowdown County and Sleazeburg for nuthin'.

Now as far as Jim Surkamp is concerned-he comes up for re-election in the next two year cycle. I LIKE Jim, too. And I like his politics when it comes to the Mountain. If Jim(are you listening, Jim?) has a fault, it's forging ahead without thinking on occasion. But rest assured you've got my vote in 3+ years as it stands now. But as my partner in crime advises me(and advice I'm not taking now):slow down and think about a response-maybe sleep on it to let it mellow, and you'll find out the resultant remarks are prolly 100% better all around.

In conclusion after all that circumlocutory obfuscation,
Ya Got ME, LaRue:whistling:

LaRue

11-15-2007, 05:43 PM

The last sentence I quoted is hyperbole to the extreme. I don't know how long you've been in the area, but I speak from experience that there are legions of worse choices than Rusty in BOTH parties. Those and their ilk are the ones who have gotten us in the mess that we find ourselves now. One recent Commissioner was quoted in the Post in recent years as saying that he "never met a developer he didn't like".

Willis: Thank you for your quick response and I agree with your assesment of that sentence. I threw it in without really thinking about it and I formally withdraw it if that is possible.

You are correct that there are certainly legions of worse choices than Rusty in both parties but, my goodness, is Rusty really the best candidate we can find out there? I am waiting to see who steps up to the plate in the next election. I understand that Lyn Wydmyer is going to run. Is she is Rusty's district or Greg's ? I know nothing about her and am hoping to meet her soon to get some clue as to what she all about.

Sorry for my rant but after watching todays CC meeting with Rusty and Manual's ("One recent Commissioner was quoted in the Post in recent years as saying that he "never met a developer he didn't like". -Manuel's quote I assume) usual antics, I just went nuts. It is truly sicking to watch and I watch all the time.

Banging my head on my desk and yelling at the computer screen yet again,
LaRue

Willis

11-15-2007, 06:27 PM

A rant is good sometimes, LaRue but it often gets us into trouble. I suggest downloading
679
this.
As for the quote, I won't mention any names but the eponymously named lawnmower and repair shop on the Flowing Springs Road next to Zoar could be a vague clue.
Lyn certainly has the qualifications to make informed decisions about planning and growth, two of the hot button issues that affect nearly all others facing our beleaguered County. I've only met her to say hello once of which I'm aware, but I suspect she'll be "hitting the bricks" soon, if she is running.
I hope all the candidates, if they are squeamish about posting on our forum, will visit some of our gatherings to make their positions on the issues known
A more critical issue on the Blue Ridge is the proposed changes in the land use regulations- I repeat that, as I've moved those comments to the topic found
HERE (http://www.shannondale.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6770)
barring a message urging me to reopen this topic, I think the issue of Jim Surkamp's removal has been talked out for the time being and I'll lock the topic. LaRue, you and others are welcome to start a new thread about potential and present County Officials. As I said before- the fur is going to fly when the "big dogs" join in the hunt this time 'round.