Monday, June 16, 2014

C. J. Huff to KZRG: I want this audit

Superintendent C. J. Huff is thrilled with the upcoming state audit. At least, that is what he is telling KZRG:

"Not very many school districts out there have been through what we've been through over the past three years, and I think having another set of eyes on how we've conducted business will be helpful for us, and helpful for other communities that might go through something similar in the future."

Though none of this was mentioned in Huff's interview with KZRG, these are some other things he reportedly wants as much as he wants the audit:

- A close shave from a dull hatchet

-Lifetime subscription to the Turner Report

-Traipsing barefoot through a sea of thumbtacks

-Dinner with David Humphreys

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

It seems like it would be so much easier to go through life being honest than being on permanent spin cycle.

Anonymous said...

Add a colonoscopy to the list. Without anesthesia.

Anonymous said...

I've had dinner with David Humphreys. Very nice down to earth person who is one of the few people who could stand up to the Joplin good ol' boy network without fear of being ruined. He has enough clout and finance to not have to be intimidated by their games. I appreciate Mr. Humphrey's doing this for the good of the Joplin community. He could be doing other more selfish things with his valuable time but he is doing what is needed and right.

Anonymous said...

Maybe the readers of The Turner Report can take donations to buy C.J a gift subscription to The Turner Report. I'd probably be in.

Anonymous said...

Hey 4:53, go read the Springfield News-Leader and the $111,000 donation by Humphreys to the State Auditor in May.

Serving dinner to Mr. Humphreys is not the same as having dinner with him.

Anonymous said...

Hey 6:55, what is the purpose of putting this same comment on every thread? Are you insinuating that Humphreys has paid the State Auditor to bring down Huff? Is the State Auditor going to drum up false information on the Joplin School District? Is he going to plant evidence of some sort in the school financial paperwork to illegally convict administration officials of wrongdoing? If you are implying that the audit is happening because Humphreys donated money, then why is Huff asking for the audit? Shouldn't the district be happy that the State Auditor decided to go ahead without the petition so they will not have to pay the cost? Maybe the administration should be thanking Humphreys. Unless of course you think they may have something to hide. Why don't you just come out and say what you think the donation to the auditor is going to buy.

Anonymous said...

I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. I'm pointing out that everyone has a motive, but we all like to pretend ours is pure and the other guy's is not. I'm mocking the hypocrisy.

I actually think an audit is not a bad idea, but only if there's specific reason to believe there's an impropriety--I'm not aware of any that has been alleged so far--even Mr. Humphreys conceded as much. I understand Randy has an axe to grind, and I don't blame him, but his beef with Dr. Huff doesn't equate to spending hundreds of thousands on an audit absent proof of more than hurt feelings and a lost job; what we have is a handful of people and groups, each pursing their own grievances at the literal expense of the rest of us.

What would have been an otherwise standard audit can , depending on the results, be called into question under circumstances like these. Calling for an audit is one thing--doing so on the heels of a donation like that means at a minimum that Schweich should recuse, and it still means someone is likely to have good reason to question the results no matter what they are. And we'll have accomplished little.

You should be upset about the donation. If the audit finds anything wrong, Dr. Huff could hardly be faulted for claiming that it was preordained.

Joplin deserves better.

Anonymous said...

6:55, Humphreys and his family have made much larger donations to many in the political arena--Thank God!! Somebody needs to put some cash in the hands of people who have some values and common sense. There is no reason to insinuate that Humphreys is buying anybody off. Last time I checked, it was perfectly legal (AND GOOD AND SMART) to donate to people with like political views and values. Being wealthy and successful does NOT make a person corrupt or evil. Joplin is fortunate to have successful people who are willing to give back to the community and encourage accountability among others in the public spotlight. I can vouch that the other school locally Humphreys supports, TJIDS, has an independent audit EVERY YEAR!!!! I think it's about time Joplin Public schools had one. And no, I have never served Mr. Humphreys a meal, but enjoyed his pleasant conversation over dinner.
Signed, 4:53

Anonymous said...

It seems to me that Turner has pointed out many unethical expenditures, complete with documentation. Perhaps he should put them in the Springfield paper where you might see them. The rest of us saw it all here. Maybe he'll post some of those documents for you again so you can stop making unfounded insinuations.

Anonymous said...

I don't live in Joplin, my children aren't in the Joplin school district, I don't know Turner, Humphreys or Huff, so my opinion doesn't really count. However, as an outsider who can look at this situation without much personal bias, I think an audit of the school district and the city is overdue. Ideally something should have been in place to establish a baseline of where the district and city stood after the disaster, to identify needs, track the influx of funds, and monitor the spending. Since that was not the case, and audit now would at least provide a starting point for the future. In both cases there has been a huge influx of money from various (and out of the normal course of business) sources, and a select few individuals (school board, city council) have been making decisions on how to use those funds. It appears that there has not been much tranparency as to how much money has come, where the money has been spent, and/or what process was in place to decide how the money was spent.