Commentary: Joplin city officials' response to audit was slap in the face to petitioners

The people who petitioned for an audit of the City of Joplin were proven right in their skepticism of how the city is being operated.

Unfortunately, it appears that's not going to make any difference in how the city is operated.

The city's spin machine went into overdrive from the moment the audit was released Thursday.

By the time it was done, what was essentially an expose of a flawed city government turned into praise for a smooth-running machine where concerned city. officials are vigilant in their efforts to keep a watchful eye on how every taxpayer dollar is spent.

Consider what Mayor Keenan Cortez said in the city's news release:

“We are extremely proud of the results, which show our finances are secure and your taxpayer resources are safeguarded, in addition to having effective and efficient operational processes. At the same time, we are grateful to the auditors for their thorough review and recommendations, which help us continue improving. This reflects our ongoing commitment to transparency, integrity, and serving the public responsibly.”

 With that kind of response, who could blame anyone for thinking that the city received an "excellent" or even a "good." Those are the top two rankings an entity can receive in a state audit.

To be fair, the city didn't receive a "poor" rating which is the lowest possible.

Joplin's rating was "fair."

The audit contained this description of what a "poor" rating means:

The audit results indicate this entity needs to significantly improve operations. The report contains numerous findings that require management's immediate attention, and/or the entity has indicated most recommendations will not be implemented. In addition, if applicable, most prior recommendations have not been implemented.

Correct me if I'm wrong. That doesn't sound like the kind of audit the mayor was describing.

To be fair, this is not as bad as the 2015 petition audit in which the city received a "poor" rating.

If you remember, the state auditor at that time, Nicole Galloway, came to Joplin in person to deliver the audit results, something that previous state auditors, Democrat and Republican, have always done, but apparently is not a priority for Scott Fitzpatrick. That makes it easier for city officials to paint their own picture of the audit results.

Of course, Galloway's in-person delivery didn't stop city officials from delivering their own spin in 2015 and for the most part it was successful.

Galloway turned the evidence her staff compiled over to Jasper County authorities to consider prosecution of a number of people, primarily former City Council member and self-described "tornado mayor" Mike Woolston.

No charges were ever brought. The Jasper County Prosecuting Attorney's office claimed it never received any such evidence.

That audit also featured mush criticism of the way the city handled its finances. The excuse that was thrown around by city officials was that they were overwhelmed by the massive tornado recovery.

It wasn't much of an excuse then, and if the tornado was the cause of the city's problems 10 years ago, what excuse is there 14 years after the tornado?

The mayor wasn't the only one quoted in the city's news release.

City Manager Nick Williams said something that was just as startling.

“We are very pleased with the outcome of this audit. We’ve even been told by people who work in the State auditor’s office that this was a good audit. That speaks volumes about the trustworthiness and dedication of our staff. Even better is the swiftness with which Council has supported implementation of the State Auditor’s best practice recommendations.”

Think about that.

"We've even been told by people who work in the state auditor's office that this was a good audit."

Really?

If those people thought it was a "good" audit, why didn't city officials receive a "good" rating? The auditors had that option. "Good" is one of the four choices. Do the auditors typically tell the people whose city or county or school district is being audited that their audit was "good" when it was actually fair?

The city's news release also includes no reference to the combative responses city officials gave to each aspect of the audit.

The sad thing is that the city's glowing news release about the audit results really wasn't necessary.

All city officials had to do was issue a statement that state auditors found some things that were concerning and they're going to work on getting those things corrected. They might have even mentioned a few of those things, though their news released conveniently omitted any specifics.

In the release, it was noted that there was "no fraud, "no theft," and "no illegal activity,"

That could also have been included in a news release.

But that's a pretty low bar.

The audit results showed that those who organized the petition drive and those who signed the petition petitions had just cause for concern about the way the city is being operated.

The audit showed considerable problems in the way the city is being operated and a hard and fast opposition to making any changes.

The city's news release was.a slap in the face to those people and a slap in the face to every Joplin resident.

(The Turner Report will break down the audit and show what the auditors said and the responses they received from city officials in a series of posts beginning later today.)

City of Joplin's Audit