.
Feedback

Audit Finds Over $6k in Mystery Charges in Mattituck Parks Department

The Mattituck Parks Department had no controls on its credit cards, according to the Office of the State Comptroller, during the time of its audit; however the district adopted a policy in October of 2011.

An audit by the State Comptroller's office released on Wednesday found that the Mattituck Park District did not have effective controls on its district credit cards in the period the state looked at its books, from January 2010 through June 2011.

According to the audit, over $6,000 in purchases were made without adequate supporting documentation. The district had no credit card policy at the time of the audit, according to the Comptroller's Office.

The Mattituck Park District's 2011 operating expenditures totaled just over $570,000, funded through property taxes, permits, and rental fees.

The audit states that the district had three general-purpose credit cards, assigned to the district treasurer and two to one of the commissioners. Among 28 purchases on the general-purpose credit cards, adding up to $10,423, 16 charges totaling $5,912 did not have adequate supporting documentation.

The audit found the following:

  • "Four charges totaling $2,967 did not have itemized receipts.
  • "Seven charges totaling $2,192 did not have adequate information provided on the credit card statements to identify the purchases as being legitimate District expenditures.
  • "Three charges totaling $507 were not supported by credit card statements or itemized receipts.
  • "Two charges totaling $246 had both itemized receipts and adequate support provided on the credit card statement, but the District made the payment prior to receiving the statement. Thereofre, the credit card statement was not available at time of payment to provide District officials with documentation that would prove the legitimacy of the expenditures."

In addition, the Comptroller's office found that the Mattituck Park District paid over $900 in gasoline taxes that it was exempt from paying. Also, six charges on a home improvement store card, totaling $493, did not have itemized receipts.

The district took swift action last year, implementing a credit card policy on Oct. 13, 2011, less than four months after the audit period was over.

According to a response of the audit from the Mattituck Park District, the new policy, "requires that every credit card holder shall have a receipt signed by the person who charged the item and received the goods. The receipt will be attached to the monthly statement presented to the board prior to payment."

The audit also suggested that the park district segregate the treasurer and clerk's duties, though no financial discrepancies were found in those departments. 

Mike Burke April 5, 2012 at 12:16 am
Was this the topic of discussion at the "Special Meeting Notice" that was put up in a few spots for March 30, 2012 at 6:30PM at the district office? First and foremost you call a special meeting and do not post the matter to be discussed? WRONG. What ever "business" that was conducted was not presented to the members of the district to have a discussion on and should be set aside.
indy April 5, 2012 at 12:43 pm
"...implementing a credit card policy...less than four months after the audit period was over." Well, I guess that is "swift" by government standards.
Tom April 6, 2012 at 03:43 pm
A better question is why did Mr. Steve Brautigam, who ran for election as Treasurer of the Park DIstrict abandon his position after he was elected? What kind of person runs for office, gets elected, and then fails to be sworn in, effectively abandoning his elected position? Did he want more money for the job? Did he not already know what the position paid before he made the decision to run for office?
Isn't this the same Steve Brautigam who ran for Southold Town Trustee as a Democrat? If elected to the position of Town Trustee, would he have abandoned his position there as well? Unanswered questions abound! Mr. Brautigam, why did you leave your post, thus costing the taxpayers of Mattituck more money to rush out and find a replacement for you? And when is the special election to find your replacement? Good riddance!

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from North Fork Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
1927 Steinway Model M
Localtucker June 18, 2013 at 02:30 pm
once it is moved, it needs to be tuned, no one is going to help you with the moving costs.
Bernie K June 18, 2013 at 08:27 am
And, now that we know how easy it is to thwart the law, we must wonder...how many potentialRead More terrorists are residing here, thanks to breaks in our security system? Maybe the Mexico/U.S. border shouldn't be our top priority.
Robert June 17, 2013 at 12:39 pm
Now lets go after all the landscapers , farmers & builders that hire Illegals. Time to put ourRead More foot down on this ongoing problem
Robert June 17, 2013 at 12:49 pm
They will probably be back to work tomorrow selling Slurpees!
north fork magazine MAY 2013 issue on left & my original illustration on right.
Rena Casey-Wilhelm June 15, 2013 at 09:32 am
even worse?...When I had the publisher of North Fork Magazine contact me regarding the blatantRead More violation, what were his comments?? To add further insult to injury, he said & I quote: "I thought I was doing Greenport a favor...all of the businesses there are suffering...this paper doesn't make any money...sure I have advertisers but they don't pay their invoices...maybe if the cover of the magazine brings business to Greenport, maybe those merchants will pay their bill.."
Rich from the East End June 16, 2013 at 08:02 am
Better yet, rather than pay mag's invoice. send $$$ to Artist.
Scotty June 16, 2013 at 08:41 pm
And he really still doesn't see that he's stealing from the artist to 'bring business to Greenport'?Read More The effrontery of his comment leaves me aghast. Of ALL people who should grasp the concept of plagiarism and copyright laws, it should be a newspaper editor/publisher! Cropping out her signature proves they knew full well that they were stealing her work. I'd suggest the artist contact a copyright attorney pronto. I'm always astonished when something like this occurs when a simple phone call to the artist might have been successful in allowing him to use her work WITH her signature intact instead of doing something so underhanded.
Pat Mundus June 14, 2013 at 08:51 am
I have a 16mm and great 1940s speakers for it. Hope your film holds up for viewing...thrilled to putRead More it to good use. Call my office 477-6993
Scotty June 16, 2013 at 08:31 pm
I've just tried to do a Google search for you and from what I've found you need to either check withRead More your local library to see if they have one they might lend you--OR--try Audio/Visual online companies. There are some which DO rent projectors for days or weekends. I have one but just checked with my husband and at the very least it needs a replacement bulb(which are fairly expensive)--hasn't been looked at in years so there's no way I could guarantee it would work. You've definitely given me an idea, though--I'll get mine in shape at some point and rent it to folks for a nominal sum. I'm sure there are many others who have old film they'd enjoy viewing for family reunions as would my own family. Good luck. If you don't succeed for next weekend, you have other options. At the very least you might be able to have the film transposed to a DVD and distributed to your family members although that's costly too, depending on how many copies you need. Just a thought, but you could add the old footage in with some taken AT the reunion as a nice follow-up gift for the attendees?