Williams and Dockter butt heads over Council on Aging funding

Tensions rose Monday at a working group meeting of the Hill County Commission between Commissioner Sheri Williams and Hill County Clerk and Recorder Lexis Dockter, arguing over who is responsible for the Hill County Council on Aging losing out on a substantial amount of state money.

The matter was prompted when the commission was discussing how the county supplements funding of the Hill County Council on Aging, when Williams said the council's funding seems to have gone down substantially, which she said is "suspicious."

Dockter said the council lost a great deal of state funding because it was not submitting proper reports on the use of its grants, something she said was the responsibility of the Hill County Commission.

She said because the council is funded so heavily by grants, with only about $44,000 coming from the county every year, the director is responsible for submitting reports about that funding to the state.

However, she said, after Bill Lanier left as the council's director last year, the responsibility for those reports should have been passed to the commission until the hiring of Heather Sinclair, the council's new director, later in the year.

After the meeting Dockter said that this lack of reporting to the state has resulted in the council being short nearly half a million dollars in state funding.

Williams, who took over management of the council briefly between Lanier's departure and Sinclair's hiring, denied this, saying that expenditure reports hadn't been filed for several months and that that responsibility rests with Dockter and Hill County Treasurer Sandy Brown not the comission.

Dockter said every county department reports to the state on their own regarding their grant use, and her office has never been expected to handle grant reporting for them.

Brown said much the same when asked about the matter.

This morning, Dockter said the commission had never come to her about filing these reports, or told her that they were her responsibility.

In Monday's meeting, Williams said she's asked Dockter about the missing funds several times and has never gotten a straight answer, though when she asked fellow commissioner Mark Peterson to back up that claim he said he would not answer yes or no.

Dockter said she has not only answered the question several times, but had warned the commission before it happened, which Peterson said is true.

Hill County Commissioner Jake Strissel was not at Monday's meeting and had not responded to a request for comment since then.

After the meeting, Hill County Council on Aging Director Heather Sinclair said she wasn't at the meeting and the issue started before her time, so she didn't want to comment.

This morning, Lanier said he thinks this situation is a result of a lack of communication, from the state as well as anyone else.

He said he worked with Brown closely during his time at the council and she was extremely helpful to him when he was making his reports to the state, and the commission and Dockter were both helpful during his time as well.

He said the council is not a traditional county department and its funding is complicated, so it can be confusing to deal with and he thinks the state could have done a better job of making sure those responsible for reporting to them were getting it done.

Lanier said that when he announced his departure he asked someone on the commission to take point on the council. He added that, admittedly, he himself could have been clearer about the specifics, so part of the communication problems were his as well in hindsight.

After the discussion on the council Monday, Hill County Commissioner Mark Peterson said they should have a followup meeting on this matter with everyone involved.

During the meeting, the commission also discussed their process for interviewing applicants for local board positions.

At the last meeting, Peterson and Williams had debated about how the commission should advertise and interview applicants for vacant positions, with Williams saying that open positions always need to be advertised under state law, and that new applicants should be interviewed for positions.

In Monday's meeting Peterson proposed that they always advertise for open positions, and interview applicants in the event that they would be new to the board or if there is more than one candidate, but forgo an interview should the only candidate be a current board member looking to get reappointed.

Williams said she agrees with that approach but wonders why they weren't doing that anyway, given that that is the procedure they had been following until recently.

Peterson told Williams to "treat everybody with respect" and not interrupt him, after which Williams accused him of doing the same thing to her shortly after when he attempted to move on to the next subject without her having finished her thoughts on the matter of board appointment procedures.

She said she wants to have these procedures in a written policy, which Peterson agreed to.

The commission then discussed the possibility of installing panic buttons in the courthouse's offices for safety purposes, as well as implementing new clock-in procedures for employees.

The latter proposal was brought up by Dockter, who suggested that the courthouse adopt a new system as the current one is relatively easy to exploit, and has caused problems in the past when dealing with payroll.

Williams agreed, saying she thinks they could adopt a new system that would keep people more honest and simplify the process significantly.

The commissioners also discussed the possibility of shifting to paying employees every two weeks instead of every month, which may be easier to handle, but agreed that that discussion should probably be left until after they have a more solid idea of what they want to do with the clock-in system.

The commission also agreed to start looking for a new provider for their outside auditing, as their current service's contract is up and they no longer provide county financial auditing services.

Dockter said it is pretty late in the game, as this year's audit is coming up soon.

She also said they should expect a substantial rise in the price of audits, likely to around $100,000.

The commission also discussed having the courthouse inspected for hazardous materials before construction on the building's new heating, ventilation and air conditioning system begins in a few months.

Peterson said they are required to inspect for and remove things like asbestos and lead from the building before the project starts and the inspection alone will cost $12,500.

Williams asked if the EPA's Brownfields Program could be used to pay for some of these costs, but Bear Paw Development Corp. Community Planning and Brownfields Director Sara Strissel, who briefly called in for that question, said that is unlikely.

Strissel said that program's grants typically only go to projects that involve a building being remodeled in preparation for redevelopment, not an H-VAC upgrade.

She said she would try to find something the county can use for the project and get back to them, but couldn't think of anything off the top of her head.