Shelby Co. (ECWd)
Shelby County Board member Gary Patterson has established a clear pattern of providing false or misleading information when it comes to his comments during county board and county committee meetings. We covered a few of those in this article.
During last night’s county board meeting there was some discussion regarding the auditor’s proposals. Patterson points out the number of county audits listed with one firm and then claims he did not see any counties on the list of the other one.
Was he even looking?
Anyone who can read can see that not only is Cook County listed on the one he claimed he did not see any on, but there is also a laundry list of public bodies covering just about every unit of government found in Illinois. Comparing the two proposals as it relates to government audits, it’s clear the one they chose did not list anywhere near the client list provided by the other.
How Patterson did not see Cook County on the list is laughable at best because not only is Cook County on the partial list of clients, but they are also the first one on the list of references. So, it’s clear Patterson was not paying attention to what he was reading or intentionally misrepresented the truth of the matter.
Please don’t take our word for it. Below are the client lists provided by both firms. Click on then and compare the client lists. After reading them ask yourself, which firm appears to have more experience?
While Patterson focused on comparing the number of counties listed in one proposal and “not seeing” any counties in the other, it appears he ignores the fact Cook County was not only listed but has over 5 million people whereas the 13 counties he pointed to have a whopping combined total population of only 397,079. An audit in Cook County would logically bring far more county audit experience into the equation than the 13 counties listed in the other proposal considering it is over 13 times the population.
While it was good to see the county moving forward with at least 1 required audit, we find it discouraging that they failed to have either of the two firms present to answer any questions before making a selection. Additionally, the board has failed to follow the law and complete the Sheriff’s audit as required. We will cover that in a separate article.
The full audit proposals can be downloaded at the following links.
The video of the board meeting is below and set for Patterson’s comments regarding what he failed to see in one of the proposals. We note this event because it is yet another example of Patterson making comments that have an influence on how board members act. When those comments are wrapped in misinformation it misleads the board and the public.