Honolulu, Hawaii 2021-04-08 23:07:23 –
Legislative reports on state auditors and legislative reports on whether the office complies with constitutional obligations have negligently appointed executives with inadequate experience, and the move has been “delayed.” And contributed to the premature report. “
The office, now headed by state auditor Le Condo, is “inconsistent” in the application of auditing standards, leading to a long-standing project by staff to revise the office’s own operations and standards manuals. ..
Report, Released on thursday According to the Hawaii State House of Representatives, state auditors have concluded that they are “not in full compliance.” Article VII, Section 10 Hawaii’s Constitution May Pave the Way for Kondo’s Dismissal
House Speaker Scott Saiki set up a working group in January to consider running Kondo’s office. The beginning of efforts to drive away Kondo.. According to Saiki, the review was triggered by “unnecessary proceedings” involving auditors and missed deadlines for some audit reports.
At the same time, Mr. Nishiki submitted a bill to reduce the annual budget of corporate auditors by more than 50%. Mr. Kondo stated as follows.Basically the intestines“Office. The budget cuts proposed later have been significantly reduced.
Saiki has nominated three celebrities in the group — led by former city auditor Edwin Young, including former US MP Colleen Hanabusa and former State Treasury Director Wes Machida.
The 79-page report made nine recommendations, including that state auditors and executive-level managers and leaders of the Secretariat have at least five years of government audit experience.
According to the report, the group reviewed the information dating back to the establishment of the state auditor’s office and interviewed a former employee of the state’s auditor’s office.
However, according to the report, Mr. Kondo refused to meet with the investigators and refused to answer questions sent by the group.
The group also accused Mr. Kondo of “using the media as a weapon with inaccurate information and mischaracterizing the working group’s request for information.”
Kondo has spoken frankly about his opposition to the speaker’s efforts to essentially audit the Audit & Supervisory Board. He argued that Saiki was trying to control the Audit & Supervisory Board for political purposes, and that the Audit & Supervisory Board had to remain politically unaffected.
He was attempted by Saiki and other legislative leaders, but so far became independent, including measures that would reduce salaries in his office and set up an office for auditors, a state oversight body. He noted that he was unable to pursue other measures aimed at undermining surveillance. , Ombudsman Office, Information Practices Office, Hawaii State Ethics Commission, Campaign Expenditure Commission — Under one roof, there is a new public accountability office.
The proposal Widely criticized And now I’m dead. So is the salary.
And on Thursday, he called the process leading to the working group’s report “sneaky and unmanageable.” He said the report’s conclusions were “not surprising” and explained as a solution to the problem.
“I think all the conclusions and recommendations were pre-determined,” he said.
He argued that the investigator had tried to meet and talk to him.
“It’s absolutely wrong to say I didn’t cooperate,” he added, adding that he sent three letters to the working group for clarity and more information on the investigation.
Saiki postponed questions about reporting to majority leader Dela Oberatti on Thursday.
Verratti said Thursday that he was “disappointed but not surprised” by Kondo’s reaction to the report.
“I’m going to let it speak for itself,” she said. “Anyone who takes the time to read will find that it wasn’t decided in advance, and it’s not the next step.”
She said the investigation was led by people with extensive experience in auditing and governance.
Regarding coming next, Verratti said there was likely a public briefing on the report.
“I know there are many recommendations and discoveries, and I need to look at them,” she said. “I want to understand what opportunities I have to strengthen my position as a legislative auditor.”
According to the Constitution, the legislature can dismiss a state auditor at any time for good reason by voting two-thirds of the members of the joint session.
The report also found that office oversight was needed “to eliminate violations of legal and statutory requirements,” such as the deadlines set by Congress.
Without that oversight, the report warns and a myriad of problems will continue.
Sign up for our free morning newsletter and face more information every day.
Report: State Auditor Not In ‘Complete Compliance’ With Constitution Source link Report: State Auditor Not In ‘Complete Compliance’ With Constitution