Three Oxford Township inspectors who were overpaid a combined $176,228.50 over a five-month period, repaid their debts in full following the township board’s verification of the amounts.
Township officials Sept. 22 publicly reviewed the amounts overpaid to Building Inspector Jim Wilson, Electrical Inspector Dale Birch and Mechanical and Plumbing Inspector Bob Gerds.
According to Building Official Mike Darling’s calculations, between January and May 2004, Wilson was overpaid $52,211.52, Birch received an overage of $42,462.65 and Gerds was paid an extra $81,554.33.
A computer software ‘glitch? was blamed for the overpayments, which were discovered in late June by Darling and brought to the township board’s attention in early July.
Basically, the ‘glitch? kept ‘accumulating? the number of inspections performed from month to month, instead of keeping them separated by month, according to Rana Emmons, of Post, Smythe, Lutz and Ziel, an auditing firm hired by the township.
As a result, the three inspectors, who are paid monthly, were being paid for the current month’s inspections, plus all the previous month’s inspections dating back to January 2004.
Darling and Emmons worked closely together since July to determine the exact amounts overpaid to each inspector and owed to the township.
‘I believe Mike (Darling) did a very complete job,? said Emmons, noting the ‘procedures? he used to arrive at the calculated amounts were ‘appropriate? and ‘accurate.?
Supervisor Bill Dunn asked the two inspectors present at the meeting, Wilson and Birch, if they agreed with the dollar amounts presented, and both said, ‘yes.?
It was stated by both Darling and Clerk Clara Sanderson that Gerds, who was not present due to a car accident, told them he also agreed with the overpayment amount attributed to him.
Until the overpayment issue was settled, each inspector continued working for the township, but their paid was withheld for June, July and August.
As part of the agreements reached with each inspector, the amounts owed to them were paid once they repaid the township in full.
Birch was owed $13,633.75, Gerds $30,276.25 and Wilson $25,708.75.
Resident and Trustee-elect Sue Bellairs asked the board if the inspectors would be required to pay interest on the monies they owed to the township.
‘We charge everybody else interest,? she said. ‘We charged parks and rec. interest when they borrowed a little bit of money for a little bit of time.?
Sanderson told Bellairs, ‘This is a little different than parks and rec. or somebody borrowing money and paying interest. This was an overpayment.?
Treasurer Joe Ferrari told Bellairs ‘you have to weigh? any interest the township would have accrued by having that $176,228.50 in its bank account ‘against the clerical errors at our end.?
‘You have to weigh those two against each other and see which one supercedes the other,? Ferrari said.
‘As a citizen, I would know if I had an extra $10,000 or $20,000 in my paycheck,? Bellairs retorted.
‘I disagree that it was all our (inspectors) faults,? Ferrari said. ‘I disagreed with that from Day One. I believe the township shares in some of that blame also.?
‘Maybe the township does share (in the blame), but they (inspectors) share too,? replied Bellairs, noting the inspectors ‘got to use thousands of dollars over the last few months.?
Ferrari noted the monies overpaid to the inspectors did not come from township tax dollars, but from the Building Department’s budget, which is derived from building permit fees.
Bellairs argued it’s still tax money because the people who paid those permit fees are township taxpayers.
‘I agree with Sue (Bellairs), they should have known it was over, but on the other hand, we should know its short,? said Trustee Jerry Dywasuk.
Trustee Shirley Clancy said it’s ‘difficult? to calculate the interest on varying amounts over a five-month period and the ’emphasis should be on rectifying? the situation.
‘Are we paying them (the inspectors) interest on the wages we held back in June, July and August,? said Trustee Pat Fitchena, noting that seeking interest could make this incident an ‘ugly situation.?
Fitchena said ‘computer glitches happen all the time? and ‘I think they’re honest and ready to step up to the plate? and ‘pay what they owe to the township.?
‘We need to move on,? she said.
‘That’s a lot of money in a short amount of time,? Bellairs said. ‘Believe me, I would have known whether my husband had $5,000 more in his check per week.?
‘To me, you’re not finishing it. Everybody wants to make it go away. I still think we the taxpayers deserve that money back in there with interest,? Bellairs added.
Ferrari did a ‘very rough? calculation of the interest that $176,228.50 would have accrued over five months and stated it was ‘about $100.?
It was officially acknowledged during the meeting as part of a unanimously approved board motion that two of the inspectors, Gerds and Wilson, tried to bring the overpayments to Building Department’s attention earlier in the year.
Dywasuk suggested Gerds and Wilson be recognized because he would ‘hate to see someone’s name besmirched.?
‘If someone steps forward and reports it and we don’t do anything, then it’s our fault,? the trustee said.
Darling said he ‘did not realize? the computer program was ‘accumulating? the inspections from month to month. He said ‘had no reason to believe there was a problem? because the number of inspections and the amounts being paid out corresponded.
Darling also said that the number of inspections always starts to increase from January onward so ‘it never dawned on anybody that it wasn’t a real figure until it got to the triple digits in June.?
‘That’s when we said, ‘Wait a minute, (there’s) no way were that busy,?? he said. ‘That’s what caught the whole problem.?
Supervisor Dunn wanted to focus on how the Building Department plans to prevent this from happening again.
‘We’ve discussed how we’ve gotten where we are, let’s discuss how we will never get there again,? he said.
One of the preventative measures will include Darling ‘manually? checking the number of inspections logged at the township against the number of inspection invoices each inspector submits on a monthly basis.
Darling said the Building Department is also looking into paying the inspectors on a ‘flat-fee basis.?
Currently, two of the three inspectors are paid a percentage of each inspection fee. That percentage varies according to the type of inspection performed. How much those percentages equal in dollars varies because the costs of the inspections vary according to the size of the home or building.
Paying each inspector a flat-fee per inspection ‘will make everybody’s life a lot easier,? said Darling, noting two of the three inspectors agreed this ‘might be the way to go.? The third inspector already works on a flat-fee basis.
As for the computer software the Building Department uses to tabulate inspections and pay the inspectors, Darling said he reviewed the computer’s inspection reports for June, July and August against the invoices from the inspectors and ‘it’s working.?
Darling said he’s ‘real confident? in the way the software is ‘now operating.?