Audio clip
Audio: Hamilton County Commission Regular session -- Dec. 03, 2008
Though his accounting firm did administrative work for the Hamilton County Water and Wastewater Treatment Authority, authority board Chairman Henry Hoss said he didn’t personally benefit from it.
“We started doing that early on,” Mr. Hoss said. “We did it because there really wasn’t anyone else to do it.”
Even so, some county commissioners, who appoint members of the WWTA board, say it could be a conflict of interest.
WHAT’S HAPPENED
Hamilton County Commissioner Curtis Adams has asked for documents showing attorney John Anderson’s charges to the Water and Wastewater Treatment Authority. An East Ridge citizens’ group asked for the documents to determine whether Mr. Anderson has a conflict of interest in serving as attorney for East Ridge and the authority.
Between June 2007 and September of this year, the authority paid $9,815 to Mr. Hoss’ firm — Barto, Hoss and Co., P.C., records show. According to authority records, the work consisted of visits to the post office, phone calls to the county finance department and trips to the bank to make deposits for the WWTA. Employees also maintained data on the depreciation of the authority’s assets, Mr. Hoss said.
Several employees of his company have done work for the authority, according to records. Mr. Hoss said part of the reason for using his firm’s employees was “segregation of duties” to avoid embezzlement or accounting fraud.
In a Monday letter to Mr. Hoss, County Commissioner John Allen Brooks questioned the firm’s work for the authority.
“Clearly, it is or could be a conflict of interest,” he wrote.
Mr. Brooks went on to request “information regarding any and all business relationships with the different business entities that have come in front of the WWTA and your accounting firm.”
County Commissioner Larry Henry agreed that the work could be a conflict of interest.
“It sort of bothers me,” he said.
Mr. Henry said, however, that he did not believe Mr. Hoss had any intent to gain from the work.
According to Tennessee state law, “it is unlawful” for officials with “direct interest” in a contract or work for a government organization to vote on or oversee the work. But Mr. Hoss said he didn’t think there was a conflict of interest, in part because he didn’t take any compensation for any work he did supervising his employees who did WWTA work.
He said the only reason the authority paid for the work was for the sake of his business partner, Mike Barto.
The work never was bid out to contractors, nor did the authority’s board ever vote on it, Mr. Hoss said.
“I’m a CPA; I know how to do that kind of stuff,” he said. “I offered to do it on behalf of the WWTA.”
Frank Gibson of the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government said the state’s ethics laws are in place for the sake of more transparency.
“It’s something that probably should have been discussed at a board meeting,” he said.
But Mr. Hoss said the amounts involved — generally $250 to $400 per month — didn’t seem particularly significant. He also said board members were aware that his firm was doing the work.
“There have been no votes, because there’s never been an issue,” he said.
There have been no votes, because there's never been an issue.
Or login with:
New Account