Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Auditing City Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Long Branch resident urges no votes on auditor appointment and questions firehouse rental payments
Summary
At the Jan. 8 Long Branch City Council meeting, resident Vincent Lepore urged council members to vote no on the appointment of the city auditor and a related temporary budget allocation, alleging missed audits and questioning rental payments to volunteer fire companies.
Vincent Lepore, a Long Branch resident, used the public-comment period at the Jan. 8 council meeting to call for a no vote on Resolution 6, which authorizes appointment of a city auditor for $78,000, and Resolution 8, a temporary budget appropriating $20,475 for the same auditor.
Lepore said the city auditor “completely missed” audits he believes should have substantiated a 30-year tax abatement at Pier Village 3 and alleged other missed auditing items, including “rent checks for vacant fire houses.” He told the council he had seen projections rather than audits for Pier Village 3 to date and asked the council to reject the auditor appointment and temporary appropriation.
Lepore also referenced statements made at a prior council meeting about an animal control officer, saying council remarks suggesting the officer was “under indictment” were incorrect and that the Fifth Amendment presumption of innocence applies. He criticized council practice, calling it, in his words, “the corrupt pay to play Palone gravy train.”
At the meeting Lepore cited specific line items and figures from the city’s budget and audit documents: he referred to “firehouse rental, $32,100” on sheet 15c of the current appropriations in the city budget for 2024 and the current fund regulatory basis audit for year-end 12/31/23. He said only six fire companies listed in Resolution 284 receive rent checks and challenged prior council characterizations that all fire companies receive such payments.
The transcript records Lepore’s request that council members oppose the auditor appointment and the related temporary appropriation; the council did not take a separate roll-call vote during public comment. No city response to Lepore’s claims was made on the record during the public-comment period recorded in the transcript.
The items Lepore referenced (Resolution 6 and Resolution 8) were on the Jan. 8 agenda; the council later acted on the agenda in other sections of the meeting. Lepore’s statements in the public-comment period are on the record and will be considered alongside formal agenda action at subsequent steps where appropriate.
