Findlay council presses auditor for clearer accounting of $100 million portfolio, requests presentation

Council members on Findlay City Council on March 4 pressed City Auditor Jim Stashek for clearer information about the city's interim and inactive investments and asked for a formal presentation on the portfolio's returns.

Councilman Dan DeArmond formally requested that the portfolio manager present a line-item report for 2022-24, a 2025 forecast and a briefing on the types of investments allowed under Ohio law; he asked that a Fifth Third Bank representative and the city's financial advisor, Andrew Brossard, attend the April 1 meeting. "We have no idea what our return on investment is. We we have a hundred million dollar portfolio," DeArmond said during the discussion, citing the need for an annual return figure and regular updates.

The request followed a letter and on-the-record statement from Auditor Jim Stashek, who read into the record a letter that described the city's adherence to the Uniform Depository Act (Ohio Revised Code chapter 135) and explained past deliberations about using third-party investment managers. In the letter he wrote, "Unfortunately, the city's investment income is being politicized by some individuals running for office." In council remarks, Stashek said the city's portfolio has been "upper fours to 5%" in recent years and warned that producing some historical, line-by-line metrics could impose a significant staff burden.

Council members repeatedly said they wanted transparency and easier-to-understand reporting. "In the interest of transparency is for you to do your job and just kind of explain some stuff to us," Councilman Bauman said. Councilwoman Holly Frishee asked whether the council would be "micromanaging" investments and said regular reports already come in; she suggested capital planning and cash-flow forecasts from the administration might answer several questions.

Mayor Christine Emmer said the administration would convene the appropriate group to determine what reporting the council should receive and noted that, under the Ohio Revised Code and local practice, the council has a role in oversight. "We are convening the group to discuss the apportionment," the mayor said when the county public-health agreement was raised separately; on investments she said a committee or board defined under ORC 135 would be an appropriate venue for more detailed reporting.

Council members asked for specific items in a requested presentation: three-year ROI by line item and total return (2022-24), an ROI forecast for 2025, a description of investment categories (short-term liquidity, excess liquidity and longer-term investments), and how those align with the administration's cash-flow projections. The auditor said the city currently follows state training and government finance best practices, uses conservative, low-risk instruments, and that interest earned must be distributed to specific funds per ordinance and state law rather than flowing solely to the general fund.

The council did not adopt a formal motion to require the presentation at the March 4 meeting. After extended discussion, a motion by a council member to "move on" from the topic passed and no vote was recorded to compel the April 1 presentation. Council members continued to press for improved reporting formats and for the city to assemble an oversight structure consistent with ORC 135.

Why it matters: Findlay holds a large pool of public funds whose performance and distribution affect multiple city budgets. Council members said clear, periodic reporting would help them meet their fiduciary responsibilities and assess whether investment income can sustainably support services or is being relied on to mask structural budget gaps.

What comes next: Councilman DeArmond asked for an April 1 presentation; the administration and auditor said they would work with appropriations and law to determine an appropriate reporting format and the timing of any formal committee or board under state law.