Council reviews state audit, city attorney mails demand for $580 in questioned credit-card charges

The Woodland City Council reviewed a state auditor's report and discussed a demand from the city for reimbursement of about $580 in credit-card charges identified in the audit. City Attorney Emily (last name not specified in transcript) confirmed her office mailed a letter requesting repayment to former mayor Will Finn based on the auditor's findings.

The audit prompted questions from council members about the underlying documentation and about the tone of the city's outreach to Finn. Emily said, "We did mail the letter last week, regarding a request for that reimbursement. The city is obligated anytime that we find that there has been... to recover that," and that the letter and the audit are public records.

Mayor (listed in the meeting as presenting the audit findings) told the council the city had taken administrative steps to address the auditors' recommendations and described the effort as corrective, saying, "This is not a witch hunt." He also said he had recused himself from handling the collection and asked the attorney's office to manage communications.

Council members differed over whether the former mayor should have been contacted directly before the audit was discussed at the meeting. One member urged colleagues to read Finn's written response before taking further action. Another said receipts existed for most charges and that the city had already recovered a majority of questioned amounts.

Emily said the auditors had sampled credit-card usage, the city pulled the year's statements for review and reconciled many transactions; the items still identified as outstanding were the ones the auditors asked the city to recover. She said the city relied on the state auditor's report for the decision to request reimbursement: "Right now, we've just said that the audit report found that this money should be returned to the city and asked that this money be returned to the" city.

No formal council vote was recorded in the transcript on further legal action; Emily said additional legal steps would be considered if Finn refused reimbursement or if new information emerged, and that legal risks could be discussed in an executive session if needed.

The discussion also covered internal changes prompted by the audit: the mayor and staff described new credit-card policies and receipt requirements circulated to employees, and council members noted prior lack of detailed itemization on voucher approvals. Multiple speakers said most questioned charges had documentation and that staff had recovered several transactions already.

The meeting record and the demand letter were described as public records by Emily and the mayor. Several council members urged caution about wording and the potential reputational effects of language such as "misuse," which appears in the auditor's findings; Emily said that phrase reflects the auditors' conclusion about consistency with state law, not an assertion of criminal intent.

The council did not adopt any additional formal action at the meeting; members said they would review Finn's response and follow up if needed.