Fort Thomas City Council voted on Oct. 20, 2025, to seek a forensic audit and to issue requests for proposals after residents and council members raised concerns about pension payments and accounting discrepancies.

The vote followed public comments and an extended council discussion prompted by documents and FOIA requests a resident, Nicole Hutz, said she had reviewed. Hutz said she found a $277,721.51 payment posted to the Kentucky Public Pension Authority on Feb. 4, 2025, and a subsequent duplicate ledger entry in mid‑March; she and other speakers pressed council to investigate whether errors or mismanagement occurred. “I'm demanding a forensic accounting audit to be conducted immediately on this city,” Hutz told the council.

Council members and staff cited the city's recent fiscal‑year audit, which the finance committee reported contained a qualified opinion after the auditors could not account for $322,498 in cash balances. Finance Committee Chair Ben Pendry recommended publishing monthly financial reports on the city website and pursuing an independent forensic review to trace the flagged amounts.

The council approved a motion to direct staff to solicit proposals for a forensic accounting audit scoped to examine the disputed pension payment, related ledger entries and other discrepancies noted in the 2023–24 audit. Council members agreed to compile a more detailed scope at a special meeting planned within roughly two weeks and to route requests for proposals through the finance committee. The motion to request RFPs and to schedule the special meeting carried with members saying “aye.”

Council and residents described specific figures and dates during the meeting: Hutz cited a March 25, 2024, letter from the Kentucky Public Pension Authority demanding payment of a delinquent obligation; she said a $277,721.51 ACH payment was posted on Feb. 4, 2025, and that an apparent duplicate entry appeared around March 14, 2025. Speakers also referenced penalties and fines totaling about $109,000 cited in public comments.

City administration and council members said staff have begun compiling records, that some duplicate general‑ledger lines appear to have been entered by two users in the accounting system, and that staff will try to provide a complete, auditable file to any independent reviewer. City Administrator Matt Kramer acknowledged the accounting entries and described staff efforts to reconcile the records; he said the apparent duplication stemmed from two users entering the same invoice in the city's Springbrook system while a finance employee was on medical leave.

Council members urged care in scoping the audit. Several residents and speakers recommended starting the forensic review focused on the $322,498 the auditors could not trace and the Feb. 4 ACH payment, then expanding the scope if reviewers uncover additional issues. The council asked staff to return proposed RFP language, vendor lists and a recommended scope for the forensic work at the finance committee meeting and at the special council session.

Votes at a glance
- Motion to add a full investigation of pension repayment to the June 2 minutes (motion seconded by Eric Strange): approved by voice vote during visitor communications; details referenced by citizens.
- Motion to pursue a forensic accounting audit and solicit competitive proposals (scope to include the Feb. 4, 2025 ACH payment and audit exceptions): motion made and seconded; council approved by voice vote; scope to be finalized at a special meeting.
- Motion to direct staff to prepare RFPs for forensic audit and for HR/outsourced HR services: motion made during the meeting and approved by council to proceed with RFP preparation and review at finance committee.
- Resolution R0072025 (apply for state grant for North Fort Thomas Avenue repaving, up to $91,236): motion to approve was made and approved by council.

The council scheduled a special meeting to finalize the forensic audit scope and to review vendor proposals. Staff said they will publish monthly finance reports on the city website showing cash position, check register and percent of budget spent, and the finance committee will review the proposed RFPs.

The council and residents repeatedly emphasized they are seeking an independent review rather than drawing conclusions in public meetings. Several residents urged the council to also consider state resources — the Kentucky Auditor and the Attorney General were mentioned as potential avenues for independent review — while council members said they will also solicit private forensic accounting firms.

Ending
Council members said they want an independent firm to trace the missing and disputed amounts and to recommend remedial steps; they asked staff to return a draft RFP and a timeline to the finance committee before the next council vote. A special meeting was set to allow all council members to review the proposed scope and vendor responses before awarding any contract.