[Lancaster Online]

[Artie See]

Email from Greg Sahd:

Regarding Jim Miller's letter to the editor in yesterday afternoon's New Era: There is no provision for former GSC members to "audit an audit," as they have apparently done at their gathering yesterday afternoon at the county government building, 150 North Queen St. Even if we agreed former Government Study Commissioners had any residual official duties to perform 5 months after the voters rejected their home rule charter referendum question and 5 months after the GSC was discharged and rendered defunct--and we do not--but even if we did, there remains a fundamental problem with former Government Study Commissioners' attesting action: This was not a financial report; it was an audit and their is no legal authority under the home rule law for anyone to sign-off on any such audit report prepared by the county.

Mr. Miller claims to quote "what the law actually says" without any citation. Why? Because he has no citation; his quotation isn't from The Home Rule Charter and Optional Plans Law ("Law"), but from page 28 of the "Home Rule in PA" manual. If Mr. Miller would consult the Law, he'd find the clarification he's missing.

Sections 2921 and 2922 of the Law govern this situation. Although Mr. Miller claims "The law is silent as to how long after the referendum vote the Commission has to file an amended report," the Law does indeed put a time limit on Commission action: 60 days before the election.

The Section 2921 procedure for the Commission to wrap up its work and issue a final report, which report is to include a signed and notarized financial statement, must be done before the election. Although Section 2922 permits the Commission to issue an amended final report, together with an amended and signed final financial statement, that amended report and/or financial statement must be completed and published "at any time prior to 60 days before the date of the referendum."

The expectation of the Law is that a Commission will conclude all of its activity no later than 60 days before the election. The Commission should not be spending any money after that. The Law intends that the public get a complete perspective of the Commission and its work and its expenditures before the election. Consequently, the Commission should have no expenditures from 60 days before the election until the election is decided.

Section 2922 of the Law specifies the Commission is discharged upon a disapproving vote of the electorate. There is no provision in the Law that provides for the Commission to approve any audit of its final financial report or of its amended final financial report.

It's quite clear that Mr. Miller and his pro-home rule colleagues are viewing the provisions of Sections 2921 and 2922 (if they're looking at the actual Law at all) as if those provisions relate to the Commission after the election. It's abundantly clear that those provisions relate to the Commission's work before the election.

Finally, Mr. Miller erroneously refers to signing "the amended Final Report." Again, it not a final report: It is an audit. As I noted above, any "amended final report" must be issued no later than 60 days before the election.

Greg