Row Office War: Chesco controller says sheriff fails info request
WEST CHESTER » The Chester County Sheriff’s Office has failed to fully comply with the request of the county’s controller for financial records concerning the sheriff’s K-9 Unit funding, according to a statement by the controller.
The Sheriff’s Office missed a deadline last week to turn over all records of the revenues, purchases and expenses for the K-9 Unit from January 2009 to the present, as was detailed in a subpoena that was delivered to the office earlier this month. The subpoena came after Sheriff Carolyn “Bunny” Welsh declined to submit the K-9 Unit to an audit by the Controller’s Office.
“We have only received partial records for three years,” Controller Margaret Reif said in response to questions from the Daily Local News about progress that was made toward fulfilling the terms of the subpoena and supplying the items requested. “They were asked to provide all records by 4 p.m. Friday and failed to comply with that request.
“We are certainly disappointed they have chosen to take this route,” Reif said in an e-mail. “My solicitor and I are in the process of discussing what the next steps will be.”
Attorney Anthony Verwey, the controller’s solicitor, was not in the office last week and could not be reached for comment.
The failure to meet the terms of the subpoena escalates a confrontation between the two county row offices, in which supporters of Welsh have accused Reif of a partisan “witch hunt,” accusations she rejects. An attorney representing the Sheriff’s Office said Friday that the lack of a full response to the subpoena came for a number of reasons, among them the nonexistence of some items requested, such as stocks and bonds associated with the
K-9 Unit’s bank accounts. But Dawson R. Muth, the sheriff’s solicitor, also said that the organization that is now overseeing the finances of the K-9 Unit, the non-profit Friends of the Chester County Sheriff’s K-9 Unit, had failed to locate some of the information that was sought. And he reiterated the stance that the controller is not entitled to the documents because the funds were privately raised.
The sheriff has provided the controller with three years of records, from 2015,
2016, and 2017, Muth told a Daily Local News reporter.
“It is my understanding that at this time the K-9 entity will not be providing any other information from other years to the controller for review,” Muth said. “It is the sheriff’s position that the subpoena is improper and seeks improper information outside the scope of her authority to audit. She has no right to see any of those records.”
But Muth also indicated that Welsh does not have all the information that Reif’s office requested, and that those records, if they exist, are in the possession of the non-profit “Friends” group. He said that organization, which is separate from the Sheriff’s Office, had hired its own attorney to represent its interests. He did not have the name of that attorney, however.
A spokeswoman for the Sheriff’s Office, Kathy Brady Shea, also said on Friday that information about the attorney for directors of the Friends of the Chester County Sheriff’s K-9 Unit would not be available until next week.
Welsh herself has raised the possibility that some of what the Controller’s Office was not available because of bookkeeping errors.
She told an interviewer on WCHE-AM radio in West Chester during a segment on the K-9 funding controversy that for some time the records of the then-Chester County Sheriff’s K-9 Unit group had been kept by her former assistant, Chief Deputy James O. Moyer, who died in 2013.
“Jim was a wonderful guy,” Welsh told WCHE General Manager Bill Mason on Wednesday. “And I’ll be nice because I love him. But he was certainly not the most organized (person). His record keeping was not the best.”
Shea also pushed back at the notion that Welsh had not complied with the subpoena.
“She absolutely did comply,” the spokeswoman said in a statement. “She appeared pursuant to the subpoena, took an oath, answered questions, and presented the controller with the available records. The controller has asked for extensive records, some of which do not exist and some which the sheriff does not have. Otherwise, she has fully complied with the subpoena.
“Unfortunately, it has become increasingly obvious that whatever the sheriff provides will not be enough,” Shea said.
The dispute over records for the K-9 Unit stems from the fact that the nine K-9 officers that the Sheriff’s Office uses for tasks such as drug and bomb detection, tracking, and comfort, both inside and outside the county Justice Center, are not funded by the county. The Sheriff’s Office has been forced as the program has grown since its inception in 2006 to use private fundraising to help defray the costs of the training, certification, veterinary care, shelter, and food for the dogs, who have names like Luke, Nero, Dexter and Murphy.
The fundraising efforts have included golf outings, classic car shows, and “wild game” dinners, Welsh said. Over the years, estimates are that the fundraising has brought in “hundreds of thousands” of dollars that might otherwise have been paid for with taxpayer dollars, had the program been approved for funding by the county commissioners.
Welsh and her office have noted the popularity of the K-9 officers, their expertise, and the law enforcement benefits the group bring to the county and elsewhere. In the radio interview, Welsh boasted that her K-9 Unit was among “the finest in the country.”
But funds for those dogs were also raised, notes Reif, with direct appeals to supporters through the county’s website, www.chesco,org. And that, among other factors, is what gives her the authority and reason to audit the K-9 Unit’s finances.
“The conversation about the good work the K-9 teams are doing is not relevant to this situation and is being used as a diversion,” Reif said Friday. “This is strictly about hundreds of thousands of dollars solicited and received in the sheriff’s office, through the county website and flowing through a bank account that lists its address as 201 W. Market St. without any oversight.”
Reif, a Democrat who was swept into office last November in a stunning sweep of county Row Offices, said she had reached out to Welsh about her perception that, “because the account was improperly registered and tied so closely to the county, (Welsh) had created potential liability exposures.
“It had been my hope that her office would have provided us with the documentation needed to straighten out the problem,” she said. “We were disappointed when, after six weeks of waiting for her to produce the records, a letter was sent to us by her solicitor stating that they would not and could not comply with the request. It was at that point that we found ourselves with no other option but to issue a subpoena.
“One would think that complying with an audit and having the opportunity for transparency to show their sponsors where their money is going would be welcomed,” the controller said.
To contact staff writer Michael P. Rellahan call 610-696-1544.