It's taken $60,000 or so, but the records of the Butler County Sheriff's office are now ready to be audited - so says an outside auditor. From a taxpayer's perspective, it's hard to see that as good news. But it is possible things could be worse - or will get worse in the future.

At this point, efforts should be made to defuse the ongoing dispute between Sheriff Dennis Rickard and Butler County Controller John "Jack" McMillan.

McMillan has claimed that the sheriff's records were in such disarray that they could not be audited by the county. To resolve this problem, the county spent $62,000 for the accounting firm of Grossman, Yanak and Ford to straighten out the records of the sheriff's office for the years 1999 through 2002.

While having better-organized 1999-2002 records in the sheriff's department is good news, taxpayers have to be wondering what will happen with the records for 2003.

Rickard has maintained that his office records have always been in good order and auditable. But $62,000 of county taxpayers' money and some 800 hours of labor billed by the outside accountants suggests otherwise. The auditor's report presented to the county commissioners last week suggested the records were all there - just poorly organized.

Still hanging over the sheriff-controller tiff is the issue of Rickard's refusal to answer a questionaire used by the controller's office as part of its auditing process. Rickard is claiming in a lawsuit against the controller's office that the 70-question document goes beyond the requirements of a financial audit, and into the arena of job performance.

McMillan has argued that the questionaire is a standard component of audits performed within municipal government's across the state. A survey of other the row offices in the Butler County Government Center suggests the questionaire is not overly intrusive and covers issues relevant to financial and record-keeping concerns. Such a questionaire is also a routine part of financial audits done within the private sector.

The fact that the types of questions in McMillan's questionare are answered by other row officers and accountants for private companies raises the obvious question of why this questionaire should be a problem for Rickard. What is so unique about the sheriff's department that it should be exempted from answering such industry-standard questions?

It is expected that in the coming months a judge will determine whether Rickard must comply with the controller's questionaire. In the meantime, McMillan should move forward to examine the sheriff's office's records that were re-organizd by the outside accounting firm.

If those records are found to be in order, McMillan could issue what might be termed a "conditional approval" of the sheriff's records, indicating that the books are in order (if that is what McMillan finds), but that there has still not been compliance with the questionaire component.

It is unfortunate that the standoff over the questionaire has landed in the courts, considering its broad acceptance as part of a standard financial audit.

Still, there are now opportunities and obligations to move forward.

Both McMillan and Rickard should make efforts to get beyond this dispute and move on for the sake of county taxpayers. McMillan should move forward with auditing efforts where possible at this point, Rickard, for his part, should assure the county commissioners (and taxpayers) that he is handling the documentation and financial affairs of his office in a way that conforms with the system established by the outside auditing firm so that McMillan can do his job in the future -without requiring the county to spend additional taxpayer money on outside assistance.

- J.L.W.III