Mattituck FD approved $150K without proper records, state audit finds

Mattituck Fire District commissioners approved nearly $150,000 in spending that could not be properly accounted for because of missing receipts, lack of proof that goods were delivered or payments made without authorization, according to a state audit.

The report, released last month by the New York State Comptroller’s Office, concluded that two-thirds of the 135 expense claims reviewed between January 2023 and June 2024 should not have been approved because of missing documentation, incorrect budget codes or other discrepancies.

State auditors examined claims totaling $194,478 and determined that the volunteer board of fire commissioners “did not perform a thorough, deliberate or effective audit of claims,” as required under state law.

The district’s expenditures totaled approximately $1.6 million in 2023, with nearly $3 million budgeted for 2024, funded primarily through real property taxes. The district serves approximately 4,898 residents in Mattituck and Laurel.

The report was released Dec. 31, three weeks after Commissioner David Haas won re-election to a new five-year term in an uncontested Dec. 10 election.

Mr. Haas referred requests for comment to Ted Webb, the chairman of the board of fire commissioners.

Mr. Webb did not respond to multiple requests for comment from The Suffolk Times.

Among the unauthorized payments were $15,286 for insurance, $4,000 for an installation dinner deposit and $2,500 for photography services. District Treasurer Erica Frank told the comptroller’s office she “forgot” to include the insurance payment on a warrant because it was made in a rush to prevent the district’s insurance from lapsing. 

Another $108,754 in spending, covering 77 claims, lacked documentation confirming delivery or completion of work, auditors found.

Among those was a $17,250 payment — half of a $34,500 invoice — for security cameras and video recording equipment that was approved without verification the equipment had been delivered or installed. District Manager Jessica Harris told investigators she did not retain packing slips for all items, keeping them only for medical supplies and one vendor’s emailed documentation while discarding others.

In their written response, district officials said they now check deliveries against packing slips to ensure items are delivered as ordered before retaining them for documentation.

Another 40 claims totaling $67,130 had missing or incorrect budget codes, preventing commissioners from verifying that sufficient appropriations were available. A board member told investigators the board did not review the budget before approving claims, instead relying on the treasurer to recommend budget transfers at year’s end for accounts that were overspent.

The board has since moved to rectify the issue, with Ms. Frank providing detailed reports from the accounting software showing the relevant budget code for each expense before meetings.

Eleven additional claims totaling $33,075 lacked itemized invoices or sufficient documentation to determine whether the expenses served valid district purposes. In one instance, a $4,525 credit card payment included 19 charges but only 16 receipts, leaving three purchases unsupported.

Because claims were approved without proper documentation, auditors said the district improperly paid $331 in sales tax despite being tax-exempt and may have paid for goods or services that were not received or were not legitimate district expenses.

The report also flagged three payments totaling $1,450 as questionable expenditures: $125 in foreign transaction and late fees, a $1,100 reimbursement to a department member for a damaged personal cellphone and $225 paid to a flower shop.

The flower shop payment drew particular scrutiny because the business is owned by the spouse of a fire commissioner. Auditors found the commissioner voted to approve the payment and seconded the motion without disclosing the conflict of interest, as required by the district’s Code of Ethics.

District officials disputed that finding, arguing the payment was permitted under an exemption in General Municipal Law. However, the comptroller’s office noted the district’s ethics code requires written disclosure and prohibits commissioners from participating in votes involving a family member’s financial interest. No disclosure was documented in meeting minutes.

Regarding the cellphone reimbursement, auditors said there is no legal authority for a fire district to reimburse volunteers for damage to personal property, except for prosthetic devices. District officials said volunteers have since been advised such reimbursements are no longer permitted.

The audit also identified systemic failures in claims processing. None of the 135 vouchers reviewed had the “District Use” section completed, leaving blank the voucher receipt date, board resolution date and approval status. Ms. Frank told investigators she was unaware the section needed to be completed.

Additionally, 16 claims totaling $12,052 for conference and travel reimbursements lacked signed vouchers and required travel explanation reports. Five credit card claims totaling $12,222, covering 75 separate charges, were missing itemized receipts or sufficient documentation.

In their response, district officials said they have implemented a new travel documentation procedure requiring the treasurer to prepare a summary of all conference-related expenses and the method of payment, which travelers must sign as confirmation.

In their written response to a draft provided in November, district officials acknowledged some findings and disputed others. They said corrective measures were underway, including centralizing deliveries at the district office to verify receipt before invoices are approved, retaining packing slips, revising voucher forms to include designated signature areas and providing commissioners with detailed accounting reports showing budget codes prior to meetings.

Officials also said travel, credit card and refreshment reimbursement procedures have been revised to require improved documentation. District officials could not be reached to confirm which reforms have been implemented since the report’s release.

The comptroller’s office issued 10 recommendations and directed the board of fire commissioners to submit a corrective action plan within 90 days. The plan is due March 31. State law requires implementation to begin by the end of the next fiscal year.

The board of fire commissioners oversees the district’s financial and administrative operations. Commissioners are elected to five-year terms and typically serve without compensation. The board meets twice monthly to conduct district business, including the review and approval of expense claims.