Residents successfully petition state to audit the City of Humansville
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. — Missouri State Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick announced on Wednesday that a petition by Humansville residents has triggered an audit of the city's government concerning the misuse of funds.
The Humansville community gathered 170 certified signatures to trigger a petition audit, well above the 135 signatures that were required.
'I want to thank the people of Humansville for taking the time and effort to collect the signatures necessary to initiate this petition audit. With the numerous issues that have occurred in the city over the last year, and with allegations of missing money, it's important that we shine the light of truth and transparency on the city's government,' said Auditor Fitzpatrick.
The Missouri Auditor's Office says the City of Humansville has been the subject of state investigations regarding possible misuse of taxpayer funds and election interference in the past year. An alderman also filed a lawsuit against the city, alleging that it violated the Sunshine Law.
Former Humansville police chief sues city that fired him after blowing the whistle
The Humansville Board of Aldermen tried to pass a resolution letting the State Auditor's office conduct an audit, but the resolution ultimately failed.
'We will do our best to give taxpayers a better understanding of the financial health and operational effectiveness of their city. If necessary, we will also provide recommendations to improve the performance of their government,' Auditor Fitzpatrick said. 'I urge everyone to be patient while we perform this intensive review of the operations of the city government and encourage anyone with information that may be helpful to our audit to reach out through our Whistleblower Hotline.'
Individuals can provide confidential information for the auditor's office to consider during the audit by calling the State Auditor's Whistleblower Hotline at 800-347-8597, by email at moaudit@auditor.mo.gov or online at the state auditor's website.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Trump got this one right: A smaller National Security Council staff is actually a good thing
President Trump's decision to downsize the National Security Council staff has evoked howls of protest from members of the media and from former NSC staffers under President Joe Biden — at times they are one and the same. These critics argue that Trump is 'removing part of his government's brain' and increasing the risk of America being unable to address and respond to a developing crisis. Their case would be much stronger if the NSC had, for example, understood the risks of a hurried withdrawal from Afghanistan and planned a more deliberate departure from that country. Biden had reduced the size of the National Security Council staff, which at its apogee under President Barack Obama stood at 400. Yet the Obama administration failed to stop Bashar Assad's chemical attacks on Syrian rebels and negotiated an agreement with Iran that Tehran began to violate before its ink had even dried. Nor did a 200-person NSC staff under President George W. Bush successfully coordinate the warring State and Defense Departments — a contributing factor to U.S. failures in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It is noteworthy that President George H.W. Bush — who managed a highly successful foreign and national security policy, including an outright victory over Saddam Hussein — relied upon no more than 60 NSC professionals. Their leader, Brent Scowcroft, is widely acknowledged to have been the most capable of all post-World War II national security advisors. Bill Clinton's NSC staff coordinated a relatively successful national security policy that included the expansion of NATO and the successful defenestration of Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic and the end of the Balkan Wars. Clinton had increased the NSC staff by 50 percent from the previous administration, but it still numbered less than 100 officials and was half the size of Biden's NSC cohort. What emerges from this tale of fluctuating numbers is that the size of the National Security Council staff matters not nearly as much as both its mission and the cohesion — or lack thereof — of the agency heads that constitute the council itself. For the elder Bush, as well as for Clinton, the NSC staff functioned as a true coordinating body, offering the president top-level policy choices while allowing the agency heads to manage their own respective operations. Biden, and even more so Obama, sought to usurp the operational responsibilities that rightly resided with the agencies that constituted the NSC, and essentially micromanaged foreign and national security policy. Of course, there was no way that a staff that at most numbered 400 people could do the job of agencies with several orders of magnitude more personnel. Trump's approach to downsizing the NSC staff certainly involves risk. That is not because of the smaller number of staff, since a small staff would have no option but to focus on coordinating the activities of Cabinet agencies. Rather, it is the manner with which the staff has been reduced, and the capabilities of those personnel who will populate it. Laura Loomer, the conspiracy theorist and gadfly, is hardly an expert in either national security policy or personnel management, and her attacks on several highly talented NSC staffers should have been ignored by the president. On the other hand, it is not as if the remaining NSC staffers will necessarily be a bunch of incompetent dunderheads. Moreover, if, as it appears, the leading agency heads in Trump's second administration will cooperate with one another — much like Secretary of State James Baker, Defense Secretary Dick Cheney and Scowcroft worked hand-in-hand, even as they offered H.W. Bush alternative approaches to policy — then all that Trump needs is a small staff that coordinates the agencies that constitute the NSC. Some have argued that Marco Rubio's multi-hatted role as Secretary of State and acting National Security Advisor gives the State Department an upper hand in policy making. Many of those making this case are the very people who previously expressed concern that State had been sidelined by the Pentagon and was a shell of its former policy-making self. In fact, although Rubio is no Henry Kissinger (and many of Trump's older critics hated Kissinger too), he certainly can ensure that State's concerns receive the same due consideration as those of Defense, or for that matter Treasury. That is not a bad thing at all. Finally, some argue that the NSC staff will simply offer up to Trump whatever it is that he wishes to hear. Perhaps. But a smaller staff by definition will be unable to stifle the views of agency heads, all of whom will offer the president what they view are the best possible choices in any given circumstance. National Security Council staffs, like the agency heads, serve at the pleasure of every president, not only this one. It is their job to ensure that his policies meet with success. They may have different views about which policies accomplish his objectives, but they all share the same goal. One can argue the wisdom or correctness of Trump's policy decisions, but like all his predecessors, the last word will always be his. And the job of the NSC staff is not to preempt the Cabinet and other top agency heads but to ensure that the president has the most viable alternatives from which to choose before he decides upon a given course of action, whatever it may be. Dov S. Zakheim is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and vice chairman of the board for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was undersecretary of Defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and a deputy undersecretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
2 days ago
- The Hill
Trump got this one right: A smaller National Security Council staff is actually a good thing
President Trump's decision to downsize the National Security Council staff has evoked howls of protest from members of the media and from former NSC staffers under President Joe Biden — at times they are one and the same. These critics argue that Trump is 'removing part of his government's brain' and increasing the risk of America being unable to address and respond to a developing crisis. Their case would be much stronger if the NSC had, for example, understood the risks of a hurried withdrawal from Afghanistan and planned a more deliberate departure from that country. Biden had reduced the size of the National Security Council staff, which at its apogee under President Barack Obama stood at 400. Yet the Obama administration failed to stop Bashar Assad's chemical attacks on Syrian rebels and negotiated an agreement with Iran that Tehran began to violate before its ink had even dried. Nor did a 200-person NSC staff under President George W. Bush successfully coordinate the warring State and Defense Departments — a contributing factor to U.S. failures in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It is noteworthy that President George H.W. Bush — who managed a highly successful foreign and national security policy, including an outright victory over Saddam Hussein — relied upon no more than 60 NSC professionals. Their leader, Brent Scowcroft, is widely acknowledged to have been the most capable of all post-World War II national security advisors. Bill Clinton's NSC staff coordinated a relatively successful national security policy that included the expansion of NATO and the successful defenestration of Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic and the end of the Balkan Wars. Clinton had increased the NSC staff by 50 percent from the previous administration, but it still numbered less than 100 officials and was half the size of Biden's NSC cohort. What emerges from this tale of fluctuating numbers is that the size of the National Security Council staff matters not nearly as much as both its mission and the cohesion — or lack thereof — of the agency heads that constitute the council itself. For the elder Bush, as well as for Clinton, the NSC staff functioned as a true coordinating body, offering the president top-level policy choices while allowing the agency heads to manage their own respective operations. Biden, and even more so Obama, sought to usurp the operational responsibilities that rightly resided with the agencies that constituted the NSC, and essentially micromanaged foreign and national security policy. Of course, there was no way that a staff that at most numbered 400 people could do the job of agencies with several orders of magnitude more personnel. Trump's approach to downsizing the NSC staff certainly involves risk. That is not because of the smaller number of staff, since a small staff would have no option but to focus on coordinating the activities of Cabinet agencies. Rather, it is the manner with which the staff has been reduced, and the capabilities of those personnel who will populate it. Laura Loomer, the conspiracy theorist and gadfly, is hardly an expert in either national security policy or personnel management, and her attacks on several highly talented NSC staffers should have been ignored by the president. On the other hand, it is not as if the remaining NSC staffers will necessarily be a bunch of incompetent dunderheads. Moreover, if, as it appears, the leading agency heads in Trump's second administration will cooperate with one another — much like Secretary of State James Baker, Defense Secretary Dick Cheney and Scowcroft worked hand-in-hand, even as they offered H.W. Bush alternative approaches to policy — then all that Trump needs is a small staff that coordinates the agencies that constitute the NSC. Some have argued that Marco Rubio's multi-hatted role as Secretary of State and acting National Security Advisor gives the State Department an upper hand in policy making. Many of those making this case are the very people who previously expressed concern that State had been sidelined by the Pentagon and was a shell of its former policy-making self. In fact, although Rubio is no Henry Kissinger (and many of Trump's older critics hated Kissinger too), he certainly can ensure that State's concerns receive the same due consideration as those of Defense, or for that matter Treasury. That is not a bad thing at all. Finally, some argue that the NSC staff will simply offer up to Trump whatever it is that he wishes to hear. Perhaps. But a smaller staff by definition will be unable to stifle the views of agency heads, all of whom will offer the president what they view are the best possible choices in any given circumstance. National Security Council staffs, like the agency heads, serve at the pleasure of every president, not only this one. It is their job to ensure that his policies meet with success. They may have different views about which policies accomplish his objectives, but they all share the same goal. One can argue the wisdom or correctness of Trump's policy decisions, but like all his predecessors, the last word will always be his. And the job of the NSC staff is not to preempt the Cabinet and other top agency heads but to ensure that the president has the most viable alternatives from which to choose before he decides upon a given course of action, whatever it may be. Dov S. Zakheim is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and vice chairman of the board for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was undersecretary of Defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and a deputy undersecretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Auditor Fitzpatrick takes legal action to obtain data for audit of Jackson County Assessment Department
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — Missouri State Auditor Scott Fitzpatrick announced on Wednesday that he has taken legal action to obtain the missing link needed to complete the audit of the Jackson County Assessment Department. Fitzpatrick filed a petition in the Circuit Court of Jackson County to enforce two subpoenas he issued on Feb. 24, 2025, to the Jackson County Assessor and to Data Cloud Solutions (DCS) – which is the vendor used by the department to house data that will help determine if drive-by assessments were performed in violation of state law. Woman says former firefighter sexually abused her, fears he will avoid punishment 'From the beginning we knew this data was critical to the audit and mandatory to answer the questions of Jackson County residents who have serious concerns about their rights being violated during the physical assessment process,' Auditor Fitzpatrick said in a news release. 'We began requesting this data in the very early stages of our work and have been given the run around the entire time.' He said the Jackson County Assessment Department claims they are unable to access the Mobile Assessor data created during the assessment of Jackson County property – and has placed the blame on Data Cloud Solutions, a third-party vendor. 'Data Cloud Solutions has been unwilling to provide the data to a client paying for their services, and has already ignored two subpoenas from our office,' Fitzpatrick said. 'Unfortunately for Data Cloud Solutions, we will fight until we have the truth for the people of Jackson County.' Fitzpatrick said that he and the State Auditor's Office initially requested data from Tyler Technologies in November 2023. After three requests to Tyler Technologies were ignored, he said the State Auditor's Office requested the data from the Jackson County Assessment Department in January 2024—only to receive a response that the department would need to reach out to Tyler Technologies about the data. After months passed and no data was provided, he said the State Auditor's Office issued a subpoena to the department on May 28, 2024, and again on Oct. 8, 2024. A representative from Tyler Technologies indicated the company gave Data Cloud Solutions the necessary permission to share the data with the Jackson County Assessment Department. However, after the department's request to obtain the data directly from Data Cloud Solutions failed, Fitzpatrick said he issued a third subpoena to the department on Feb. 24, 2025. From February 2024 through January 2025, he said Data Cloud Solutions ignored these requests. According to Fitzpatrick, the State Auditor's Office also issued subpoenas to Data Cloud Solutions in December 2024 and February 2025 – both of which were ignored. The audit of the Jackson County Assessment Department has been ongoing since Oct. 23, 2023. The audit was initiated at the request of the Jackson County Legislature, which passed a formal resolution authorizing the audit on Aug. 21, 2023. Download WDAF+ for Roku, Fire TV, Apple TV Auditor Fitzpatrick released preliminary results to the people of Jackson County in December 2023 after his office discovered up to 200,000 homeowners in Jackson County were the victims of a flawed and inadequate assessment process that failed to comply with state law. He said his office 'continues to work to complete the audit of the department in spite of continued efforts made by the auditee to delay the process.'Jackson County likely to comply with latest order on assessments Three Jackson County legislators call on AG to investigate Frank White Missouri Tax Commission orders Jackson County to roll back 2023 assessments The latest in tug of war over Jackson County property tax assessments Jackson County leaders stand by 2023 property assessments despite state order Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
