Susan Walker, Bourbon County Clerk read a statement with information about the payroll situation and collaboration issues at the special meeting on October 22nd. FortScott.biz requested a copy of the statement, which is printed below.

---

I was elected, not appointed when I ran for County Clerk. I ran on the fact of being transparent. I am here today deeply concerned about the direction you have taken regarding major organizational decisions—decisions that were made unilaterally, without consultation with other elected officials. These are not small, routine matters; they are critical components of our county’s operations—payroll & benefits.

Over the past two months, my team has worked diligently to provide all necessary information for the payroll system conversion. However, today was the first time we were given access to view the actual payroll and time management systems. Despite this being our initial opportunity to see the systems firsthand, employees are expected to complete enrollment and begin clocking time by this Sunday. In addition, we must still train department heads how to approve time during the most critical time of an election. The election is my number one priority presently.

I believe this timeline is premature, as not all programming components have been fully configured or tested. At first glance, I see errors that need addressed and do not think it is fair that I must spend 15-hour days and weekends to keep us on this timeline. While I understand that some of these delays are the result of time constraints, I must emphasize that the Clerk’s Office manages many other statutory responsibilities that require significant attention and coordination. At no point was I consulted to determine whether this implementation schedule would be feasible within the existing workload of my office.

Mr. Beerbower, I appreciate your willingness to listen and treat me with respect the past few meetings. I called you on Tuesday following our training to express my concern that this payroll conversion is moving too quickly. As of today, I have not received a return call. I want to reiterate that my intent in reaching out was to communicate legitimate operational concerns—concerns that directly impact our ability to ensure a smooth and accurate transition for all employees. Timely communication on matters of this magnitude is essential to the success of this process and to maintaining trust among all offices involved.

Nonetheless, I have continued to cooperate in good faith and have made every effort to keep up with the process. It is important to note that the period from August through November represents the busiest time of year for the Clerk’s Office. During this time, we are responsible for producing more than 30 budgets, preparing for elections, open enrollment for benefits, and setting tax levies, each of which requires substantial time, precision, and staff resources.

In addition, I have been removed from benefit-related discussions, which has proven to be problematic as shown earlier. My office has received numerous calls from employees about open enrollment and I have no information, yet I am expected to run the process. Excluding key offices from these conversations has created unnecessary confusion and inefficiencies. It is unfortunate that, as Commissioners, you have not been willing to set aside personal grievances to collaborate on matters as important as payroll and employee benefits—issues that directly affect the very people who keep this county running.

I want to remind you that your employees are also your customers. They are the face of county government to the public and should be valued and appreciated accordingly. A successful organization depends on mutual respect, cooperation, and communication among its leadership and staff. I truly hope that moving forward, we can return to a more collaborative and respectful working relationship—one that serves both our employees and the taxpayers we represent.

The decision to remove payroll responsibilities from the Clerk’s office was portrayed as cost savings and improving processes. I must say plainly this was not an operational improvement; it was a political move. I have repeatedly explained that this change increases costs for taxpayers. Yet, instead of engaging in a transparent discussion or reviewing the data, this Commission has chosen to rely on the assurances of a salesman, who claims this move will “solve all our problems” (Yet, we had none) and “free up time in the Clerk’s office”.

That claim is simply not true. In fact, this decision adds unnecessary administrative oversight, no integration with our current accounting systems, increases the risk of human error, and fails to meet the governance requirements we must adhere to as a county. It undermines efficiency rather than improving it. Even though payroll is not a statutory duty of the Clerk, the Clerk is required to approve all expenditures of the county and book them accordingly per K.S.A. 311-318.

In addition, during recent public discussions and commission comments a commissioner questioned the integrity of the County Clerk’s financial processes and implied a failure to perform statutory duties. The County Clerk’s office is dedicated to transparency and adhering strictly to state law, and I feel I must clarify the established financial controls.

1. Clarification of Statutory Roles and Financial Controls

The duties of the County Clerk and County Treasurer are distinct and are defined by Kansas Statute Annotated (KSA), which establishes a crucial separation of powers:

• The County Treasurer’s Office is responsible for the collection of all county revenues and collector of taxes and tax distributions.
• The County Clerk’s Office is responsible for auditing, recording, and approving all county expenditures, maintaining records of financial statements, and ensuring budget compliance.

This separation is the cornerstone of financial controls and checks and balances for the county. The Clerk and Treasurer work collaboratively to ensure the general ledger and tax accounts are accurate and reconciled. Any action that circumvents these established roles places the county at risk of internal control failures.

2. Standardized Accounts Payable and Payroll Process

Our current process ensures that all expenditures are approved by the Commission before being paid, in full compliance with state law.

• Process Implementation: Since 2021, I assisted in implementing a process where Accounts Payable (AP) and Payroll details are included in Commission agenda packets and must be formally approved prior to payment processing as CFO. In the past this was not included in agenda packets for transparency.
• Commission Oversight: The Commission and County Counselor are provided ample time and opportunity for oversight:
  • Payroll: Details are delivered the Wednesday prior to payday, allowing Commissioners time to review and question any payment.
  • Accounts Payable: Detailed registers are presented at every Commission meeting.
  • The Commission and county counselor has the right and duty to pull any invoice or register item for review and withhold payment.

To imply that any payment has been processed without proper oversight or approval is factually incorrect and misrepresents the established, auditable procedure. The detailed records are available at every meeting, and my staff stands ready to answer any questions regarding invoices or the review process. In addition, another layer of control is in place with the current Human Resources representative, Dr. Cohen, identifying and giving direction on any exceptions to normal procedures.

3. Call for Collaboration and Education

My office has repeatedly invited the Commission to review our operations and receive clarification on our statutory duties. A functioning government requires clear, consistent communication and mutual respect for all elected and appointed offices. The continued focus on gossip and unsubstantiated opinions, rather than on fact-finding and process education, is unproductive and has had a demonstrable negative impact on the morale and retention of critical county staff.

I say this not out of defiance, but out of duty. It is my responsibility to protect taxpayer dollars, ensure compliance with the law, and maintain the integrity of the Clerk’s office. Decisions made out of spite or political motivation hurt not only the employees who must carry them out, but also the citizens we are all here to serve. In the end, it will be the taxpayers, the employees, and the operations of this county that will suffer the consequences of these shortsighted decisions. I urge the Commission to reconsider its approach to restore collaboration, transparency, and fiscal responsibility in these matters. The people of this county deserve nothing less.