Schuylkill County Judge Charles M. Miller handed down an opinion Tuesday afternoon explaining the law he applied to his order issued Sept. 3, giving county Controller Melinda Kantner until Oct. 1 to complete and file the annual audit pertaining to the county's financial spending for the preceding year or face contempt of court.

The audit was due July 1."Pursuant to the Pennsylvania Code," wrote Miller, "the power and duty of the county commissioners is to manage and administer the fiscal affairs of the county, the controller shall supervise the fiscal affairs of the county including the accounts and official acts relating thereto of all officers or other persons who shall collect, receive, hold or disburse the public assets of the county. The discretionary power of the controller shall not be applicable to the management of the fiscal policies of the commissioners, or to matters not involving the accounts and transactions of officers or other persons of the county."Miller also stated the board of commissioners is the governing body of the county and is the sole contracting authority for the county. (It was the commissioners who hired L. Samuel Deegan, a Pottsville CPA auditor, to perform the annual audit. Kantner claimed he had no experience in doing a county audit and blamed him for the delay).Miller continued, "The code also provides the controller shall, at the end of the fiscal year, complete the audit, settlement and adjustment of the accounts of all county officers. The controller, before the first day of July in every year, make a report, verified by oath or affirmation, to their Court of Common Pleas of said county, of all receipts and expenditures of the county for the preceding year, in detail, and classified by reference to the object thereof, together with a full statement of the financial conditions of the county."A concise summary of this report shall thereupon be published one time in such newspapers published in the said county as the controller may direct, but the aggregate cost thereof shall not exceed $1,500 in any one year in any county to be paid for out of the county treasury. Such report may also be published in pamphlets at the cost of the county, the number and cost of such pamphlets to be determined by the controller and the county commissioners."The controller shall also, before the first day of July, make an annual report to the Department of Community and Economic Development of the financial condition of the county, on forms furnished by the Secretary of Community and Economic Development and subject to the penalties provided in the act for auditors refusing or neglecting to make similar reports. The report shall also be made available to the public to inspection."Miller claimed at the hearing he held in his chambers Friday morning prior to issuing his speedy ruling, "There was no evidence offered to support that the annual report concerning the financial condition of the county was completed, on or before the 1st day of July, 2010, conceding a dereliction of her statutory duty."Miller added, "It is abundantly clear that the controller failed and continues to fail to perform her duty to make a detailed report to the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County for the fiscal year ending Dec. 31, 2009, in violation of the County Code."Similarly, she failed to obtain an extension," the judge stated. (Kantner claims on May 20 county administrator Mark Scarbinsky issued a memo to her, requesting she seek a delay of filing the audit to Nov. 1 because the auditor requested it. She claimed she complied with this order and it was denied by Judge D. Michael Stine).However, Miller wrote, "We reject the controller's assertions that her duties were performed since an extension was requested and she is awaiting completion of the external auditor's work. On the contrary, we agree with the commissioners (who filed the action against the controller) that the extension request was denied, necessitating the prompt filing of the report. Secondly, that the annual report requirements under the code are not contingent upon the assistance of, (among other things), the external auditor."Miller concluded, "Therefore, we find there are no material factual disputes. The controller failed to perform a mandatory duty, that is to complete and file the annual financial report on or before July 1, for the preceding year, that the commissioners are entitled to the performance of this duty and there is no other appropriate remedy."