INVESTIGATIVE FEATURE: Harrison County’s Repeated Audit Deficiencies and the Suppression of Public Oversight
By Lori White – Missouri Valley Voices | October 2025
October 6, 2025 — Citizen Raises Concerns Over State Audit Findings
On October 6, 2025, Harrison County resident Brad Doyle emailed all three members of the Harrison County Board of Supervisors — Brian Rife, Rebecca Wilkerson, and Tony Smith — following up on his participation in the September 25 Board meeting. He reported on how neighboring counties handle meeting recordings and public accessibility and raised new concerns after learning that Harrison County’s FY2024–2025 State Audit, filed by the Iowa State Auditor’s Office, contained 14 findings requiring attention, 13 of which were repeats from prior years.
Doyle asked the Board:
1. What measures are being taken to come into compliance with Iowa Code Chapters 21.4(b) and 349.18(a)&(b)?
2. Has the Board scheduled a public review of the audit’s 14 compliance issues?
This was a straightforward and responsible inquiry about how the County manages taxpayer money and whether the Board was fulfilling its oversight duties.
October 7–8, 2025 — Supervisor’s Attempt to Add Audit Blocked by County Clerk
Supervisor Rebecca Wilkerson attempted to ensure Doyle’s questions were addressed publicly. On October 7, she emailed Michelle Kersten, a staff member in the Auditor’s Office and Clerk, requesting the agenda item:
“Discuss FY24 Financial Audit.” The following morning, October 8, Kersten rejected the request: “No, it needs to be more specific. That is a very broad description of what you are intending to discuss.” Wilkerson replied that she wanted it listed as written, but the item never appeared on the agenda. That single rejection became the barrier that prevented the audit’s findings — involving public funds and potential mismanagement — from being discussed by elected officials in a public meeting.
Why It Matters: “Agenda Item” vs. “Public Comment”
This is where process meets power — and why this moment matters for every Harrison County taxpayer.
Being on the Agenda
When an issue is on the agenda, it becomes part of the official record of County business.
It must be posted publicly at least 24 hours in advance under Iowa’s Open Meetings Law.
Supervisors are allowed to discuss, debate, and take formal action (such as motions or votes).
The discussion is recorded in the minutes, ensuring permanent transparency.
It allows follow-up and accountability at future meetings.
In short: being on the agenda means your concern becomes part of government action.
Public Comment
By contrast, public comment is a limited, controlled space at the beginning or end of meetings.
Speakers are typically restricted to three minutes.
The Board is not required to respond, discuss, or act on anything said.
Comments are recorded only in vague terms (“Citizen spoke about roads” or “Citizen expressed concern”), without details.
Once finished, there’s no obligation for follow-up or public resolution.
In other words, public comment allows citizens to speak, but not to be heard in any meaningful or lasting way.
Why It Matters for You
When citizens are blocked from the agenda, their issues — even those involving millions in taxpayer funds — can be acknowledged politely and then disappear into the void of procedural silence. This distinction is at the heart of democratic accountability: agenda access equals power, while public comment equals containment.
October 9, 2025 — Board Meeting: Citizen’s Email Acknowledged, but Audit Still Not Discussed
At the October 9 meeting (YouTube link), Supervisor Rebecca Wilkerson referenced a citizen email about the audit — later identified as Doyle’s — but expressed concern about whether she could discuss it publicly since it was not on the agenda. This was the first public sign that citizen oversight of government spending was being quietly obstructed by procedural barriers, not overt refusals.
October 15, 2025 — Open Records Request Filed
I, Lori White, visited the Harrison County Courthouse and was told by the Auditor’s Office to contact Wilkerson directly for the referenced email. That same day, I submitted a written open records request for “the email and all documentation referenced during the Board meeting regarding the fiscal audit.” Wilkerson responded promptly with Doyle’s email and the State Auditor’s report. From the audit, I noted this key passage:
“Sand reported fourteen findings related to the receipt and expenditure of taxpayer funds… Thirteen of the findings discussed above are repeated from the prior year.” This confirmed the County had systemic, long-term internal control failures that had persisted year after year despite repeated warnings.
October 16, 2025 — Public Meeting Confrontation
At the October 16 Board meeting, both Brad Doyle and I addressed the Board. Doyle described being initially told his topic was added to the agenda, then later receiving a call from County Attorney Sarah Delanty questioning whether it was “actionable.” He raised concerns about the County Attorney’s involvement in citizen agenda requests, stating that his conversation was later mischaracterized and that Delanty attempted to classify his inquiry as a grievance, which it was not. Doyle spoke with the Iowa Ombudsman regarding the situation and presented the following questions: “Does every agenda item have to be clear to the county Attorney's office? Does every person seeking to be on the agenda need to be approved by the county attorney? Does the county attorney call everyone who is seeking to be on the agenda and ask them if it is an actionable item or discussion of item?” Doyle ended his time stating, “As a taxpayer of Harrison County, I not only have the right, but the duty to ask questions of the people elected to represent us in a public meeting and on the record.”
Board Member Tony Smith agreed with Doyle, saying he had “some of the same questions.” Rebecca Wilkerson strongly objected to the new process, noting that citizens had always been allowed on the agenda before.
Brian Rife, who removed Doyle’s item after consulting with Delanty and without consulting the other two board members, one of whom added the agenda item, said he did so “for efficiency,” arguing that the Board couldn’t have “eight-hour meetings.”
Wilkerson’s Response: “We Are Here for the People. We’ve been entrusted by the public to conduct ourselves with integrity and openness. The public has the inherent right to communicate their concerns without filtering or obstruction. One board member should not be removing agenda items that another board member places on the agenda. That practice needs to stop.”
She cautioned that using the County Attorney to remove or filter topics undermines both trust and transparency.
County Attorney Sarah Delanty clarified that she was not gatekeeping the agenda and was acting within her role to help ensure proper classification of items — not to block citizen input.
My Public Comment: Accountability and Ownership
During my three-minute public comment, I addressed the financial and ethical responsibility tied to the audit:
“These findings involve taxpayer funds. Each one needs ownership and oversight until the State Auditor confirms it’s resolved. Accountability starts with transparency.” I urged the Board to add audit follow-up as a recurring agenda item until all 14 findings were accepted by the State Auditor.
Conclusion — Democracy Depends on Access
This investigation revealed two critical truths about local government in Harrison County:
Fiscal Oversight Is Failing.
Thirteen of fourteen audit deficiencies were repeats — an unmistakable sign of structural neglect.Transparency Is Under Threat.
Citizens and even Supervisors encountered barriers when trying to place legitimate public concerns on the agenda.
When the process to speak becomes the process to silence, democracy erodes quietly — not by decree, but by agenda management.
What’s at Stake?
Being “on the agenda” isn’t just a bureaucratic step — it’s the difference between being recorded or forgotten, between governance and gatekeeping. Every Harrison County resident deserves a government that listens, responds, and records the truth for all to see.
ACTION ITEMS-COMMITTMENT
Board of Supervisors Commitment - All 3 board members committed to adding the audit findings to the agenda so they are formally recognized and addresssed
Lori White - I will continue to monitor these findings and attend Board of Supervisor Meetings when possible. I will ensure the 5 items acknowledged but not accepted are on the agenda, an appropriate person is named as the owner of the finding, and will track, monitor, and report back to the community regarding the status of those findings.
