Golf course audit, more law suits against town
Published on December 8th, 1999
STONEHAM, MA - Unicorn review
An independent accounting firm found deficiencies in the operation of the town-owned Unicorn Golf Course.
The Board of Selectmen, per a request made by member Darin Leahy at the May 25 meeting, asked the Andover-based accounting firm of Melanson Heath and Company to review the operating procedures of Unicorn.
Town Administrator Jeff Nutting said, "We want to know if the money is being handled correctly."
According to the report, the accountants did not conduct a full audit but examined what procedures were used in handling the flow of money and then recommended alternative approaches to ensure efficiency and accountability.
For example, the accountants noted that the cash register drawer is not closed after each sales transaction. They recommended that the cash register be closed after each sale to prevent unauthorized access or unrecorded sales.
The accountants also noted that bank deposit receipts were not remitted to a designated Town employee on a daily basis as specified in the agreement between the town and Unicorn management.
Leahy's original request to review town golf course operations came after he noticed in the town accountant's reports for fiscal 1999 that Unicorn logged 5,000 golfers in the third quarter while the town par-three course logged zero.
No accusations of impropriety have been made. The issues center around efficient operation and accurate accounting.
Michael Munro, who manages the golf courses with his brother Paul, said the brothers have met with town officials once already and are willing to work things out.
Nutting plans to meet with Melanson and Heath to decide "what steps must be taken."
Nutting said he will publicly discuss the results of his upcoming meeting with the accountants and the Munros at a January session of the Board of Selectmen.
oLawsuits
Developer Dale Halchak is taking the town to court.
In October residents of Nixon Lane were successful in convincing selectmen that public safety required the board to deny Halchak's request for a site plan for 104 Main St.
Halchak wanted to alter the use of the lower level of the building from office to retail. Neighbors worried about increasing traffic at the already dangerous intersection across from Redstone. Selectmen agreed with neighbors.
But Halchak has appealed, challenging the town in Land Court. The appeal is pending in land court.
In a separate lawsuit, William and Faye Sullivan are suing the town.
The Sullivans have had to incur great costs (according to court documents — $50,000 to date, $1.6 million estimated) to remediate pollution on six lots on Spring Lane which they subdivided and sold. The Sullivans allege that the pollution resulted from hazardous materials dumped nearby in the Spring Street town dump.
The Sullivans have demanded a jury trial in Middlesex Superior Court.
Subscribe and get Home Delivery of The Independent
Save 36% off the newstand price — that's like 18 FREE issues!