If my accountant told me there is only $85,000 available after stating he thought there was $700,000, my ears would prick up.

If he then added he didn't account for commitments already made, I'd see red. Not reconciling my cheque book with bank accounts and purchase orders would not qualify him as an accountant worth having.

READ ALSO:

Letter | Overspend is a concern and leaves questions answered

Council digs a hole as bore projects in villages blows out

If he then added that nothing had been put aside for wages, superannuation and expenses, I would seek a better qualified and skilled accountant. Conversely, if I allowed him to get away with such errors, I would demonstrate it's okay to make mistakes, keep doing the same in the future, it's just money - $615,000 to be precise.

The finance director declared $85,000 instead of $700,000 was there to be allocated, adding some money was used for unbudgeted purchases, recording elsewhere commitments and on-cost haven't been considered. The GM allowed this to happen. In my opinion, it tells residents it's okay to make mistakes, keep doing the same, it's just money - $615,000 to be precise.

Overspending on any project without authorisation shows the lack of control attributed by Cr McCarthy (Oberon Review, October 31) to the lack of experienced staff. Without having timely, correct and accurate financial information, even experienced staff would struggle.

As a ratepayer you have to wonder when the GM will start implementing actions overcoming obvious problems other than engaging contractors to treat the symptoms rather than the cause?

The overexpenditure until September 30, 2019 may have been $38,000; the detail that commitments and on-cost weren't included was overlooked. A further $58,000 will be required to partially complete the original scope without any guarantees if any on-cost can be recovered or if the additional money will be sufficient.

The bores project is only the tip of the iceberg. Council would benefit from studying the first law of holes, which states that "if you find yourself in a hole, stop digging".

It matters not if there were scope changes required, what matters is the project was not put on hold until adequate funding had been arranged before the money had gone.

And worse, the admission that the real picture isn't known as the revised overexpenditure of $38,000 needs another $58,000 to finish it.

Add to that commitments are not even known and on-cost not recovered and the total overexpenditure is not $38,000, the harsh reality is more like $100,000.

Council's preferred solution trying to cover up the sink hole is sinking more bores next to it.