Condensed account of the contradictory financial responsibilities
A brief chronology
7 Nov 1994
An edict from G. Smith purporting to centralize accounting, altered existing responsibilities and procedures by removing accounting for LAS grants and funds from me to the YCIAS business manager, Kimbro.
28 Nov 1994
Discussed the 7 Nov edict at meeting of entire LAS staff with chairman and DUS. Joseph’s instructions were: we'll ignore the edict for now — sometimes these things never come to pass. We'll wait until we're called on something, then demand a meeting with Gaddis. We can't possibly work under those circumstances [of the edict].
To the extent possible, I followed Joseph’s directive to ignore the edict; however, it was no longer possible for me to reconcile monthly accounting statements because Kimbro, beginning in Oct 1994, now withheld them.
30 June 1995
No one from the YCIAS had ever “called us” about the contradictory situation and, at the fiscal year end, no one requested information from me for final reports
25 July 1995
I asked Kimbro (via email) for her understanding of the accounting procedures to be followed for the three Kempf fund grants of 1994-95
7 Aug 1995
Kimbro replied (via email) that she was in the process of reviewing accounts for the councils, that “once I have finished this and updating the Kempf fund for Ray Novack I will get with you on the accounting procedures. Hopefully within the next two weeks.”
11 Aug 1995
Kimbro asked me (by telephone) for copies of the requisitions, invoices, etc., for the Kempf fund for 1994-95, saying she needed them right away because she was to see Novack on Monday (Aug 14) and had to include the LAS expenditures in her report to him. She came to my office, where I gave her all records I had of all financial transactions for all LAS accounts and projects for 1994-95. She returned the records to me later in the morning, after presumably having made copies of them. I assumed that this was the end of the matter.
15 Aug 1995
There was no note or other communication from Kimbro regarding any accounts this day or any day until 10 October (see following).
10 Oct 1995
Kimbro sent me (via email) a puzzling request for information about the 1994-95 Kempf grants — as if I had not already given all I had to her and as if she had not made the August 14 report to Novack. She claimed that McCord had called her that morning asking for year-end accounting. Further puzzling, Kimbro identified the grants by a single dollar amount that did not match any possible combination of the actual amounts given by McCord ($29K, as opposed to the actual $17K or $22K)
12 Oct 1995
I responded (via email) to Kimbro by suggesting a meeting of all affected or interested parties to clear up our lack of common understanding over this accounting.
13 Oct 1995
Kimbro responded (via email) by writing, “The Kempf Fund year-end accounting has not changed since your reporting of it in 93-94. . . .” This was clearly at odds with G. Smith’s 7 Nov 1994 edict, which — according to Jackson — Smith, Ruther, and Kimbro herself had ostensibly reaffirmed when they rejected on 29 August, through Jackson, my request to meet to discuss the evident contradictions.
8 Nov 1995
Under Kimbro’s threat of unspecified “discipline,” I recopied, and this time sorted into four folders, all my records of transactions of the three Kempf grants, and gave them to Kimbro with a note suggesting a short meeting among the relevant parties if she thought there was a misunderstanding about procedures.
10 Nov 1995
Kimbro dumped the four folders on my desk and for the first time indicated crudely that she wanted a typed list of information; she demanded it by two working mornings hence (14 Nov), without specifying the consequences of not meeting her deadline. Kimbro was personally abusive to me, and the incident, in front of some of my staff, was humiliating and demoralizing to us all.
That same morning, I had been given explicit directions from both my chairman and the acting chairman to make completion of a financial report for Pessar’s Migration conference by that same 14 Nov the priority over all other work.
14 Nov 1995
I mentioned to Pessar my dilemma of trying to complete a difficult report for her while being threatened by Kimbro. Pessar assured me that she was “working with” Kimbro and “in touch” with her. She said, “Beverly will not suspend you” for making the Migration conference a priority today.
15 Nov 1995
Despite Pessar’s assurances, Kimbro delivered a suspension letter signed by her, and she crudely and abusively refused my very temperate efforts to talk with her — again in front of one of my staff.
Last updated 06 December 2022 (Tuesday) at 19:56:41 EST ▲