Subscribe for 33¢ / day

La Crosse Mayor Tim Kabat on Tuesday vetoed a Common Council initiative to have a third party audit the city’s parks department, arguing that it duplicated work done in the city’s annual audit and is too vague in scope.

Mayor Tim Kabat


“Accordingly, I do not feel it is in the best interest of the city of La Crosse to approve legislation that is vague in scope, duplicates current auditing practices and organization improvement efforts and accuses staff without identifying any specific problems, and therefore I veto the legislation,” Kabat wrote in his veto notice to the council.

The council voted 10-3 last week to pay WIPFLI $30,000 to conduct a review of the Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department’s procurement procedures, income, donations, expenses and associated accounts for the past three years.

Andrea Richmond mug


Council member Andrea Richmond, who authored the resolution, was disappointed and surprised to see the mayor’s veto, she said in an interview Tuesday.

“There is reason to be looking into this,” Richmond said.

In his veto, the mayor said it was troubling to see council members say City Hall has a dishonest reputation, quoting a council member as saying “this is an opportunity for the parks department to have their name cleared.”

“In my experience, sweeping general accusations about wrong-doing are difficult to address. It would be much more productive for the council to limit the rhetoric and focus on solutions to address specific problems,” Kabat said.

He further said the council failed to spell out how WIPFLI’s audit differed from the city’s annual external audit from Hawkins Ash CPAs, which each year examines how the city manages its finances and determines whether all funds are accounted for.

Richmond reviewed the annual audit and said it used a different process.

“They don’t look at the processes and the projects. I want these projects looked at,” she said, adding she wanted it done by an independent party.

Kabat argued that the city already has tools to address concerns raised by proponents of the audit, who raised concerns about transparency and how funds were spent on parks department projects.

The mayor last month proposed a detailed review and analysis of several parks department projects to be done by the city’s finance department, something he said would better address council members’ concerns.

“And based on recent suggestions, my directive can be amended to include how professional services were solicited for each of these projects,” Kabat said.

The Finance Department reviewing those processes to identify improvements would “bear the most fruit,” he said.

For the last several years, the city has been working to establish more efficient financial procedures following a 2014 organizational assessment which said the city as a whole relies too heavily on manual financial systems.

He also suggested directing Hawkins Ash CPAs to provide a detailed look at the parks department as part of the regular independent audit.

Kabat questioned how the council decided on WIPFLI to perform the audit.

“I find it ironic that the Common Council selected to the vendor to perform the audit without soliciting bids or proposals from qualified firms, which I understand is one of the significant concerns certain members of the council has of the parks department,” Kabat said.

Richmond said WIPFLI was chosen on the recommendation of the city’s legal department.

The council would need a super-majority of nine votes to override the veto.


City government reporter

Jourdan Vian is a reporter and columnist covering local government and city issues for the La Crosse Tribune. You can contact her at 608-791-8218.

(9) comments

Rick Czeczok

OH-Oh I smell a rat. All the money we spend on consultants, and here is where we decide to save money. Mayor, this makes you look like your hiding something........ Council please override this


Maybe some of the good old boys fingers in the cookie jar???


I'm generally not a fan of any politicians these days, but if this Mayor is standing up for what he believes is correct, it's a good thing. It sounds like there are some grudges with the council members while the Mayor is neutral and not taking sides.


The article doesn't mention, but is there some discrepancy or scandal that is prompting the council to request an audit? If there's reasonable evidence of wrongdoing, then I think 3rd party audits are a pretty important tool. But based on the article, this seems a bit arbitrary, and a little wasteful. Am I missing something?

Tim Russell

There is an individual that both Marshall and Janssen feel very indebted to that would really like the job as Director of Parks and Recreation Dept. He really thinks that he should have the position. It really is gutter politics. And the Mayor knows it.


Would first name be Jacob?


The mayor is an idiot.




Over-ride the veto; after you educate the Mayor about what the annual audit does and does not do. The annual audit is not designed to find wrong-doing and not designed to make wide recommendations on internal controls. That is the scope of a special purposes audit and what the Council wanted done as an extra measure.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Thanks for reading. Subscribe or log in to continue.