MARBLE HILL AUDIT IS URGED

MARBLE HILL -- If a petition is successful in forcing a state audit of the Marble Hill treasury, thousands of dollars of city money would be wasted, say municipal ~officials.

The petition questions the use of a $700,000 trust donated to the city by a St. Louis woman between 1988 and 1990 for building a city pool.

City officials have been accused of misusing the trust by planning to build not just a swimming pool but also a city complex. The complex would be built in a L-shape around the pool and be the new location for the city hall, police station and a community room.

Most city officials plead no misallocation of funds so far, and financial records back them up.

In fact, city audit reports show none of the money in the Larma Wisely Swimming Pool account had been spent until late last year, when construction of the complex began. In addition, the trust has earned more than $150,000 in interest since it was given to the city.

But one member of the board of aldermen and more than 100 citizens have signed a petition ask~ing State Auditor Margaret Kelly to audit the city.

If the petition is successful, the city would be forced to pay the cost of the audit between $4,000 and $12,000.

The city's administrative assistant, David Jackson, said the state audit would be a waste of money.

"We are audited by an independent auditor every year," Jackson said. "So if people think we are never audited, they're wrong."

A forced "petition audit" of a city can be brought if a large enough percentage of residents sign the petition. In a city the size of Marble Hill, it has to contain at least 20 percent of registered voters. The audit would be done by Kelly's office, but by law the city has to foot the bill.

Jackson said including city offices in the pool complex will provide a year-round income for the pool. The city rents its current offices, and when the complex is built, the city would pay rent to the trust account.

"We are trying to ensure income for the pool in the off-season," Jackson said. "There is a general understanding that it is hard to make a pool pay for itself, and you don't want to leave the building vacant during the off season."

But Alderman Frank Killian, who signed the petition, disagrees.

"The money was not set aside for (city offices)," he said. "It was set aside for a swimming pool, period."

Killian, who has been a member of the board for more than 10 years, said he "can't prove it," but suspects the city is trying to misuse the funds.

Jackson said that isn't the city's intention.

"We're not trying to sneak something by. We're trying to make this a better facility. And this has all been done through an attorney," he said.

In her will, drawn up in 1976, Wisely left the city half of her estate. Townspeople say she had visited Marble Hill where her brother, Frank Pellegrino, owned a factory only once. He donated the land where the complex is being built Pellegrino Park.

"Legend has it," said City Attorney Gary Kamp, "she had only been here once. The story is she loved it so much she wanted to give it something, so she asked someone what the town needed. They said a swimming pool."

Wisely left the remainder of her estate to relatives and the American Cancer Society.

The will states the money granted to the city $283,636 between 1988 and 1989 and another $358,627 by the end of 1990 is to be used "to build a swimming pool in the park to be named after the Grantor (Wisely)." With interest, the account had grown to $768,683 by the June 1991.

Kamp said there is no legal reason the money can't be used to pay for the construction of a city complex as well as a pool.

"You've got some nuts who are trying to stir up some trouble," Kamp said. "You've got a group of about four or five people who are against everything the town does."

Kamp said the fact that the city planned to build the complex has never been challenged at meetings of the Board of Aldermen or public hearings on the matter.

Jimmie G. Bollinger said he is the "instigator" of the petition. The first drive for signatures netted 151. But the city had 30 days to challenge the signatures. It was found 26 were not registered voters, and another 54 voluntarily withdrew their names. Several other signatures were found to be invalid, leaving a total of only 64 valid signatures.

Bollinger said city officials coerced people to remove their names from the petition.

But Police Chief Gary Shrum, who notarized 40 of the 54 withdrawals, said many people didn't read the petition before they signed it.

"In a nutshell, they didn't know what they were signing," Shrum said. "Most of the people, when I explained to them what the petition meant, they wanted to take their names off."

Shrum denies any coercion. He admitted he drove his police car to people's homes to ask them to remove their names, but he said it wasn't on city time.

"In a small town like this, everyone knows I'm a police officer. But I don't think that had anything to do with it," he said.

Shrum said he is against the audit because of its cost and because the city's financial records are a matter of public record.

"If anyone thinks something's wrong with the books, all they have to do is go to city hall and look at them," he said.

The top of the petition states how much the audit would cost and that the city would be forced to pay for it.

Bollinger said after the 84 signatures were taken off, he had 30 days to gather more. He said he sent the remaining names plus 60 additional ones to the state auditor's office last week to try again for the audit. A total of 103 valid signatures are needed.

He said he isn't satisfied with the city's yearly audit.

"An accountant only tells you where your money is going," he said. "They don't tell you if you're breaking the law or spending money where it shouldn't be spent."

Bollinger said city officials have fought the audit because "they are scared" misuse of funds will be detected.

Jackson, the city's administrative assistant, said the cost is the major factor in why the city is against the audit. He said the city has nothing to hide.

"I don't think anyone at city hall cares if there is an audit," he said. "But we've been informed by Margaret Kelly's office that it's going to cost $3,000 to $12,000. And because we're audited every year, it's redundant."

Bollinger dismissed the cost of the audit. He said he will likely be notified in the coming week if the additional signatures are declared valid.

"I always figured money spent wisely is never wasted," he said.

The city's new mayor, Adrian Shell, declined to comment about the petition or building of the complex, saying he isn't familiar enough with city records. Shell was sworn in Monday.