As many of my long time readers know, I have a formal education in Applied Mathematics.

Which means, for the slow readers in my audience (and there are many ain’t that right JimmyB), I am really good with 3rd order partial differential equations and/or adding whole numbers together.

So, applying my Applied Mathematics background (hence the word applied) to the Lauderdale Lakes Cash Flow Analysis, I came to the following conclusion.

Someone over there don’t know their ass from a hole in the ground.

Welcome back MAOS! We’ve missed you.

– The World at Large

Let me give you a case … er … three cases in point from their Cash Flow Worksheet (Download (XLS))

**1.** The General Fund tab shows a $600,000 beginning balance (though I opine this is actually zero dollars). Even with that, the math wizards over at City Hall have added the beginning balance into the ending balance (perhaps to over-inflate their cash position) in the last column.

(Read: Marie Elianor, One Time Assistant is now a Finance Director).

**Therefore, the $855,000 ending balance is actually $255,000.**

But wait, there’s more.

If you follow our opinion that Lauderdale Lakes started the fiscal year dead broke, then there wasn’t $600,000 in the beginning balance, but actually bupkis.

So working the numbers…

- $855,000 – $600,000 (added to over-inflate) – $600,000 (that was never there to begin with) +/- bupkis
- That’s Pi carried the square root of dumbshit…
**Ding ding. That’s a negative $345,000. Or, in accounting parlance ($345,000).**

**2. **Taking a gander at the Fire Fund tab, we noticed the same thing — beginning cash balance added back into the ending balance. More of that overstatement thingy.

**But wait, it gets worse(r).**

The total column for revenue does not equal the monthly collections. Examining the formulas inside the spreadsheet, you will see that the revenue numbers are not calculated, but actually entered by hand. Tricky tricky. But not clever enough to outsmart a Genius such as myself.

**Correcting these errors, we find the fund to be negative of cash at the 30SEPT2011 mark.**

**3. ** The Stormwater Fund. Same as the two above — beginning cash balance added back into the ending balance. More overstatement.

**4.** Solid Waste Fund. Any guess as to what’s what here? Well, if you said adding the beginning coinage to the end, you’d only be partially correct.

See, only half of the $428,000 in deferred payments for FY11 had been accounted for — and correcting for this, the fund would also be negative for cash.

Leading us to wonder. If my data is correct (any takers to prove me wrong?), is this due to deceit, deception, incompetence, or (d) all of the above?