State audit raises questions about travel spending at two Port Angeles agencies
An investigation released by the Washington State Auditor’s Office has flagged thousands of dollars in travel-related expenses associated with Steve Burke, who served as a port commissioner and executive director of the William Shore Memorial Pool District.
The report, issued Thursday, September 24, 2026, states that Burke received $3,603 from the Port of Port Angeles for mileage reimbursement and meal per diems covering the period from October 2019 through September 2025.
During that same timeframe, he charged at least $3,904 to the pool district’s credit card. The audit notes that these funds were used primarily for fuel and meals on dates for which he also sought and obtained reimbursement from the port.
Investigators with the State Auditor’s Office examined all reimbursements paid to Burke by the port from January 2019 through November 2025. They compared the receipts submitted for those payments with records obtained from the pool district during a separate inquiry conducted in November 2025.
That earlier investigation, which was released alongside a push to censure Burke, determined he benefited personally from at least $41,148 in self-insurance medical benefit payments, payroll tax refunds, and credit card purchases. It also identified another $25,980 in expenditures that auditors could not verify as serving a legitimate business purpose.
Regarding the travel expenses, the report states that during a May 13, 2026 interview, Burke denied seeking reimbursement from both agencies for the same mileage or expense. His attorney was present for the discussion.
Auditors questioned whether both organizations should have incurred fuel and meal costs on the same dates. Within the overlapping expenses, investigators identified at least $165 in misappropriated reimbursements between November 2021 and January 2025. This amount stems from instances where Burke submitted district credit card receipts to the port for personal payment.
The report does not classify all instances of overlapping travel spending as misappropriation.
When questioned about specific dates where costs overlapped, Burke stated that the district’s vehicle expense allowance was part of his overall compensation and was not intended to cover district business travel. He explained that the only way to access that allowance was by using the district’s credit card for personal purchases.
Auditors first raised concerns regarding these issues during a routine port audit in November 2025. That was the same month the auditor’s office released a fraud report concerning Burke’s financial activities at the pool district, also known as the Shore Metro Park District.
While reviewing receipts attached to port reimbursement requests, auditors discovered expenses charged to the district’s credit card that Burke subsequently submitted to the port for personal reimbursement. The report notes that the district had incurred those costs.
The auditors found that while the port maintained internal controls, these safeguards were unlikely to detect such activity because neither agency could view the other’s receipts and reimbursement processes.
At the pool district, auditors reiterated earlier findings regarding inadequate financial controls for protecting public resources. They cited credit card charges that benefited the executive director and missing documentation required to establish a business purpose for other purchases.
Burke resigned from the port commission on May 1.
The audit recommends that when employees disclose outside employment, both agencies consider those work arrangements when monitoring potential conflicts of interest.
Both organizations were advised to seek guidance from legal counsel regarding potential financial recoveries from Burke, with each being asked to claim $7,838 toward their respective portions of the inquiry. The combined cost for these investigative efforts amounts to $15,676, a figure tracked separately from the reimbursement determination.
In its written response, the port stated that it had fully assisted investigators and would review the recommendations with legal counsel. The port also indicated it would evaluate whether further actions are required to address potential conflicts of interest and reimbursement issues concerning service with other public bodies.
The pool district indicated it accepted the findings and would implement the recommendations.
The auditor’s office stated it would examine the internal controls of both agencies during their upcoming audits.