Score: +5
(36/57/31)
Orange County Grand Jury
• 2011-2012
The Dissolution of Redevelopment:
Published: February 17, 2012
32 pages
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 10 findings
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
It is highly likely that new legislation will pass expanding the scope of the low to moderate income housing programs and ultimately a replacement program for redevelopment itself. Local governments should take a proactive approach in planning and shaping its return.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
F7
Ending redevelopment changes the distribution of property tax revenues among local agencies, but not the amount of tax revenues raised.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
Prior to the dissolution of redevelopment, some agencies encumbered debt to their cities, thereby creating questionable enforceable obligations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
F9
Some former RDAs (such as Brea and Buena Park) have incentive payments to commercial entities as enforceable obligations.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
F10
The city of Garden Grove failed to adequately address citizen concerns in the pursuit of development of the parking area on Grove Street, west of historic Main Street.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
The city of Garden Grove should resume negotiations with the Downtown Business Association to come to an agreement on the scope of the Grove Street Condominium Project including the availability of a suitable number of convenient public parking spaces to meet the needs of the downtown merchants. (See F10) REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the agency. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court); except that in the case of a report containing
Agency Responses 48
Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.
▶
Anaheim City School District 8/20/12, 1.43M
August 20, 2012
•
3 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: +1
(+2, 0, -1)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
ACSD agrees with this finding. Each District Susan Preus within Orange County may use different student data information systems James Vanderbilt and procedures to track and document bullying or harassment incidents. Regardless of the system used to record bullying or harassment, all incidents prior to July 1, 2012, should have been coded under Education Code section 48900(r). With the implementation of AB 1156, Education Code section 48900(r) provides a common definition of the term "bullying" and therefore enables districts to accurately and consistently identify and document incidences of b...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Should the OCDE spearhead a conversation among districts regarding the feasibility of transitioning to a county-wide compatible information system, The Anaheim City School District will certainly participate in that discussion. As a cost saving measure, perhaps an investigation into how we can use our current data systems to accurately report incidents of bullying and gather data across districts would be preferable. The Anaheim City School District currently uses the AERIES student data system to document and track incidents of bullying and harassment. Investigations are documented by site ad...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The Anaheim City School District agrees that AB 1156 provides a broader and more specific definition of "bullying" than was provided in previous legislation. Finding 3: Education Code section 234.1 requiring posting of antibullying/anti-harassment policies in prescribed areas was not 1001 S. East Street evident in all schools visited. Anaheim, CA 92805-5749 ^
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The Anaheim City School District is required by law to apply the definition of "bullying" contained in Education Code section 48900(r) in suspending and expelling students. The District has also committed to using this definition of "bullying" for investigating and tracking complaints of bullying that are sustained. Recommendation 3: Each district review standardized procedures to protect a bully, victim and bystanders' confidentiality as stated in Education Code section 234.1
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The Anaheim City School District disagrees with Phone: 714-517-7500 this finding as it relates to our district. Prior to July 1, 2012, all ACSD Fax: 714-517-8538 schools consistently posted anti-discrimination/anti-harassment policies in ^ required areas. In response to the implementation of Education Code www.acsd.k12.ca.us 234.1, all ACSD schools had anti-bullying/harassment
policies posted in all school offices in English and Spanish, all classrooms, staff lounges and pupil government meeting rooms by July 1, 2012. Finding 4: Based on witness testimony, confidentiality was not maintained i...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The Anaheim City School District implemented this recommendation on July 16, 2012 by assigning each employee of the district an online video course requiring the review of Board Policy 5131.2 and the accompanying Administrative Regulations. The AR states, in part, "The Principal/Coordinator shall keep the complaint and allegations confidential except as necessary to carry out the investigation or take other subsequent action." Additionally, all school site administrators were trained in July and August 2012 by the District Coordinator regarding investigation of allegations and the importance o...
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Though the Grand Jury did find that confidentiality was breached regarding a bullying incident in an unidentified school district, The Anaheim City School District regularly provides training to all administrators regarding investigation of harassment and all disciplinary incidents as well as the importance of maintaining confidentiality of students involved. The most recent training was held August 14, 2012. Awareness and prevention of bullying is a priority for all schools. Each school will receive ongoing training and support to fully implement the new bullying policy. Recommendation 1: Rec...
R6
The city of Garden Grove should resume negotiations with the Downtown Business Association to come to an agreement on the scope of the Grove Street Condominium Project including the availability of a suitable number of convenient public parking spaces to meet the needs of the downtown merchants. (See F10) REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS: The California Penal Code §933 requires any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presi...
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
Should a county-wide system of reporting incidents of bullying be explored, The Anaheim City School District will participate in the planning process. Currently, ACSD utilizes
the AERIES student data system to document and track incidents of bullying and harassment. Investigations and resolutions are documented by site administrators, and by the District Complaint Officer when an allegation is brought to the district level. Recommendation 7: All schools post anti-bullying/anti-harassment policy in offices, staff lounges and student government meeting areas as prescribed in Education Code sect...
▶
Buena Park Police Department 6/12/12, 370KB
June 12, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Anaheim 10/29/12, 892K
October 29, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Anaheim 9/11/12, 7.08M
September 11, 2012
•
18 pages
• 3 responses
•
Score: -1
(+1, 0, -2)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The City of Anaheim wholly disagrees with this finding. We disagree with Finding #1 based upon two key points.
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
As the fire departments evolved into emergency medical departments, the model for operating the fire department has not radically changed. The fire departments have simply absorbed the emergency medical responses into their departments under their old "fire response" model. The City of Anaheim wholly disagrees with this finding. Anaheim Fire and Rescue has embraced the call to respond to those in need and has played an integral role in growth and expansion of Orange County emergency medical services system. In fact, in can be argued that the fire service has resources in place to provide the m...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Economic recessions have forced local fire department boards of directors and city councils to re-evaluate their models for providing fire and emergency medical responses. While this brings to the fore issues of staffing, response times, public safety, training, consolidations, union rules and privatization of their various services, it also spotlights the model used for all emergency responses. The City of Anaheim agrees with this finding. > In a very short period of time, many factors have come into play to create the shift we are experiencing and witnessing today. The economic downturn has ...
▶
City of Anaheim Community Development 9/18/12, 2.19MB
September 18, 2012
•
2 pages
• 3 responses
•
Score: +3
(+3, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
3 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
- "As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABXI 26". As reported by the Grand Jury, Anaheim agrees with this finding.
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
- "Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code". As reported by the Grand Jury, Anaheim agrees with this finding.
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
- "Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt". As reported by the Grand Jury, Anaheim agrees with this finding.
▶
City of Brea 02/05/13, 711K
February 05, 2013
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Brea 12/20/12, 982K
December 20, 2012
•
3 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: +2
(+3, 0, -1)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Based upon the provided example in Appendix D, the City agrees with the Grand Jury's finding.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Unknown
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2012-13
Score: 0
With the Fiscal Year 2012-13 reporting of budgeted EXECUTIVE Compensation Costs, the above recommendations have been implemented. However, a majority of executives and managers reported are not subject to overtime. Therefore, amounts are not listed. Budgeted costs for managers who are subject to overtime are not reported because overtime is not budgeted at the individual level, rather at the department/division level. Furthermore, budgeted insurance premiums for positions are reported along with other City paid benefits including Medicare, workers' compensation, and life insurance. City Counci...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Based upon the provided example in Appendix D, the City agrees with the Grand Jury's finding.
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
</u> With the 2012-13 reporting of budgeted EMPLOYEE Compensation Costs, the above recommendations have been implemented. Budgeted overtime costs are not reported because it is not budgeted at the individual level, rather at the department/division level. Furthermore, budgeted insurance premiums for positions are reported along with other City paid benefits including Medicare, workers' compensation, and life insurance. <u>
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with the Grand Jury's finding.
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
</u> As of December 12, 2012, the City posted their annual pension contribution rates for both Safety and Miscellaneous employee groups.
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The City disagrees wholly with the Grand Jury's finding. The City is required to post fiscal year information. Therefore, it provides fiscal year budgeted costs for salaries and benefits. Budgeted overtime costs are not reported because it is not budgeted at the individual level, rather at the department/division level. It is almost impossible to post overtime costs for individual positions based on fiscal year.
2011-2012 Grand Jury Report Compensation Study of Orange County Cities | Page 3
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The State Controller's Office-Division of Accounting and Reporting requires the City to annually report employee compensation. Included in the City of Brea's 2011 calendar year data are the annual overtime costs for individual positions. An inquirer can easily search this information at the following website: http://www.sco.ca.gov/compensatiom. 2011 information should be posted by January 2013. The City of Brea greatly appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury Report and acknowledges the work of the 2011-12 Orange County Grand Jury, to determine whether abusive compensation exis...
▶
City of Brea 9/24/12, 2.66M
September 24, 2012
•
7 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Costa Mesa 8/23/12, 2.18M
August 23, 2012
•
5 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: -1
(+1, 3, -2)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
. All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by AB X1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1) Response - The recommendation has been implemented by the Successor Agency to the Costa Mesa Redevelopment Agency pursuant to the Dissolution Act, in particular through each Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS), ...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
the Health and Safety Code. Response - The City and Successor Agency agree with F2 as Costa Mesa has had, and continues to have, a citizen involvement committee called the Redevelopment and Residential Rehabilitation (3R) Committee that includes stake-holders as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3) Response - The recommendation has been implemented, as noted by the actions taken by the Successor Agency and the Oversight Board in the chart above.
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
the successor agency debt. Response - The City of Costa Mesa disagrees with F3 that external oversight over redevelopment has been missing as there have been several groups that have provided continuous oversight to redevelopment outside the Redevelopment Agency including the 3R Committee, the Planning Commission, and the City Council.
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8) Response - The recommendation has been implemented. The Successor Agency and the Oversight Board have evaluated what the former Costa Mesa Redevelopment Agency owes to the City of Costa Mesa, which loan was initially established within two years of creation of the Agency with the proceeds intended and expended for the Agency's start-up costs and establishing and implementing the Downtown Project Area. Pursuant to Section 34...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9) Response - The recommendation is not applicable to the Successor Agency and thus will not be implemented. There are no outstanding enforceable obligations that require monies to be paid to commercial entities, so none are listed on the ROPS. However, there are outstanding covenant agreements listed on the ROPS that include maintenance, management and/or use covenants that will require monitoring for comp...
▶
City of Cypress 6/27/12, 1.33M
June 27, 2012
•
4 pages
• 10 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 10, 0)
View Details ▾
10 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We do not know the status of other Redevelopment Agencies and having citizen involvement committees. In regards to the City of Cypress, when the project areas were established and when specific plans were established in these project areas, there were citizen involvement committees used for input. However, the City does not maintain an on-going committee subsequent to the plans being approved.
F.3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performan...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt. Response: The City of Cypress disagrees partially with this finding, as far as it applies to the City of Cypress, since we cannot answer for other Redevelopment Agencies. We do not agree that external oversight has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment compl...
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We do not know the status of other Redevelopment Agencies and having citizen involvement committees. In regards to the City of Cypress, when the project areas were established and when specific plans were established in these project areas, there were citizen involvement committees used for input. However, the City does not maintain an on-going committee subsequent to the plans being approved.
F.3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performan...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of Cypress agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of Cypress, the report indicates that the City is at 8%. While we don't know where this figure comes from or what is included, it should be noted that the Cypress Redevelopment Agency and Successor Agency submitted a ROPS higher than the DOF has approved Leroy Mills, Mayor Todd W. Seymore, Mayor Pro Tem Doug Bailey, Council Member Phil Luebben, Council Member Prakash Narain, M.D., Council Member
Page 2 of 4 that could cause the perce...
▶
City of Cypress 8/13/12, 944K
August 13, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Cypress – Follow Up Response 5/06/13, 1.83M
May 06, 2013
•
7 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Fountain Valley 7/17/12, 5.73M
July 17, 2012
•
16 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 6, 0)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
: Accessibility Ratings for Cities, Special Districts and JPAs
While the City of Fountain Valley was rated, "good", we partially disagree with this finding. The City has maintained a link entitled "salaries and benefits" on the front page of the site for the last year. This link takes you directly to our "Transparency" webpage which contains all the information on employee compensation and benefits as well as the Grand Jury recommended reporting format. In response to the Grand Jury's finding however the City has moved the "Salaries and Benefits" hyperlink to the top of the Quicklinks section...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Recommendation 1: Access for Compensation Costs Transparency The Grand Jury recommended action has been implemented.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Recommendation 2: Content and Clarity of Executive Compensation Costs The Grand Jury recommended action has been implemented.
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Recommendation 3: Content and Clarity of Employee Compensation Costs The Grand Jury recommended action has been implemented.
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Recommendation 4: Transparency of Employer Pension Contribution Rates The Grand Jury recommended action has been implemented.
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Recommendation 5: Transparency of Overtime Pay and On-Call Pay in Employee Compensation Cost Reporting The Grand Jury recommended action has been implemented.
▶
City of Fullerton 11/13/12, 2.74M
November 13, 2012
•
7 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Fullerton 8/8/12, 1.2M
August 08, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Fullerton 9/18/12, 2.19MB
September 19, 2012
•
6 pages
• 2 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 2, 0)
View Details ▾
2 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R1 has been implemented through the ROPS process and State Department of Finance procedures for review and approval/denial.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R2 has been implemented as required by statute.
▶
City of Huntington Beach 9/20/12, 5.62MB
September 20, 2012
•
10 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: -4
(+0, 3, -4)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
, the Grand Jury misstates how the "administrative cost allowance" allocable to successor agencies actually works. Compliance with the 5% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Year 2011-2012, and the 3% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Years 2012-2013 and after, is automatic. A successor agency will not receive a distribution from the County Auditor-Controller for successor agency administrative expenses in excess of the allowable The debt is not "successor agency debt," but the debt of the dissolved redevelopment agency. The Successor Agency has no debt. Auditor-Controller errs because the max...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: 0
"As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26." The Huntington Beach City Council disagrees wholly with this Response: Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The Finding encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies wrongly-there was a 5% administrati...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The Finding encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. In fact, the 12% administrative figure accountable for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency included both administrative and project administration costs. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment ...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: 0
"Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code." Response: The Huntington Beach City Council disagrees wholly with this Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The implication in this Finding is that Huntington Beach was somehow deficient or violated the CRL because the Huntington Beach RDA failed to have a "citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee." The City does have the Southeast Coastal Project Area, a...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The Finding encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. In fact, the 12% administrative figure accountable for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency included both administrative and project administration costs. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment ...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: 0
"Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical valuation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt." The Huntington Beach City Council disagrees wholly with this Response: Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The premise of this Finding is wrong insofar as the Grand Jury is blaming local redevelopment agencies and cities for a lack of oversight or ineffective monitoring. In...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
not warranted and is not reasonable. (Penal Code §933.05(b)(4).) This Recommendation as applied to Huntington Beach, presumes Huntington Beach's successor agency and oversight board are failing to fulfill their respective legal duties under AB1x 26/AB 1484. There is no evidence to support such a premise. As noted in Huntington Beach's response to Recommendation R.3, the Grand Jury does not appear to be aware of the legal duties imposed on successor agencies and oversight boards under ABx1 26/AB 1484. Huntington Beach's successor agency and oversight board have fulfilled their respective duties...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The Finding encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. In fact, the 12% administrative figure accountable for the Huntington Beach Redevelopment Agency included both administrative and project administration costs. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment ...
▶
City of Irvine 8/2/12, 734KB
August 02, 2012
•
2 pages
• 1 response
•
Score: 0
(+0, 1, 0)
View Details ▾
1 response to findings and recommendations
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R3: Content & Clarity of Employee Compensation Costs This has been completed and posted.
▶
City of Irvine 8/2/12, 8.61M
August 16, 2012
• 10 responses
•
Score: -7
(+1, 1, -8)
View Details ▾
10 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) Finding F.1 encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies- wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment agency operations.<sup>4</sup> Finding F.1 conflates the lack of administrative cost caps imposed on redevelopment agencies before they were dissolved with the...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Will Not Implement
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: -1
Code §933.05(b)(1)] because Irvine already complied with the totality of the Recommendation before the Grand Jury Report was released. As described in Irvine's response to Finding F.1, the Grand Jury misstates how the "administrative cost allowance" allocable to successor agencies actually works. Compliance with the 5% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Year 2011-2012, and the 3% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Years 2012-2013 and after, is automatic. A successor agency will not receive a distribution from the County Auditor-Controller for successor agency administrative expenses in excess ...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) Finding F.1 encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies- wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment agency operations.<sup>4</sup> Finding F.1 conflates the lack of administrative cost caps imposed on redevelopment agencies before they were dissolved with the...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Will Not Implement
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: -1
Code §933.05(b)(1)] because Irvine already complied with the totality of the Recommendation before the Grand Jury Report was released. As described in Irvine's response to Finding F.1, the Grand Jury misstates how the "administrative cost allowance" allocable to successor agencies actually works. Compliance with the 5% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Year 2011-2012, and the 3% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Years 2012-2013 and after, is automatic. A successor agency will not receive a distribution from the County Auditor-Controller for successor agency administrative expenses in excess ...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) Finding F.1 encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies- wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment agency operations.<sup>4</sup> Finding F.1 conflates the lack of administrative cost caps imposed on redevelopment agencies before they were dissolved with the...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: 0
"Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical valuation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt." The Irvine City Council disagrees wholly with this Response: Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) The premise of Finding F.3 is wrong insofar as the Grand Jury is blaming local redevelopment agencies and cities for a lack of oversight or ineffective monitoring. In Irvine, th...
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
"Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)." Response: The Recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted and is not reasonable. (Penal Code §933.05(b)(4).) At the outset it should be noted that Irvine was not asked to respond to Finding F.8 referred to in Recommendation R.4, yet is required to respond to Recommendation R.4. Recommendation R.4, like Recommendation R.3, as applied to Irvine, presumes Irvine's successor agency and oversight board a...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Will Not Implement
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: -1
Code §933.05(b)(1)] because Irvine already complied with the totality of the Recommendation before the Grand Jury Report was released. As described in Irvine's response to Finding F.1, the Grand Jury misstates how the "administrative cost allowance" allocable to successor agencies actually works. Compliance with the 5% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Year 2011-2012, and the 3% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Years 2012-2013 and after, is automatic. A successor agency will not receive a distribution from the County Auditor-Controller for successor agency administrative expenses in excess ...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Finding. (Penal Code §933.05(a)(2).) Finding F.1 encapsulates the deficiencies in the Grand Jury Report in that it mixes up two different laws that apply at two different times to two different entities. It implies- wrongly-there was a 5% administrative cost cap applicable to redevelopment agencies prior to their dissolution. Prior to the enactment of AB1x 26, there was no administrative cost cap in the CRL that applied to redevelopment agency operations.<sup>4</sup> Finding F.1 conflates the lack of administrative cost caps imposed on redevelopment agencies before they were dissolved with the...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Will Not Implement
Scheduled: Fiscal Year 2011-2012
Score: -1
Code §933.05(b)(1)] because Irvine already complied with the totality of the Recommendation before the Grand Jury Report was released. As described in Irvine's response to Finding F.1, the Grand Jury misstates how the "administrative cost allowance" allocable to successor agencies actually works. Compliance with the 5% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Year 2011-2012, and the 3% administrative cost cap for Fiscal Years 2012-2013 and after, is automatic. A successor agency will not receive a distribution from the County Auditor-Controller for successor agency administrative expenses in excess ...
▶
City of La Habra 6/26/12, 956KB
June 26, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of La Habra 7/26/12, 957KB
July 26, 2012
•
2 pages
• 4 responses
•
Score: 0
(+2, 0, -2)
View Details ▾
4 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Agree with finding F1.
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Agree with finding F2.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible (see F3). Response: The recommendation has already been implemented with the ROPS being approved by the Department of Finance, State Controllers, and OC County Auditor. Further, the continued implementation of Dissolution Act and AB 1484 will wind down the debt of the agency as quickly as possible as proscribed by the law. R4. Successor agencies and oversight boa...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Disagree with finding F3.
▶
City of Lake Forest 9/12/12, 2M
September 12, 2012
•
5 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: -4
(+0, 0, -4)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The City has no knowledge of the ability or desire of the 20 cities referenced in F2 to meet the Grand Jury's definition of an "excellent level." Without such a foundation from which to offer an informed opinion, the City respectfully disagrees with the finding.
F.3:
There is more opportunity for transparent reporting in the content and clarity of employee compensation costs reporting on local government websites. Response: The City has not reviewed the manner in which the 29 Orange County cities rated good, average, poor and nonexistent, disclose employee compensation costs on websites or t...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
At this time, the City will not be implementing the Grand Jury's recommended reporting methodology. As referenced above, while the Grand Jury's efforts to provide leadership in the area of compensation reporting are notable, the City will continue to provide a web link to the State Controller's Database of Government Compensation in California as a consistent standard. We believe the State Controller's database enables a member of the public to compare compensation between agencies statewide through a common reporting method, reducing potential confusion generating from differing compensation ...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The City has not reviewed the manner in which the 29 Orange County cities rated good, average, poor and nonexistent, disclose employee compensation costs on websites or through other means. Without such a foundation from which to offer an informed opinion regarding the content and clarity of said information, the City respectfully disagrees with this finding. DRUG USE IS E ABUSE 25550 Commercentre Dr., Suite 100 www.lakeforestca.gov Lake Forest, CA 92630 Lake Forest, Remember the Past ~ Challenge the Future (949) 461-3400 Printed on Recycled Paper. City Hall Fax: (949) 461-3511
Page 2
F.4:
...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City makes no recommendations on what other cities should do. As for the City of Lake Forest, we currently report employee compensation information to the public in an easily accessible manner, as discussed in our response to R.2. At this time, the City will not be implementing the Grand Jury's recommended reporting methodology. As referenced above, while the Grand Jury's efforts to provide leadership in the area of compensation reporting are notable, the City will continue to provide a web link to the State Controller's Database of Government Compensation in California as a consistent sta...
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
The City has not independently reviewed the websites of all 34 Orange County cities to verify this finding. Without such a foundation from which to offer an informed opinion, the City respectfully disagrees with this finding.
F.5:
Inclusion of overtime and on-call pay in employee compensation costs for employees, executives, and elected officials are missing from compensation cost reporting. Response: Without reviewing the websites of all 34 Orange County cities, the City cannot verify the existence of a "de facto" standard for compensation reporting throughout Orange County. It is unclear f...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City makes no recommendations on what other cities should do. Further, whether information is displayed "prominently and transparently" on a website is highly subjective and varies from person to person. The City recognizes that there is always room for growth and improvement, and to this end the City regularly reviews and updates the content and design of the City's web pages. The City's employer pension contribution rate is disclosed in the Annual Operating Budget, which is posted on the City's website. However, during the next review period, the City will consider posting the City's emp...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
Without reviewing the websites of all 34 Orange County cities, the City cannot verify the existence of a "de facto" standard for compensation reporting throughout Orange County. It is unclear from the Orange County Grand Jury's finding whether data for overtime pay and on-call pay should be reported as projected pay for the year based upon budgets, or actual pay, which would need to be calculated retroactively. Without such a foundation from which to offer an informed opinion, the City respectfully disagrees with this finding. Recommendations:
R.2:
Content & Clarity of Executive Compensation...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation as written by the Orange County Grand Jury is unclear as to how "overtime pay" is defined. Overtime pay can be
Page 5 reported proactively as budgeted, based upon projections for a fiscal year, or retroactively, based upon actual usage. In any given fiscal year, the discrepancy between the proactive and retroactive data points has the potential to be extreme. Nevertheless, the City will not take action to implement this recommendation at this time unless this information is requested by the State Controller as part of its Database of Government Compensation in California. T...
▶
City of La Palma 10/11/12, 2.4M
October 11, 2012
•
4 pages
• 2 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 2, 0)
View Details ▾
2 responses to findings and recommendations
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R-2: The recommendation has been implemented.
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R-3: The recommendation has been implemented.
▶
City of La Palma 8/7/12, 113KB
August 07, 2012
•
3 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 8, 0)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Disagree Partially
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City of La Palma agrees in part with this finding. We cannot verify other agencies' administration costs as a percent of tax increment. In regards to the City of La Palma, the report indicates that La Palma's Redevelopment Administrative costs as a 16.71% of tax increment revenue. We do not know how the Grand Jury arrived at this figure or what is included in it. On a going forward basis, we note that the La Palma Successor Agency submitted an Oversight Board approved ROPS to the DOF reflecting an Administrative Cost Allowance of the minimum $250,000 as authorized by AB1X 26. F.2 Of the ag...
▶
City of Mission Viejo 11/16/12, 1.65M
November 16, 2012
•
5 pages
• 4 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 4, 0)
View Details ▾
4 responses to findings and recommendations
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R2 - Content and Clarity of Executive Compensation Cost This recommendation has been implemented.
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R3 - Content & Clarity of Employee Compensation Costs This recommendation has been implemented.
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R4 - Transparency of Employer Pension Contribution Rates This recommendation has been implemented.
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R5 - Transparency of Overtime Pay and On-Call Pay in Employee <b>Compensation Cost Reporting</b> This recommendation has been implemented.
▶
City of Mission Viejo 6/29/12, 469KB
June 29, 2012
•
2 pages
• 2 responses
•
Score: 0
(+0, 2, 0)
View Details ▾
2 responses to findings and recommendations
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R1, the recommendation has been implemented.
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R2, the recommendation has been implemented.
▶
City of Orange 9/18/12, 2.39MB
September 18, 2012
•
4 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Placentia 7/18/12, 891KB
July 18, 2012
•
2 pages
• 10 responses
•
Score: +4
(+4, 4, 0)
View Details ▾
10 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City agrees with the finding. Finding F2: Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a project area committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code. City Response: The City agrees with the finding. Finding F3: Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The new formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and man...
F8
Prior to the dissolution of redevelopment, some agencies encumbered debt to their cities, thereby creating questionable enforceable obligations.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. The City did not encumber debt to the City prior to the dissolution of the agency. Recommendation R5: Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Payment Obligation Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9) City Response: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. The Agency did not have any incentive payments to commercial entities. Thank you for affording us this opportunity to comment upon the finds and re...
F9
Some former RDAs (such as Brea and Buena Park) have incentive payments to commercial entities as enforceable obligations.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted. The Agency did not have any incentive payments to commercial entities. Thank you for affording us this opportunity to comment upon the finds and recommendations of the Grand Jury's study. Should you have any questions or need clarification regarding the City's responses contained herein, please do not hesitate to contact our City Administrator at (714) 993-8117. Sincerely, houng Jeans for Jeremy B. Yamaguchi Mayor City Council C: City Administrator
▶
City of Placentia 8/7/12, 370KB
August 07, 2012
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of San Clemente 6/26/12, 640KB
June 26, 2012
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Stanton 01/16/13, 674K
January 16, 2013
•
2 pages
• 7 responses
•
Score: -2
(+1, 3, -3)
View Details ▾
7 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
redevelopment the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency was in compliance with the recognized limits of administrative costs per Redevelopment Subsequent to the dissolution of the redevelopment, the Stanton Law. Consolidated Redevelopment Agency continues to be in compliance. The Stanton Consolidated The respondent disagrees with the finding.
F2:
Redevelopment Agency created a Project Area Committee as part of its Amendment 2011 to the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Project. The City of Stanton can neither agree or disagree with this finding. The State of
F3:
California created red...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
R1:
The recommendation has been implemented.
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
Redevelopment Agency created a Project Area Committee as part of its Amendment 2011 to the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Project. The City of Stanton can neither agree or disagree with this finding. The State of
F3:
California created redevelopment agencies as public agencies with mechanisms to provide annual reports to state agencies. In addition, in the case of the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency, the Stanton City Council also served as the Redevelopment Agency Board. The City Council serving as the Agency Board was voted into office by the electorate. As a representative de...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
Redevelopment Agency created a Project Area Committee as part of its Amendment 2011 to the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Project. The City of Stanton can neither agree or disagree with this finding. The State of
F3:
California created redevelopment agencies as public agencies with mechanisms to provide annual reports to state agencies. In addition, in the case of the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency, the Stanton City Council also served as the Redevelopment Agency Board. The City Council serving as the Agency Board was voted into office by the electorate. As a representative de...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
California created redevelopment agencies as public agencies with mechanisms to provide annual reports to state agencies. In addition, in the case of the Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency, the Stanton City Council also served as the Redevelopment Agency Board. The City Council serving as the Agency Board was voted into office by the electorate. As a representative democracy form of government, the electorate had the ability to signal their approval or disapproval of projects and management of the agency as a whole through their right to vote. 7800 Katella Avenue • Stanton, California 9...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
The recommendation will not be implemented as it is not warranted.
R5:
The recommendation will not be implemented as it is not warranted. The Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency did not provide incentives to commercial entities. The City of Stanton appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury's report. While the City feels that the State's decision to eliminate redevelopment was myopic and to the detriment of the residents of the City of Stanton and of the State, we have complied with all requirements of State Law. If you have any further questions or comments, please feel ...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Will Not Implement
Score: -1
The recommendation will not be implemented as it is not warranted. The Stanton Consolidated Redevelopment Agency did not provide incentives to commercial entities. The City of Stanton appreciates the opportunity to respond to the Grand Jury's report. While the City feels that the State's decision to eliminate redevelopment was myopic and to the detriment of the residents of the City of Stanton and of the State, we have complied with all requirements of State Law. If you have any further questions or comments, please feel free to contact me at (714) 890-4277. Sincerely, James A. Box City Manage...
▶
City of Stanton 12/11/12, 672K
December 11, 2012
•
2 pages
• 6 responses
•
Score: +5
(+5, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
6 responses to findings and recommendations
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Stanton agrees with the finding.
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
implemented in February 2013. The City of Stanton was not able to respond in a timely manner due to a miscommunication. It appears that the direction taken from the former City Manager was to implement the recommendations to the 2012 future reporting and no responses were required.
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Stanton agrees with the finding. 7800 Katella Avenue • Stanton, California 90680 • (714) 379-9222 M
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in February 2013. The City of Stanton was not able to respond in a timely manner due to a miscommunication. It appears that the direction taken from the former City Manager was to implement the recommendations to the 2012 future reporting and no responses were required.
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Stanton agrees with the finding.
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
The recommendation has not yet been implemented but will be implemented in February 2013. The City of Stanton was not able to respond in a timely manner due to a miscommunication. It appears that the direction taken from the former City Manager was to implement the recommendations to the 2012 future reporting and no responses were required. Sincerely, ares of i Jamés A. Box City Manager Cc: City Council
▶
City of Tustin 10/17/12, 1.56MB
October 17, 2012
•
4 pages
• 11 responses
•
Score: +5
(+5, 4, 0)
View Details ▾
11 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City acknowledges a Project Area Committee (PAC) did not exist at the time of dissolution. While a PAC was not in existence, the former Redevelopment Agency was in complete compliance with the HSC as it related to Redevelopment and PACs. F3) Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt. City Response: While the City ...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
The City acknowledges that before January 1, 2012, the former Redevelopment Agency's administrative costs exceeded five percent (5%). Effective January 1, 2012 and in accordance with California Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section 34171(a) & (b), the City acting as the Successor Agency to the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency ("Successor Agency") has prepared administrative budgets that restrict the administrative cost allowances payable from property tax revenues to five percent (5%) for the period of January 1, 2012 through June 30, 2012 and three percent (3%) for the subsequent periods....
F8
Prior to the dissolution of redevelopment, some agencies encumbered debt to their cities, thereby creating questionable enforceable obligations.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation has been implemented. The Successor Agency and Oversight Board are critically reviewing each and every enforceable obligation, including debt owed to the City of Tustin. Debt owed to the City and qualifying as enforceable obligations has been listed on the ROPS and submitted to DoF. These enforceable obligations are in compliance with HSC Section 34171(d)(2) as well as with page 3 of the ROPS III (January 2013 through June 2013) instructions posted on DoF's website. As noted before, the Oversight Board is committed to fulfilling its fiduciary responsibilities to holders of e...
F9
Some former RDAs (such as Brea and Buena Park) have incentive payments to commercial entities as enforceable obligations.
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The recommendation has been implemented. Prior to dissolution, the Tustin Community Redevelopment Agency was not providing incentive payments to commercial entities. As a result, the First, Second and Third ROPS approved by the Oversight Board and the First and Second ROPS approved by the California Department of Finance ("DoF") did not list any incentive payments to commercial entities as an enforceable obligation. The Third ROPS is currently being reviewed by DoF. Unless there are amendments to the current legislation, the Successor Agency cannot enter into new agreements that require incent...
▶
City of Tustin 8/2/12, 1.31M
August 02, 2012
•
4 pages
• 7 responses
•
Score: +3
(+3, 4, 0)
View Details ▾
7 responses to findings and recommendations
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with this finding. While the City has provided a variety of executive compensation data on the City's website for many years, according to the Grand Jury's criteria, the City has room for improvement. F.3: There is the most opportunity for more transparent reporting in the Content and Clarity of Employee Compensation Cost reporting on local government websites. Only five of thirty-four cities (15%) were rated excellent for Employee Compensation Cost Content and Clarity. Response: The City agrees with this finding. While the City has provided a variety of employee compensation d...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. The City has prepared a total compensation summary that lists all compensation paid to all employees over the last fiscal year. We have also included a data definition summary that specifies all compensation items that are included in each column. This
Page 3 information is available on the City's "Transparency in City Government" website (accessible from the City's website home page) as well the City's Human Resources department website. R.3: The Grand Jury recommends that the County of Orange and all Orange County cities, districts, and joint power ...
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with this finding. While the City has provided a variety of employee compensation data on the City's website for many years, according to the Grand Jury's criteria, the City has room for improvement. Mayor John Nielsen • Mayor Pro Tem Al Murray • Jerry Amante • Deborah Gavello • Rebecca "Beckie" Gomez 300 Centennial Way, Tustin, CA 92780 • (714) 573-3010 • www.tustinca.org
Page 2 F.4: Many Orange County local government web sites do not generally post their employer pension annual contribution rates prominently to their web sites as part of their compensation cost disclosure f...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. The City has prepared a total compensation summary that lists all compensation paid to all employees over the last fiscal year. We have also included a data definition summary that specifies all compensation items that are included in each column, including overtime pay, on-call pay, and pension costs. This information is available on the City's "Transparency in City Government" website (accessible from the City's website home page) as well the City's Human Resources department website. R.4: The Grand Jury recommends that all Orange County cities, dist...
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City agrees with this finding. While the City has provided the employer-paid member contribution amounts in the labor contracts on the City's website for many years (and the employer contribution rates have long been available on the CalPERS website), according to the Grand Jury's criteria, the City has room for improvement. F.5: The Orange County "de facto" standard for CCT in the county, cities, districts, and JPA now contains all employees, including a page for executives and all elected officials. Two key categories are missing from compensation cost reporting. They are overtime pay an...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. The City's retirement contribution rates are listed by bargaining group for the last two fiscal years on a single page document. This information is available on the City's "Transparency in City Government" website (accessible from the City's website home page) as well as the City's Human Resources department website. R.5: The Grand Jury recommends that all Orange County cities, districts, and joint power authority, as well as the County of Orange, include overtime pay and on-call pay in compensation cost reporting on their employees' compensation page...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Implemented
Score: 0
This recommendation has been implemented. The City has prepared a total compensation summary that lists all compensation paid to all employees over the last fiscal year. We have also included a data definition summary that specifies all compensation items that are included in each column, including overtime pay and on-call pay. This information is available on the City's "Transparency in City Government" website (accessible from the City's website home page) as well the City's Human Resources department website.
Page 4 The City of Tustin offers our thanks to the Grand Jury volunteers for thei...
▶
City of Tustin 9/13/12, 938K
September 13, 2012
•
2 pages
• 4 responses
•
Score: -4
(+0, 0, -4)
View Details ▾
4 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
disagrees wholly" with findings F1, F2, F3, and F4, and reports that recommendations R1, R2 and R3 will not be implemented because they are not warranted.
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
disagrees wholly" with findings F1, F2, F3, and F4, and reports that recommendations R1, R2 and R3 will not be implemented because they are not warranted.
F3
Historically, external oversight over redevelopment has been missing or ineffective in monitoring redevelopment agency compliance and performance. The newly formed oversight boards offer a potential to improve on that record by providing critical evaluation of existing projects and management of the successor agency debt.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
disagrees wholly" with findings F1, F2, F3, and F4, and reports that recommendations R1, R2 and R3 will not be implemented because they are not warranted.
F4
The Orange County Auditor Controller has an expanded role in managing the tax- increment revenue. The implementation of ABX1 26 includes a requirement that all former redevelopment agencies in the county be audited to determine the accuracy of the information supporting agency claimed enforceable obligations. It has been determined that the County will contract with external auditors to accomplish this task under the direction of the Auditor- Controller.
Response: Disagree
Score: -1
disagrees wholly" with findings F1, F2, F3, and F4, and reports that recommendations R1, R2 and R3 will not be implemented because they are not warranted.
▶
City of Westminster 12/3/12, 1.12M
December 03, 2012
•
3 pages
• 8 responses
•
Score: +3
(+3, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
8 responses to findings and recommendations
F1
As of the date of dissolution of redevelopment (February 1, 2012), all city operated redevelopment agencies, except Mission Viejo and Seal Beach, were exceeding the administrative costs limit of 5% of the tax increment distributed related to the ROPS as authorized by ABX1 26.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is room for improvement such that a great number of Cities, Special Districts, and JPAs receive a rating of excellent in future reviews. Since the issuance of this report the City's website has undergone a complete redesign to make information more accessible to the user. Finding F.2: Content & Clarity Rating for Executive Compensation Cost Response: The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is more potential improvement possible; and Orange County cities can collectively achieve greater than a 41...
R1
All successor agencies should review administrative costs to ensure compliance with the limit of five percent of the tax-increment or less as required by ABX1 26 and develop a plan to reduce these costs to three percent of the tax increment received or less in 2012-2013. If these percentages fall below $250,000, the agencies are allowed to claim the higher amount. (See F1)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is room for improvement such that a great number of Cities, Special Districts, and JPAs receive a rating of excellent in future reviews. Since the issuance of this report the City's website has undergone a complete redesign to make information more accessible to the user. Finding F.2: Content & Clarity Rating for Executive Compensation Cost Response: The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is more potential improvement possible; and Orange County cities can collectively achieve greater than a 41...
F2
Of the agencies surveyed, only Costa Mesa and Santa Ana reported having a citizen involvement committee along the line of a Project Area Committee as authorized by Section 33385 of the Health and Safety Code.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is more potential improvement possible; and Orange County cities can collectively achieve greater than a 41% excellent rating for this reporting item.
114 City of Westminster Response: "Transparency Breaking Up Compensation Fog - But Why Hide Pension Costs?" Finding F.3: Content & Clarity Rating for Employee Compensation Cost Rating <b>Response:</b> The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that greater than 15% (5 of 34) of Orange County cities can achieve a rating of excellent in this rating category. Sin...
R2
Successor agencies and oversight boards should review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule with a view toward limiting the range of projects and obligations thereby retiring the enforceable obligation debt as quickly as possible. (See F3)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City of Westminster is in the process of implementing this recommendation as part of review and overhaul of the City's current website. This update will include single click dropdown menus and text box search functions to assist the user in locating needed information. This update is scheduled to "go-live" in late January and will be in compliance with State reporting requirements. Recommendation R.3: Content and Clarity of Employee Compensation Costs
City of Westminster Response: "Transparency Breaking Up Compensation Fog - But Why Hide Pension Costs?" Response: The City of Westminster i...
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
"Transparency Breaking Up Compensation Fog - But Why Hide Pension Costs?" Dear Judge Borris: The City of Westminster is in receipt of the 2011-2012 Orange County Grand Jury Compensation Cost Transparency Study Report. The City has reviewed the documents and is hereby responding to the findings and recommendations of the Grand Jury in accordance with California Penal Code Section 033 and 933.05. As directed, the City has responded to Findings F.1 through F5 and Recommendations R.1 through R.5. Finding F.1: Accessibility Rating for Cities, Special Districts and JPAs Response: The City of Westmin...
R4
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for debt owed to the city. (See F8)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City of Westminster is in the process of implementing this recommendation as part of review and overhaul of the City's current website. This update will include single click dropdown menus and text box search functions to assist the user in locating needed information. This update is scheduled to "go-live" in late January and will be in compliance with State reporting requirements. Recommendation R.5: Transparency of Overtime Pay and On-Call Pay in <b>Employee Compensation and Cost Reporting</b> Response: The City of Westminster is in the process of implementing this recommendation as part...
F5
The Orange County Board of Supervisors has an expanded role in the management of the transition of redevelopment. They have a responsibility to make appointments to all oversight boards in the County. Ultimately, in 2016, there will be a single oversight board over all successor agencies in the County. The Board is also responsible to approve and oversee the external audit contracts to be managed by the Auditor-Controller.
Response: Agree
Score: +1
The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is room for improvement such that a great number of Cities, Special Districts, and JPAs receive a rating of excellent in future reviews. Since the issuance of this report the City's website has undergone a complete redesign to make information more accessible to the user. Finding F.2: Content & Clarity Rating for Executive Compensation Cost Response: The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is more potential improvement possible; and Orange County cities can collectively achieve greater than a 41...
R5
Successor agencies and oversight boards should critically review the Recognized Obligations Payment Schedule (ROPS) to evaluate the need for incentive payments to commercial entities. (See F9)
Response: Unknown
Score: 0
The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is room for improvement such that a great number of Cities, Special Districts, and JPAs receive a rating of excellent in future reviews. Since the issuance of this report the City's website has undergone a complete redesign to make information more accessible to the user. Finding F.2: Content & Clarity Rating for Executive Compensation Cost Response: The City of Westminster agrees with the Grand Jury finding that there is more potential improvement possible; and Orange County cities can collectively achieve greater than a 41...
▶
City of Westminster 9/12/12, 1MB
September 12, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Fountain Valley School District – Follow Up Response 4/25/13, 1.17M
April 25, 2013
•
2 pages
• 1 response
•
Score: +1
(+1, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
1 response to findings and recommendations
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
(Dated 9/20/12): The District will implement this recommendation by September 28, 2012. The District has adopted policies in regard to retaliation and confidentiality. Those policies state: The identity of a complainant alleging discrimination, harassment, or bullying shall remain confidential as appropriate within the dual contexts of the District's legal obligation to ensure a learning environment free from discrimination, harassment, intimidation, and bullying, and the right of the accused to be informed of the allegations. (BP 5131.2(d)) Any student, including a student with disabilities, ...
▶
Fullerton Joint Union High School District – Follow Up Response 4/26/13, 1.17M
April 26, 2013
•
2 pages
• 1 response
•
Score: +1
(+1, 0, 0)
View Details ▾
1 response to findings and recommendations
R3
The Orange County Board of Supervisors should appoint a committee to study possible replacement programs for redevelopment and use legislative influence to help shape the next generation of redevelopment in the likely event such a program is passed by the Legislature. (See F6)
Response: Will Implement
Score: +1
(August 12, 2012): The District will implement this recommendation by July 1, 2012. The District has adopted policies in regard to retaliation and confidentiality. AR 5642 Anti-Bullying states: "The District prohibits bullying as defined in this Administrative Regulation. This includes, but is not limited to, discrimination, harassment, intimidation, and bullying based on the actual or perceived characteristics set forth in Penal Code Section 422.55 and Education Code Section 220, and disability, gender, gender identity, gender expression, nationality, race or ethnicity, religion, sexual orien...
▶
Fullerton Police Department 8/09/12, 198KB
August 09, 2012
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Irvine Police Department 10/15/12, 736K
October 15, 2012
•
2 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Placentia Police Department 12/19/12, 463K
December 19, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Seal Beach Police Department 10/1/12, 465K
October 01, 2012
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
Westminster School District – Follow Up Response 3/1/13, 1.17M
March 01, 2013
•
1 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of San Juan Capistrano 02/05/13, 1.37MB
February 05, 2013
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Lake Forest 9/18/12, 2.31MB
September 18, 2012
•
5 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Fountain Valley 8/21/12, 1.07M
August 21, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
▶
City of Buena Park 7/31/12, 612KB
July 31, 2012
•
3 pages
View Details ▾
No structured response data extracted yet.
View the PDF for full details.
No Responses Found 5
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.