📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
San Francisco County Grand Jury
• 2015-2016
Part Vii: Improving Accounting and Reporting for Deferred Maintenance
⚠️ 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 1 findings
F42
Page 71
F:VII.2. The City does not have accounting and financial systems and processes Controller, in place to accurately determine and report the condition of its assets or Department of Public the extent of its deferred maintenance. Works, City Administrator, Director of the Capital Planning Program, Director of the Real Estate Division, General Manager of Recreation and Parks F:VII.3. The City’s capital assets shown in its financial statements may be Controller overstated because its use of straight line depreciation assumes a longer asset life span than is likely given the reducedlife impact of deferred maintenance. F:VII.4. Existing data show that maintaining assets extends asset life and is Controller, cheaper than prematurely replacing unmaintained assets. Director of Public Works, City Administrator, Director of the Capital Planning Program, Director of the Real Estate Division, General Manager of Recreation and Parks Maintenance Budgeting & Accounting Challenges for General Fund Departments 84
No recommendations for this finding