📋

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.

Nevada County Grand Jury • 1999-2000

Nevada County Sheriff's substation at Truckee

7 pages

View PDF View Full Original

⚠️ 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 25 findings

The employees of the Nevada County Assessor have poor morale. There is a shortage of adequately trained personnel. The office is nearing operational paralysis and is in need of sound management, clear direction and good judgment. There may have been a loss of revenue to the county as a result of these problems.

The Assessor's proposed computer system is non-operational. He said his project is between 60 and 70 percent complete and estimated it will cost between $250,000 and $500,000 to complete the project.

In December, 1999, Stephen T. Monaghan, Director of Information Systems for Nevada County, told the Supervisors, at a board meeting, "... In the county's best interest...it would be advisable to have the Assessor provide the proper project documentation and information. It has been ongoing for almost three years without any demonstrated project plan or management and therefore cost hundreds of thousands of dollars already spent by the Assessor." (Emphasis added by Grand Jury.)

Monaghan told the Supervisors that a computer systems design may be compared to a blueprint for a building, and added that 80 percent of a project is design, specifications, 3

The Grand Jury requested from the Assessor a copy of his systems design (blueprint). The Assessor was unable to provide one. A temporary employee in charge of the proposed computer system testified that many aspects of the design "are in Art Green's head" rather than on paper.

After taking office in late 1998, the Assessor allowed two temporary employees (husband and wife) to work on the proposed office computer system at their private home, without supervision or documentation of work hours except for the workers' own handwritten time cards.

The Assessor testified he verbally approved overtime for the temporary workers -- who were paid $42,458 in overtime plus their combined salaries of $85,136 -- in 1999 alone. The Assessor said he was unaware of the total overtime costs.

The Assessor further testified that the male temporary worker was his former business partner. This temporary worker is also repaying a personal loan to the Assessor, according to annual conflict of interest filings by the Assessor.

The Assessor said he let the male temporary employee participate in management decisions, including evaluation of staff, reviewing job applications and conducting interviews. The Assessor said he also directed the temporary employee to look at the staff "under a microscope."

F10

The Assessor said he placed that same temporary employee in charge of the department and staff in the Assessor's absence.

F11

Some of the county-purchased computer equipment was delivered directly to the temporary employees' family home. The Assessor ordered the connection of computer modem (phone) lines between that private home and the Rood Center, at county expense.

F12

The appraisal records for the temporary employees' home and property have disappeared from the Assessor's confidential files and are still missing as of the date of this report.

F13

Employees testified they have frequently been confused about the "chain of command" since the Assessor took office in late 1998. They also said morale has never been lower and the office is in disarray. The Assessor twice testified he was unaware of any morale problems in his office.

F14

The Assessor's office is understaffed due to unfilled positions. All employees interviewed, testified that understaffing causes many difficulties and delays. They further testified they believed salaries were being saved by understaffing to pay for computers and software.

F15

Regarding the unfilled positions, the Assessor testified that personnel recruitments had been delayed by the Personnel Department. Records show it took the Assessor from 2-1/2 to 5-1/2 months to provide required job descriptions to the Personnel Department.

F16

A review of the Assessor's 1998/1999 actual expenses, compared to the budget, shows that salaries were $119,864 under budget while operating expenses, including computers, were $108,544 over budget. There is no evidence that a required budget transfer was approved. This shifting of budgeted funds has continued in the first half of fiscal 1999/2000. /1

F17

Employees said appraisals of commercial properties within Nevada County are not being performed adequately due to the shortage of workers, thus losing potential tax dollars for the county.

F18

A training facility has been established within the Assessor's office and equipped for training employees. That facility remains locked and unused for its stated purpose.

F19

Assessor's employees told the Grand Jury they have repeatedly met resistance from the administrators in their attempts to attend continuing education classes required by the state.

F20

A former long-term employee in the Assessor's Department, who was the Assessor's election campaign manager, was promoted to assistant assessor. After her three-month probationary period, the Assessor made her appointment permanent. Just two weeks later, the Assessor removed her from that position. The Assessor told the Grand Jury she "was not doing the job."

F21

Subsequently, the Assessor named another of his campaign workers to that same assistant's position, although that individual did not meet job description requirements. After the Grand Jury questioned the Assessor, in January 2000, he hired another friend as his temporary assistant.

F22

The Assessor told the Grand Jury he let another of his campaign workers -- not an employee of the county -- have unlimited access to the Assessor's office. He also issued the man an Assessor's department badge

F23

Employees concluded that this campaign worker, described by the Assessor as his "political advisor," was acting in a management capacity and had access to confidential information. Employees said the man was present during review of job applications and other administrative functions.

F24

The county requires each of its departments to maintain an ongoing inventory of all equipment valued at from $1,000 to $2,500. The recent county audit of the Assessor's Department found the inventory was not prepared until Jan. 18, 2000, well after the Assessor's office was under investigation by the Grand Jury.

F25

A $4,400 study was prepared for the Assessor and his proposed computer system, by the Government Finance Research firm. It also contained information from the other "online" counties of San Bernardino and San Diego. The research firm reported that San Bernardino has yet to have a "hit" on its internet subscriber sites and San Diego was planning to go full service as of Oct. 1999. The report concluded, "The Nevada County Assessor, along with San Bernardino and San Diego are on the cutting edge of a new paradigm of information services and it is difficult to gather information that is not yet there." (Emphasis added by Grand Jury.) CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations 25

R1

The employees of the Nevada County Assessor have poor morale. There is a shortage of adequately trained personnel. The office is nearing operational paralysis and is in need of sound management, clear direction and good judgment. There may have been a loss of revenue to the county as a result of these problems.
R2

The Assessor's proposed computer system is non-operational. He said his project is between 60 and 70 percent complete and estimated it will cost between $250,000 and $500,000 to complete the project.
R3

In December, 1999, Stephen T. Monaghan, Director of Information Systems for Nevada County, told the Supervisors, at a board meeting, "... In the county's best interest...it would be advisable to have the Assessor provide the proper project documentation and information. It has been ongoing for almost three years without any demonstrated project plan or management and therefore cost hundreds of thousands of dollars already spent by the Assessor." (Emphasis added by Grand Jury.)
R4

Monaghan told the Supervisors that a computer systems design may be compared to a blueprint for a building, and added that 80 percent of a project is design, specifications, 3
R5

The Grand Jury requested from the Assessor a copy of his systems design (blueprint). The Assessor was unable to provide one. A temporary employee in charge of the proposed computer system testified that many aspects of the design "are in Art Green's head" rather than on paper.
R6

After taking office in late 1998, the Assessor allowed two temporary employees (husband and wife) to work on the proposed office computer system at their private home, without supervision or documentation of work hours except for the workers' own handwritten time cards.
R7

The Assessor testified he verbally approved overtime for the temporary workers -- who were paid $42,458 in overtime plus their combined salaries of $85,136 -- in 1999 alone. The Assessor said he was unaware of the total overtime costs.
R8

The Assessor further testified that the male temporary worker was his former business partner. This temporary worker is also repaying a personal loan to the Assessor, according to annual conflict of interest filings by the Assessor.
R9

The Assessor said he let the male temporary employee participate in management decisions, including evaluation of staff, reviewing job applications and conducting interviews. The Assessor said he also directed the temporary employee to look at the staff "under a microscope."
R10

The Assessor said he placed that same temporary employee in charge of the department and staff in the Assessor's absence.
R11

Some of the county-purchased computer equipment was delivered directly to the temporary employees' family home. The Assessor ordered the connection of computer modem (phone) lines between that private home and the Rood Center, at county expense.
R12

The appraisal records for the temporary employees' home and property have disappeared from the Assessor's confidential files and are still missing as of the date of this report.
R13

Employees testified they have frequently been confused about the "chain of command" since the Assessor took office in late 1998. They also said morale has never been lower and the office is in disarray. The Assessor twice testified he was unaware of any morale problems in his office.
R14

The Assessor's office is understaffed due to unfilled positions. All employees interviewed, testified that understaffing causes many difficulties and delays. They further testified they believed salaries were being saved by understaffing to pay for computers and software.
R15

Regarding the unfilled positions, the Assessor testified that personnel recruitments had been delayed by the Personnel Department. Records show it took the Assessor from 2-1/2 to 5-1/2 months to provide required job descriptions to the Personnel Department.
R16

A review of the Assessor's 1998/1999 actual expenses, compared to the budget, shows that salaries were $119,864 under budget while operating expenses, including computers, were $108,544 over budget. There is no evidence that a required budget transfer was approved. This shifting of budgeted funds has continued in the first half of fiscal 1999/2000. /1
R17

Employees said appraisals of commercial properties within Nevada County are not being performed adequately due to the shortage of workers, thus losing potential tax dollars for the county.
R18

A training facility has been established within the Assessor's office and equipped for training employees. That facility remains locked and unused for its stated purpose.
R19

Assessor's employees told the Grand Jury they have repeatedly met resistance from the administrators in their attempts to attend continuing education classes required by the state.
R20

A former long-term employee in the Assessor's Department, who was the Assessor's election campaign manager, was promoted to assistant assessor. After her three-month probationary period, the Assessor made her appointment permanent. Just two weeks later, the Assessor removed her from that position. The Assessor told the Grand Jury she "was not doing the job."
R21

Subsequently, the Assessor named another of his campaign workers to that same assistant's position, although that individual did not meet job description requirements. After the Grand Jury questioned the Assessor, in January 2000, he hired another friend as his temporary assistant.
R22

The Assessor told the Grand Jury he let another of his campaign workers -- not an employee of the county -- have unlimited access to the Assessor's office. He also issued the man an Assessor's department badge
R23

Employees concluded that this campaign worker, described by the Assessor as his "political advisor," was acting in a management capacity and had access to confidential information. Employees said the man was present during review of job applications and other administrative functions.
R24

The county requires each of its departments to maintain an ongoing inventory of all equipment valued at from $1,000 to $2,500. The recent county audit of the Assessor's Department found the inventory was not prepared until Jan. 18, 2000, well after the Assessor's office was under investigation by the Grand Jury.
R25

A $4,400 study was prepared for the Assessor and his proposed computer system, by the Government Finance Research firm. It also contained information from the other "online" counties of San Bernardino and San Diego. The research firm reported that San Bernardino has yet to have a "hit" on its internet subscriber sites and San Diego was planning to go full service as of Oct. 1999. The report concluded, "The Nevada County Assessor, along with San Bernardino and San Diego are on the cutting edge of a new paradigm of information services and it is difficult to gather information that is not yet there." (Emphasis added by Grand Jury.) CONCLUSIONS