📋
Extraído del Informe Consolidado
Esta investigación fue publicada originalmente como parte de un informe consolidado más amplio que contiene múltiples investigaciones. Consulte el PDF consolidado para ver el documento completo.
Sacramento County Grand Jury
• 2002-2003
Recommendations for Improving Public Water Districts’ Accountability
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 3 findings
F1
District directors on the whole do not have financial or accounting backgrounds. They rely on their audit reports to ensure that their district’s operation is fiscally sound.
F2
The Grand Jury finds that an electorate, kept unaware by a district that fails to “give light” to its actions, cannot properly evaluate the performance of district personnel. These 47 voters elect boards to oversee the operation of the district. The board in turn hires a general manager to manage the district. It is the close relationship between the board and the general manager that has potential for misuse of district funds. We find that the use of district credit cards may enable the misuse of district funds; however, it is the culture within the district that permits the abuse. District managers and board members should be aware of what is and what is not proper. Golf at district expense is not proper. Expensive restaurant meals charged to the district is not proper. Increasing the retirement benefits to a level primarily given to public safety personnel to benefit a retiring general manager is not proper.
F3
Some written practices and policies, which vary from district to district, may be outdated.
Recommendations 9
-
R1aThe district should provide to auditors all district policies and procedures before an audit is performed. Auditors should verify that all disbursements made during the year comply with the district’s procedures. The audit should include a random sampling of travel expense reports, including credit card usage.
-
R1bThe Sacramento County Director of Finance should schedule regular, selective reviews of district audit reports for completeness and financial impact on ratepayers, and report any anomalies to the respective water district board of directors.
-
R1cThe California State Government Code Section 2609 should be amended to eliminate Section 2609(f) providing for audits to be performed less frequently than once a year. The code should require all districts to perform annual audits.
-
R1dThe California State Legislature should enact a statute requiring the State Controller to independently verify accuracy and completeness of district audits.
-
R2Auditors should confirm water districts’ compliance with IRS rules, that all income is being reported, that boards actively oversee payments to management, and that all financial records are maintained for at least five years.
-
R2bExpenses submitted for reimbursement or charges on district credit cards that exceed California State per diem allowances or that do not fall within permitted district expense policies should be disallowed, published on the district’s Web site and discussed at the next board meeting.
-
R3In an effort to obtain a thorough and professional annual audit, auditors should be changed every three years.
-
R4To increase public awareness of district activities and to provide easy access to this information, public water districts should establish and maintain a Web site with links to their audit report, district travel policies and travel expenses.
-
R5Notices of public hearings for rate increases should be clear and concise enabling customers to understand easily the reasons and justifications for such increases.