📋

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.

Amador County Grand Jury • 2013-2014

History of the Grand Jury The grand jury is an investigatory body created for the protection of society and the

24 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 10 findings

F1 Page 21

County department heads, especially for those departments not normally involved with construction, frequently lack construction experience and expertise, space needs and architectural design, and/or real property cost/benefit analysis skills.

F2 Page 21

There are no written policies and procedures in to direct staff in acquiring property either by lease or by purchase.

F3 Page 21

A set of procedures in place could have overridden the lack of experience of the negotiating team and BOS members.

F4 Page 21

With the increase of square footage over the HHS departmental needs, the County has sub-let the extra space to cover costs. While the Grand Jury feels all entities in HHS are a benefit to the community, not all entities are paying at the primary rate of the base lease.

F5 Page 21

The lease costs of $7,144,200 (over 5 years) were traded for $400,000 (immediate) in cash. (see letter, Appendix A)

F6 Page 21

No County official, auditor, or controller has the official assignment to review fiscal commitments of the County prior to adoption and/or approval by the BOS.

F7 Page 21

There is no policy to perform a financial cost-benefit analysis prior to BOS approval.

F8 Page 21

Members of the BOS relied on staff to develop needs, space configurations, terms of the leases, and did not perform any due diligence on their own.

F9 Page 21

There is no policy or procedure that addresses monies received from an individual or company as a gift, donation, grant or “valuable consideration” by the County.

F10 Page 21

The problems and complexities in negotiating leases of property are not limited to the County. A neighboring county has drafted policies and procedures to address these issues. (Appendix E)

Recommendations 4

R1
Page 21

The County should develop a policy and procedure that requires a cost-benefit analysis for all real estate transactions, lease or purchase, prior to starting negotiations.
R2
Page 21

The County should appoint a negotiating team that is professional and knowledgeable and should contain one person experienced in the specific areas and from outside County employment. ____________________________________________________________ { 17 }
R3
Page 22

BOS should present, at an open session, the documentation to support the decision to lease or purchase property including the specific costs and benefits of its choice. Terms agreed upon in closed session should be presented in open session to promote public awareness of financial commitments, prior to final adoption of any lease/purchase agreement.
R4
Page 22

All monies received either by gift, donation, grant or “valuable consideration” by the County over $10,000 should be formally acknowledged in a separate BOS action, with the source of the funds and the purpose or uses of the funds identified.