📋
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.

Score: +1 (1/0/0)
El Dorado County Grand Jury • 2015-2016

Andscaping and Ighting

Published: June 02, 2016 11 pages
View PDF View Full Original

Findings 7 findings

F1
Oversight of the LLAD assessment process is lacking
F2
Assessments vary significantly from year to year with little or no rationale provided for the changes.
F3
The total fund balances are growing year over year. Some LLADs have fund balances of nearly 400% of expected expenses with no explanation as to why such large balances are warranted or necessary.
F4
CSD employees were not forthcoming with the grand jury paricularly when questioned about the fund balances and the characterization thereof - reserves versus surpluses.
F5
Allocation of CSD overhead among the LLADs does not have an ascertainable rationale. Budgeted expenses and allocated overhead costs are inconsistent and vary widely between LLADs. Tracking actual costs by LLAD is problematic.
F6
The SCI Engineer’s and Browning Reserve Group reports contain very obvious errors and/or misstatements that need to be examined by CSD staff with a critical eye toward detail.
F7
Fees collected by the CSD for usage of improvements within various LLADs are put into the CSD general fund and not used to offset LLAD expenses for maintaining those improvements.

Recommendations 7

Agency Responses 1

Government agencies' official responses to this report's findings and recommendations. Click on a response to see the structured breakdown.

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.

El Dorado Hills Community Services District Special District