Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Audit Work Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Budget analysts propose three 2012 audits; public commenters warn of secrecy and potential political misuse
Summary
The Budget and Legislative Analyst office presented a proposed 2012 work plan recommending audits of DPH/HSA contracting, redevelopment asset transfers and public-safety realignment. Public commenters warned that supervisor-requested confidential analyses risk political misuse and biased findings.
A representative of the Budget and Legislative Analyst (BLA) office told the San Francisco Board of Supervisors that the office is proposing three audits for 2012 aimed at oversight of city contracting and major transitions.
The BLA representative said the three audits would require about 3,600 hours of audit work and that roughly 5,500 hours would be set aside for audit special projects and special requests. “We are recommending 3 audits,” the representative said, adding that the proposal fits within the office’s planned capacity.
The first proposed audit would evaluate professional-service contracting at the Department of Public Health (DPH) and the Human Services Agency (HSA), examining how the two departments decide whether services are contracted out or provided in-house, how they measure and report service levels, and what performance measures are in place. The BLA said prior reports and budget reviews had identified concerns in this area.
The second audit would examine the impact of transferring redevelopment agency assets and functions to the city after the redevelopment agency’s dissolution. The BLA recommended starting that review after the mayor’s budget proposal is released so auditors can analyze concrete staffing and fiscal allocations.
The third audit would study public-safety realignment under AB 109, with the BLA proposing to begin that work later in the year after at least a year of implementation. The office said it has continuing staffing and operational concerns for the sheriff’s department and the adult probation department as caseloads shift.
Peg Stevenson of the Controller’s Office said the Controller’s staff have been involved in transition work and can assist with audit design. “We certainly have a lot of staff that have been deeply enmeshed in this process in the last 8 weeks,” Stevenson said, and noted that some transition processes are likely to continue after the budget is finalized.
Public commenters offered a mix of support and criticism. Thomas Picariello said he agreed with the first two priorities but did not think a sheriff’s-department safety audit should be a high priority now; he also urged removing a provision that allows each supervisor to request up to 150 special-request hours, calling that a potential avenue for abuse.
Dr. Derek Kerr criticized a recent BLA survey of the costs of the Sunshine Ordinance as methodologically flawed and warned it could be used for political retaliation. “This one-sided survey was designed to overstate the costs,” Kerr said, adding that respondents had conflated costs for multiple open-government laws and that memory-based estimates tend to inflate numbers. Maria Ribero said emails suggested the BLA had been instructed to state only that it was conducting an analysis “for the board,” and she asked why a supervisor would try to keep such a request secret.
Douglas Yap urged a full audit of DPH and suggested reviewing a 2003 report on San Francisco General Hospital as background for new work; he also recommended audits of the Ethics Commission and the city’s whistleblower program.
After public comment the Board moved the item forward with the BLA’s recommendation; the motion carried "without objection." The BLA said it would begin the first audit immediately but cautioned that completion would likely come after the budget process.
