RFP Issued for Public Works Audit

[DowntownNow]

As reported in the Tulsa World today
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20090311_11_A8_Aforma972488&allcom=1#commentform

City is seeking proposals for review of Public Works by: BRIAN BARBER World Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
3/11/2009 4:13:10 AM

A formal request for proposals has been issued by the city for an independent performance review of the Public Works Department, Mayor Kathy Taylor said Tuesday.

Taylor said she and her staff are still figuring out where the money will come from to pay the estimated $250,000 cost, particularly with a $3.5 million general fund deficit projected.

"We are working diligently to identify a funding source, but in the meantime we need to get this process going," she said.

The Public Works divisions to be included in the review are public facilities maintenance, and operations and engineering services.

The request lays out a timeline that would have the effort start no later than June 1 and be completed by July 31. Proposals are due by March 20.

Taylor has maintained that she wants the review done before the city begins work this summer on the $452 million streets initiative that voters approved in November.

"I think this is an important step toward restoring the public's confidence in Public Works," she said.

The City Council passed a resolution last month to encourage the mayor to move forward with the review. Both the administration and the council have said it is especially needed in light of the fraud and bribery accusations in federal indictments against two former Public Works employees and four contractors.

Taylor also said Tuesday that the forensic audit that was launched in the wake of the criminal investigation is about to wrap up.

"I expect that next week we'll get the final report," she said, adding that a public presentation of the findings will be held, likely later this month.

The forensic audit is being conducted by KPMG and overseen by an external attorney with Hall Estill at a cost of $90,000, which is coming from the city Legal Department's budget.

During the council's committee meetings, Taylor gave a briefing on the status of the 49 current contracts that the city put on hold with firms connected to the indicted contractors.

Work on all but 17 of the contracted projects is completed. Payments are being withheld until the forensic audit is done.

The city has filed claims with surety bonding companies to get work restarted on construction projects and is exploring how to finish design and inspection work that was stopped.

I have one very big concern about this.  I fully support an audit of the Public Works Department after what just recently happened with the alleged bribery and fraud scandals.  I also support it in light of the fact that the public has been calling for such an audit since I can remember.  There has always been a dark, low hanging cloud over the way Public Works conducts its business and the value taxpayers receives from their efforts.

But my concern is this...instead of doing a top/down review of the entire Public Works Department, Mayor Taylor has structured the RFP to audit only the Engineering Services, Public Facilities Maintenance, and Environmental Operations Divisions within PW.  There is no mention of auditing the Policy Development or Development Services Divisions of PW.  IMO These are among the most critical Divisions that need auditing to ensure business goals, reviews and inspections are carried out properly and provide the most efficient reponses to PW tasks, their timely completion and ensure public safety. 

It would seem, based on what little I have been able to find regarding Public Work's separate divisions, that the Development Serives Division is responsible for carrying our reviews of the Engineering Services Division's designs and conducting inspections to ensure public safety is maintained as well as work quality.

The Policy Division, while I can find no information directly related on the internet, seems to be just that, a policy making division that most likely sets up the goals, the means by which to achieve them and most likely the way in which their successes or failures are reported.  I would assume that the Policy Division acts as the head division of the entire Department.  This is where top level management must be.

To not include all divisions of the Public Works Department is a mistake.  This will leave us spending near $250,000 and provided only limited feedback on which to make changes.  If the audit can not be conducted within two of the most important divisions, how are we to know and trust that everything that could have been done was done to prevent the fraud and bribery, that policies are in place to ensure work quality and public safety, and that the taxpayers are getting the best bang for their buck? 

At some level, and as a result of the recent and unfortunate Federal findings of Fraud and Bribery, someone must be held accountable and IMO it must be the heads of the departments where such actions took place.  At the very least, such actions could lead one to believe that those in upper management (and who have stated were particularly close to the parties indicted) are either duplicitious in these endeavours or are inept in managing and executing their duties when it comes to oversight.

The extent of which, or the level of responsiblity those in management should have been held accountable for, will not come out as a result of the way this audit is being put forward and that is a shame if this was the Mayor's and Council's best effort to regain and build the public trust in Public Works again.

[shadows]

Lets have an audit. Lets go to the land of OZ and hire an auditor.

Over 5,000 voters signed a petition to have an audit of public works and they called a Grand Jury in 1993 to look into the things the FBI are suppose to be looking into at present. The Jury recommended an in-house audit be done.  So the citizens elected auditor made an attempt in which he pointed out that over $7,000 dollars was overpaid one contractor.

When he started the audit the director of public works sent a memo that all request for any information was to be submitted to his office and none of the employees of PW was to be questioned by the city auditing department.  The legal department entered into it to protect the PW by citing that some parts of the title 11 of the flood ordinance did not apply in the accusations made by the citizens.  The city legal department took over the Grand Jury and refused to show them photos and tapes of the violations.  The legal department, that are paid by the citizens to protect them from bureaucracy control, became the fox guarding the henhouse door as is happening today in zoning and other matters.

Public Works got the council to pass a fee on the water bill for storm water management which they have converted to a property tax that is due even if you do not have a water meter.  With 130,000 water meters with a minimum of $4.79 fee that alone creates a problem with finding enough wet diplomas for recruits' to fill the $80,000 to $100,000 title jobs to tell the citizens how fine a job is being done. (They get sales tax, bond and budget money also).

The  city auditor or city put the "Grand Jury Project, Internal Auditing, September 1994," in an orange backed book form in which the first 11 pages are dedicated to the conditions of auditing without being able to see the source of information.  This should be available in the library.  The Grand Jury report follows his report which all are available under FOI act.

Don't be surprised, if in view of a federal investigation, several of the PW employees will retire or resign since a whistle blower has come forward.