![LINE<H2](15.gif"){kind=small}
Brian Sonntag is the Washington State Auditor from Tacoma. I heard him brag that other politicians are jealous of his large political base in Tacoma. The CPAs in the Tacoma State Auditor’s Office are aware that Tacoma City Employees do not have to keep track of mileage on their assigned city vehicles while other Washington Cities do. The reasons besides good management practices and good internal controls for keeping mileage is because use of the cars can be taxable. Brian Sonntag is now going to do performance audits on take home vehicles. Brian Sonntag also is running the campaign for a person running for the Tacoma City Council, David Curry who doesn’t seem to have a past. David Curry is a citizen recently appointed to the Tacoma Performance Audit Committee. To add insult to injury according to John Hathaway a former city council member, Kevin Phelps, is now going to assist Brian Sonntag in the performance audit. For the record I gathered 6,000 signatures for performance audits for Tacoma and had to file suit in court to get them started. Not one person now involved with performance audits backed me in my endeavor to get performance audits. With this setup just how independent are the audits going to be? Tacoma politicians spoil everything decent. Citizens sit back and do nothing except pay higher property taxes and blog on the News Tribune web site lamenting everything. 8-22-2007
Below are standards used by cities, states and federal agencies to determine fringe benefits that are taxable.
Q: Certain city employees are allowed to drive city-owned vehicles home. Is this a taxable fringe benefit?
A: A qualified non-personal use vehicle is excluded from an employee’s income and, therefore, not taxable. If an employee uses another city vehicle to commute, even if that employee is “on-call,” then use of the vehicle is taxable.
Q: What is a qualified non-personal use vehicle?
A: A qualified non-personal use vehicle is a vehicle that an employee would use minimally due to the design of the vehicle. These types of vehicles include:
clearly marked police and fire vehicles; unmarked vehicles used by law enforcement officers provided the officer is authorized to carry a firearm, execute search warrants and make arrests; an ambulance or hearse used for its specific purpose; any vehicle designed to carry cargo with a loaded gross vehicle weight over 14,000 pounds; delivery trucks with seating for the driver only, or driver plus a folding jump seat; a passenger bus for at least 20 people used for its specific purpose; school buses; and tractors and other special purpose farm vehicles.
I have almost begged the city council to do the following on all city vehicles especially now that the cost of fuel is skyrocketing. All to no avail.
Q: What records must the city employee keep?
A: The employee must keep a daily record of business miles by keeping a log containing the following: date; odometer reading (beginning and ending); destination; business purpose mileage; personal use mileage; and commuting mileage
The State Auditor, Brian Sonntag, who is running a campaign for a city councilman Curry, hasn’t found this as an audit exception for Tacoma. Now his office is going to do a performance audit on take home vehicles. I think we need an IRS audit. (-5-23-07)
The police got their new police headquarters. They are satisfied. Former Chief Brame was more interested in having citizens pay for the police to respond to false home alarms not implementing the performance audit. The citizen's be damned. Not one officer has said "Thank You". I also helped them get a new fingerprint system. No "Thank You". I also found the police had been over charged over a million and a half dollars by Equipment Rental. No "Thank You" We owe them. Now a thank you is 5 years too late. I did have a dog and cat accidentally die within two weeks of each other last summer.(1-17-06)
The News Tribune
There were enough superlatives directed at the Tacoma Fire Department Tuesday to make even veteran firefighters blush. But as a new performance audit makes clear, that doesn't mean there isn't room for improvement. Auditors from Carroll Buracker & Associates Inc. - the same firm that audited the Tacoma Police Department last year - presented their findings to the Tacoma City Council. The auditing team, which praised TFD as one of the nation's best fire departments, cited numerous TFD strengths, including the department's strong recruitment and training efforts, mobile data terminals, computer-based mapping system and high-quality personnel. But the auditors also made 48 recommendations to improve department efficiency, including reducing city fire stations from 16 to 14 and relocating five others. Auditors said the moves would reduce response times and increase fire and emergency service to parts of the city. The changes would be costly; one new fire station would cost about $2.5 million. Given the attachment of many residents to their neighborhood stations, such changes also would be controversial. One notable recommendation calls for the city to negotiate with the Port of Tacoma to help fund fire-protection service in the Tideflats, including a fireboat and a full-time station. This move is long overdue. Such funding arrangements are common in large port cities, the report notes, and the Port of Tacoma's plans for major expansion will only increase the need for port-related fire protection. The port needs to be a funding partner. Unless sufficient funding can be provided, the auditors recommend mothballing the city's high-tech fireboat and relying on a smaller rigid-hull, inflatable craft that can respond more quickly to emergencies on the waterfront. The report also recommends that the department replace private ambulance companies by taking patients with non-life-threatening injuries to the hospital. This suggestion should be regarded skeptically. The audit claims replacing private ambulances would guarantee a uniform level of medical service throughout the city and provide the department up to $1.9 million a year in revenue. But a stronger case must be made that existing private ambulance service isn't adequate. Generating money for the department isn't sufficient reason. If all the recommendations in the report were carried out, the department would end up with 47 fewer firefighter positions as well as fewer stations. Among other things, the report says the department has too many engines, ladder trucks and ambulances. The report also recommends a more effective shift schedule than the one the department has used since 1983, and says the department should be using civilian fire dispatchers instead of commissioned captains and lieutenants. None of those efficiency moves would sit well with the firefighters union, which can be expected to push strongly for taking over private ambulance service in order to preserve firefighter jobs. Tacoma's new police chief, David Brame, has committed himself to carrying out the recommendations of Buracker's police audit wherever feasible. Fire Chief Eileen Lewis and her boss, City Manager Ray Corpuz, should show similar resolve. Tacomans can be pleased at the audit's recognition of the fire department's overall quality. But they should also expect the city to follow through with changes that will give citizens better fire service for their money. © The News Tribune 05/09/2002
Martha Modeen; The News Tribune
After 10 months of talks, the City of Tacoma and the city's police officers' union begin meeting with a state mediator today.
The 341 members of Local 6 have been working without a contract since Jan. 1, when the union's two-year agreement expired. Local 6 represents Tacoma's patrol officers, detectives and sergeants.
Roughly 12 of 32 contract items still need to be resolved, said Pat Frantz, Local 6 president.
A city official, however, characterized labor talks as largely fruitless so far.
"The whole contract is open," said Phil Knudsen, Tacoma's human resources manager. "We've made very little progress. That's why we have the mediation process."
Today's negotiations come just two weeks after the release of a performance audit of the police department. The timing of the report could exert added pressure on talks.
The consultant doled out criticism of both the city and the union, noting that "relations between Local 6 and the city have been contentious and adversarial." Knudsen acknowledged the topics addressed in the report likely would be discussed.
Representatives from both sides will meet at an undisclosed location with Ken Letsch, a mediator with the state Public Employees Relations Commission. Both the union and the city representatives declined to discuss what is stalling negotiations, saying to do so would violate ground rules both sides have agreed to.
The City Council will receive updates on talks in closed-door meetings.
In the recent police audit, Carroll Buracker, former chief of the Fairfax County Police Department in Virginia, suggested that Local 6 successfully has gained ground in scheduling and disciplinary matters, sometimes to the detriment of the department or the city. That's a charge Frantz disputes.
"The union doesn't get things without the city signing off on them," Frantz said.
Buracker also wrote that until recently Local 6 "seemed better prepared than management to enter into contract negotiations."
"There are a number of provisions in the (union's labor) agreement which make it difficult to manage the department effectively and efficiently," Buracker wrote.
For example, Buracker said police are scheduled to work criminal investigations according to what's stipulated in the union contract rather than when crimes are occurring. Officers in criminal investigations work from 8 a.m to 4 p.m. or 9 a.m.to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, not at night or during weekends when prostitution, drug dealing, assaults and robberies occur.
Buracker also faulted the department's performance review system set forth under the union's contract. Performance reviews only can be used to counsel employees on strengths and weaknesses and future training and goals, rather than to determine assignments and promotions.
"This is contrary to 'best practices' police management," he wrote. "It is as if a commissioned officer's past performance track record simply just doesn't exist."
Frantz called the consultant's report "skewed."
"The union doesn't have $84,000 to put their side of (the issue) out right now," he said.
Meanwhile, on a different front, Local 6 members are unhappy with last month's failure of a $32 million capital bond measure that would have allocated $25 million for a new police headquarters.
Tacoma's headquarters were described by the consultant as the most substandard he's seen in the nation. More than 200 police employees continue to work at a former Washington State Patrol building near South 38th Street that was designed for about 50 employees.
The lack of adequate headquarters has lowered morale and hinders potential crime-solving communications among officers, police said.
In months to come, Local 6 members will urge city officials to make a new police headquarters a priority, Frantz said. "We're no closer now than we were eight years ago," Frantz said of a new headquarters.
Council members also said they want new police facilities, but last week decided to wait until February to try again for a bond measure to allow more time for planning.
- - -* Staff writer Martha Modeen covers Tacoma. Reach her at 253-597-8646 or martha.modeen@mail.tribnet.com
Turn back two pages for a shocking read
It'll never show up on any bestseller lists, but Tacoma taxpayers should find the contents of the two preceding pages compelling reading. It's an outrageous story of mismanage-ment, inefficiency and waste in the Tacoma Police Department.
On today's Insight and Perspectives pages, we publish key portions of an independent performance audit that shows the department badly needs major changes to deliver the kind of service Tacoma residents deserve and expect.
The audit, performed by a nationally recognized law-enforcement consulting firm, publicly blows the whistle on a number of department practices that Tacoma's citizens and elected leaders simply should not tolerate.
For example, the consultants said they knew of no other police department in the nation that has the kind of patrol work schedule that gives Tacoma "Fat Thursday." It's called "Fat Thursday" because every officer on duty is scheduled to work on Thursday, a low-crime day, while only half the force works on weekends when crime is highest. This absurd schedule has everything to do with accomodating the police union and nothing to do with fighting crime and protecting the public.
In a similar vein, the audit reveals that Tacoma's police detectives work only regular daytime hours Monday through Friday, instead of being scheduled to rotate through nights and weekends when serious crimes most often occur. The result is either delayed investigations or unnecessary overtime.
There's more. Tacoma's police budget has increased by $20 million over the past six years - but the percentage of "cleared" cases of serious crime has fallen. Tacoma easily leads its West Coast peer cities in the number of sworn officers per 1,000 residents, yet the city has the sixth-highest crime rate among 34 peer cities nationally.
This page editorialized at length on the audit's findings last Sunday. This time we invite our readers to read the most disturbing parts of the audit's executive summary for themselves - and to join us in calling for a careful but thorough overhaul of the department's management and practices. 6/24/01
It's troubling enough that the City of Tacoma and the Tacoma Police Union have been negotiating for the last 10 months without settling on a new contractÊ- and that a state mediator has been called in to help.
That fact alone would seem to call for some explanation. Yet city and union officials have mutually agreed not to provide the public with any information at all about what has led to the impasse, not even a general description of the issues at stake.
But this blackout is especially disturbing in light of the recent performance audit of the Tacoma Police Department. The audit, conducted by respected former police chief Carroll Buracker, concluded that the department was rife with inefficiencies - some of them rooted in past union contracts.
Take "Fat Thursday," for example. Thursdays have acquired this nickname within the department because the contract mandates 10-hour shifts, four days a week, for all patrol officers. The days off are either Friday, Saturday and Sunday, or Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, which means that every patrol officer in the force normally works every Thursday.
But the crime rate spikes on weekends, not Thursdays, so deployment doesn't reflect the city's public safety needs.
Similarly, the contract mandates 8 a.m.-to-4 p.m. or 9 a.m.-to-5 p.m. shifts, Monday through Friday, for detectives. This means the city must often must pay expensive overtime - on top of an already generous pay scale - when investigative work has to be done at night or on weekends.
Such disparities between needs and scheduling contribute to the higher-than-average cost of police protection in Tacoma - and perhaps to the department's lower-than-average rate of clearing crimes.
None of this reflects on the skills or professionalism of individual officers; the inefficiencies Buracker identified are institutional in nature. To a large extent, the Tacoma Police Department's disappointing bang-for-the-buck can be attributed to labor agreements that seem geared more to perquisites than public safety.
That's why the shape of the next contract is the public's business, not a private affair between city and union officials. Tacoma wound up with arrangements like "Fat Thursday" because unwise concessions were made behind closed doors, then presented as done deals to a compliant City Council. It isn't "bargaining in the media" to simply explain what is on the table; many labor contracts are successfully negotiated without making state secrets of the contested issues.
Given the impasse and the findings in Buracker's audit, it's wrong to deny ordinary Tacomans any information about what is going on in these talks.
PHYLLIS A. BARRETT
vs.
CITY OF TACOMA, a first class city; BRIAN EBERSOLE, Mayor; RAY CORPUZ, City Manager; Robin Jenkinson, City Attorney; ; RICK ROSENBLATT, City Clerk; TACOMA CITY COUNCIL
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________MOTION TO VACATE 5 April 2000 DECISION AND ORDER FOR A VISITING JUDGE
Plaintiff had filed a mandamus action in Pierce County Court to force the defendants to put the performance audit issue on the ballot. A hearing for dismissal of plaintiff’s case was scheduled for April 5, 2000. Before the 5 April 2000 hearing the plaintiff had attempted to ascertain which visiting judge would be assigned her case, but, it wasn’t until the day of the hearing plaintiff learned Judge Karen Conoley, Kitsap County, was the judge assigned the case.
Judge Conoley ruled for the defendants, yet, she asked no questions, made no findings of fact nor made no conclusions of law.
The plaintiff has since learned Judge Conoley is married to Judge Arthur Verharen, Pierce County Superior Court. Judge Verharen and other Pierce County Superior Court Judges oppose performance audits for the Pierce County Courts. Sharon Hjelseth, visiting judge coordinator for Pierce County Court confirmed Judge Verharen recused himself from her case. It follows if Judge Verharen had a conflict of interest in this case then his wife, Judge Conoley, had a conflict of interest.
Ethically Judge Conoley should have made public her relationship with Judge Verharen. She was a visiting judge in name only.
WHEREFORE plaintiff requests Judge Conoley’s decision be vacated. She further requests this case be remanded to the visiting judge coordinator, Sharon Hjelseth, so a truly impartial judge who has no conflict of interest nor appearance of conflict of interest can hear this case.
Respectfully submitted,
Phyllis A. Barrett
Tacoma, WA 98405
(4-14-00)PHYLLIS A. BARRETT
vs.
CITY OF TACOMA, a first class city; BRIAN EBERSOLE, ) Mayor; RAY CORPUZ, City Manager; Robin Jenkinson, City Attorney; ; RICK ROSENBLATT, City Clerk; TACOMA CITY COUNCIL
Defendants.
Memorandum in Support for Motion for Reconsideration
The plaintiff is requesting a Motion for Reconsideration under Superior Court Civil Rule 59 (a)(4)(7)(8)(9).
Exhibit 1 is Judge Karen Conoley’s decision dated April 5, 2000 in which she ruled for the defendants in their Motion to Dismiss.
In 1996 and 1997 the petitioner gathered almost 6,000 signatures on petitions to require performance audits for all Tacoma City Agencies, Departments and Programs. Plaintiff filed the petitions with the City Clerk in May, June and July 1997. Tacoma City Charter Section 2.19
At the April 5, 2000 hearing the defendant’s attorney repeatedly asserted the Tacoma City Clerk, Rick Rosenbladt, found the petitioner’s signatures sufficient and transmitted his report on July 15, 1997 to the Tacoma City Council and Mayor. The defendants further averred they took final action within thirty days from July 15, 1997 by passing an ordinance to do performance audits on August 12, 1997
However, after the April 5 hearing the plaintiff was able to obtain the letter written by the city clerk, Rick Rosenbladt to the “Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council” dated 9 July 1997 “Mandatory Performance Audit” Petitions
The council had 30 days from July 9, 1997 not July 15, 1997 to take final action. The final action should have been taken by August 8, 1997. Yet, the defendants took no final action until four days (12 Aug 97) after the deadline set forth by the city charter. (Exhibit 4)
The defendants should have submitted the issue of performance audits to the electorate back in 1997. The defendants have been out of compliance with the city charter since 1997.
Plaintiff,
)vs.
CITY OF TACOMA, a first class city; BRIAN EBERSOLE, ) Mayor; RAY CORPUZ, City Manager; Robin Jenkinson, City Attorney; ; RICK ROSENBLATT, City Clerk; TACOMA CITY COUNCILDefendants.
PLAINTIFF’S REPLY TO DEFENDANT’S REPLY TO PETITIONER’S MOTION TO DISMISS
For almost two years the plaintiff begged the defendants to do performance audits. Plaintiff's pleas fell on deaf ears, therefore, she gathered almost 6,000 signatures on petitions for performance audits.
Plaintiff submitted these signatures to the Tacoma City Clerk, Rick Rosenbladt on May 30, June 30 and July 7, 1997. Mr. Rosenbladt sent the signatures to the Pierce County Auditor Ms. Cathy Pearsall-Stipek
On July 7, 1997, the Pierce County Auditor sent a letter to Mr. Rosenbladt,
Section 2.20 of the Initiative and Referendum of the City Charter states
From July 7, 1997, the city council had 30 days- til 6 August 1997- to take final action on plaintiff’s petition. The defendants took no final action on plaintiff’s petition therefore by August 6, 1997 the performance audit issue should have been put on the ballot for the citizens to vote on.
To try to circumvent the voters, the city council on July 29,1997 had the first reading of their ordinance for performance audits,
but, the city council did not vote, take final action, on the ordinance until August 12, 1997 which was six days after the thirty day statute of limitations ran out. The ordinance was not published until 14 August 1997.
The defendants never intended to do performance audits. They did not appoint a performance audit committee. They did not allocate any funds in the budget to pay for performance audits. This was a feeble attempt by the defendants to bypass the initiative process.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief as follows.
1. At the next general election the defendants will put on as a ballot measure the question: Shall the Council provide for mandatory performance audits be conducted of the City on its various agencies, departments and programs every three years by an independent audit firm who is in no way connected with the City Government. Any such audit shall be filed with the City Council and shall be open to the public.
2. For costs.
3. For attorney fees and
4. For any other relief both in law and in equity that plaintiff may be entitled to.
Caution if you have heart medication please have it ready should you chose to proceed. Below are samples of Work Order Charges Reports compiled by Equipment Rental. The reports show the maintenance performed on Tacoma owned vehicles by Equipment Rental. These pages represent the 470 pages of repair reports that I reviewed. The reports cover repairs made from August 99 to October 99.
After conducting a financial audit the state auditor's office declared, "There were no findings related to Equipment Rental of Fleet Services operations."
Equipment Rental, a city agency run by city employees, charged the Tacoma Police Department $214.39 to retrieve keys locked in a patrol car and to change the patrol car battery. Having no unit costs for lube, oil and filter the taxpayers through the Tacoma Police Department paid $56.31, $96.38 and larger amounts for the same work.
The Tacoma Police Department paid $324.83 for a free battery
Not to be out done the Health Department, a Pierce County Agency paid Equipment Rental $196.60 to fix a flat tire, $116.16 for a lube and oil job, and $30.50 for an emission test. An emission test in the community at that time cost $12.00. The Health Department, also, paid Equipment Rental $242.70 to change a flat tire and $91.50 to check the rear brakes for a grand total of $334.41
Last, but, not least we have Planning and Development Services which paid $91.54 for a lube, oil and filter job. Two different cars had an emission test. For one car it cost $33.50 and for the other car it cost $45.20. An emission test at that time would have only cost $12.00 if it had been done in the community.
Equipment Rental, a Tacoma "City Agency run by Tacoma employees is the brain child of Ray Corpuz, the Tacoma City manager. The same city manager who doesn't want to have performance audits because he claims the audits are too costly. Never mind we pay $66.50 an hour for financial audits which do not test the reasonableness of purchases, charges to city agencies. (28 Jan 2000)
I came to Tacoma vowing never to get involved again. See what a child will do for you. Taking on the feds, which I did, is like dealing with a den of thieves. Maybe that is why Tacoma felt so familiar. Tacoma has it's own den of thieves. Below is an example of one of my projects. Now you know why I never wanted to go into a court room again. Attorneys and judges do not want the public to know how easy law can be. Just take out the therefores, thous, pay attentions to the ors and ands and go to to the law to find the elements of proof for your case. What is even more telling about our legal system is the judges refused to grant me attorney fees, but, they gave them to Mary Cazales. They used the arguments in my brief to justify giving Mary $30,000 in legal fees. (See the case below) After my case was "completed" members of a large law firm in Michigan asked for a copy of my briefs. (Apparently, my case was cited in the US Supreme Court.) All I charged them was photocopy fees. I never got paid! The story goes on, but, I won't bore you with the
details.
I want this issue, performance audits, to be put before the voters and let them chose if they want performance audits. I have some knowledge of the Pierce County Superior Court.
Anyone have any helpful hints? (16 December 1999)
I have a few questions about Equipment Rental. I forget people don't have my background so I'll first explain terms. Suppose you have a son named Joel. You tell Joey you will buy him his first car for $18,000. In accounting terms the car is considered an asset. You KNOW after 6 years Joey will need to buy a new car. You don't want Joey to get in debt for a new car in 6 years so you plan ahead. Each year for the next 6 years Joey pays you $3,000. You put $3,000 in a savings account. When Joey needs a new car in 6 years he will have $18,000. Not only that, but, since you are such a good parent you have Joey pay you $180 each year for your time and effort. $180. is 8% of the $3,000 Joey pays you each year. Equipment Rental calls the 8% interest. I call the 8% profit. Now, IRS comes along and says you owe us taxes on $3,180. But, you say wait a minute the $3,000 is money I am putting aside to purchase a new car. IRS allows you to call that $3,000 a depreciation expense. You keep track of the depreciation expense in the accumulated depreciation account.
Equipment Rental buys patrol vehicles. The Tacoma Police Department leases the patrol vehicles. The Equipment Rental Depreciation Schedule lists the asset name (eg radios, cars etc.), the cost of the asset, any depreciation expense paid by the police for the asset for the current year and it lists the accumulated depreciation for the asset. Once an asset is fully depreciated then it is considered no longer useful to the company and a new asset is purchased.
When I reviewed a similar schedule for the Tacoma Police squad cars. I noticed the police paid twice and sometimes three times as much as Equipment Rental originally paid for the squad cars. When I made this discovery Equipment Rental decided they had a computer
"error" and refunded almost one million dollars to the police. (I'll bet there was a lot of prozac sold that week.) The city manager, the city council, the city manager, Equipment Rental and the police did not "discover" the error. I had to find it. Yet, last week the Tacoma City Council and mayor voted not to have performance audits because the city manager feels it is more cost effective to have city agencies audit themselves!
The Tacoma News Tribune continues to tell readers the city received a seven million dollar one time windfall. That is how Tacoma balanced the budget for this biennium. So I asked the city where they got that windfall. Below is the response
It is important to note that $5,300,000 comes from Equipment Rental
Below is a Draft Comparative Balance Sheet for Equipment Rental. Current Asset is similar to the money in your check book. Equipment Rental keeps track of the repairs they make on the rental equipment in Current Asset. The Restricted Assets Account is similar to a savings account. That is the account where Equipment Rental keeps the money it is going to use to purchase equipment that has been depreciated. Property, Plant and Equipment are the assets owned by Equipment Rental used by them to do business.
Equipment Leased to Others are the cars, radio computers shown in the depreciation schedule.
What is interesting about this balance sheet is in 1998 the Current Asset was in the hole for ($2,0181,521). Yet, in September 1999 the Current Asset Account had $850,158. That is because Equipment Rental took $3,000,000 from the Restricted Asset Account to bail out its equipment repairs operation.
If you look at Equipment Leased to Others it has $28,738,456 in equipment. Yet, $20,071,845 of the equipment is depreciated and needs to be replaced. But, Equipment Rental only has $3,730,231 set aside in the Restrict Asset Account to replace $20,071,845 worth of equipment. Not only that, but, remember on 29 November 1999, Peter Luttropp told me the $5,300,000 one time revenue came from Equipment Rental. WHERE IN EQUIPMENT RENTAL?
Tacoma City Manager Ray Corpuz said last week Brian Sonntag's State Auditor's Office is independent. Brian Sonntag is from Tacoma. He is running for state auditor again.
If you look at the bottom of the letter a copy was sent to the Washington State Auditor's Office. I never contacted the Washington State Auditor's Office to tell them of my inquiries. Stay tuned. I have asked the Wa State Auditor's office for a copy of the audit they last did on Equipment Rental. Today Robert, state auditor's office, paged me. He said they last did an audit in 1998. But, he wouldn't put that in writing. Nor would he put in writing they found NO exceptions! He is waiting for word from his boss as to what he can put in writing. Again, why did Equipment Rental send the state auditor's office a copy of their response to me
Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean people aren't out to get you. Last time I was looking at Equipment Rental coincidentally there was a murder attempt on my daughter. Coincidentally the Tacoma Police Department would not even take the jacket of the bullet out of the back window of her car. Of course the Tacoma News Tribune kept the attempt quiet. McClatchy looked the other way also. (7 December 1999)
I will update you on the $50 per diem the city council and mayor claim for work HERE in Tacoma. The claims range mainly from April 98 to May 99. Our councilwomen claimed NO per diem. Dave DeForrest claimed $50 to attend ONE meeting. Councilmen Baarsma and Kirby claimed per diem
mostly for the days they went to committee meetings. They claimed $1,400 and $2,450
respectively. But, now for the big hitters. Councilmen Crowley claimed $5,550 and
Miller claimed $9,149. Mayor Ebersole claimed $9,600 and our king of per diem Councilman Phelps claimed $9,900. Why did they claim per diem? Councilmen Crowley, Miller, Phelps and Mayor Ebersole claimed per diem to meet with each other,to meet with city staff, to go to neighborhood council meetings, to go to city club meetings, to meet citizens, to meet Gov. Locke in Tacoma etc.! Councilman Phelps additionally claimed $50 per month for “Coffee with Kevin”. The mayor who is paid to represent the city at ceremonial functions claimed $50 per diem to attend ceremonial duties in the Proctor District AND downtown Tacoma. These folks even claimed $50 per diem when they spoke with the Tacoma News Tribune.
I asked the TNT to only interview the mayor and council on Tuesdays to save the taxpayers a few $50. On 30 April 99, the city manager brought the mayor to Stanley and Seafort’s.
Corpuz paid for his lunch AND for the mayor’s lunch. Corpuz claimed the mileage and $30.53 for the TWO lunches as EXPENSES on his expense account. The mayor claimed $50 for this same day, for among other things to attend a MEETING WITH RAY CORPUZ. There were
$38,099 worth of per diem claims since April 98.
(14 July 99)
In December 1998 Tacoma City Manager, Ray Corpuz, announced Tacoma would have a performance
audit committee. As of July 99 no one has been selected to be on the committee. Since Corpuz is responsible for Tacoma's day to day operation could he be dragging his heels? Below is a letter Corpuz sent me about the "progress" of performance audits.
The library has a board that directed it do performance audits. Corpuz had nothing to do the implementation of the library performance audit. For whatever reason, the Tacoma News Tribune(TNT) does not believe Tacoma should have performance audits. Do they have reason to fear performance audits for Tacoma?
Yet, the
TNT endorses performance audits for Pierce county. Pierce County's performance audit found it was NOT cost effective to bring county cars home. At the same time, Corpuz purchased $40,000 FULL SIZED patrol cars to add to the police fleet so each police officer has a patrol car to bring home.
There are NO controls to ensure the police cars are NOT used for extracurricular activities. Not only that, but, the police "lease" the cars from another city agency, Fleet Management. The "profit" is used by Corpuz to fund pet projects.(5 July 99)
Bruce Mann (University of Pudget Sound) and his associates did An Assigned Vehicle Program: Assessment of the Benefits and Costs on bringing Tacoma Police Department cars home.
I have some questions as to the accuracy of the $24,000+ study. The auditor allowed the Tacoma Police Department to pick which officer?s vehicles would be studied rather than using a random sampling table. A listing of the residences of most of the TPD officers show some live in Eatonville, Kent, Fox Island, Buckley, Ellensberg etc., yet, the TPD only picked officers who lived in Gig Harbor and Spanaway for this study.
Fleet management advised the auditors that “...on average patrol vehicles are removed from the patrol fleet at 89,000 miles.” The auditor than calculated “Thus the average pool patrol vehicle remains in service for four years.”... “The average assigned vehicle would remain in service for 7.25 years.” ...”For accounting and analytical convenience an eight year program life-cycle was adopted.” I would suggest 7.25 should be rounded down to 7 not up to 8. A memo from the police department shows TPD vehicles are retired after 3 and 6 years regardless of mileage.
I combined two listings I obtained from Fleet Management of vehicles they sold, the mileage at sale and the year sold. The mean and mode mileage averages are well below 89,000. Only 12 % of the vehicles had mileage 89,000 or above.
The pool vehicles studied didn’t even remotely match the assigned vehicles. They compared one year old cars versus three year old cars. The makes and models weren’t even the same.
This independent auditor in Mar 97 wrote a paper with Tacoma Councilman Baarsma on “The efficacy of an Assigned Vehicle Program for Reducing Crime: A cost-Benefit Decision." The study was completed May 98.
With all the erroneous figures they still couldn’t prove it was cost effective to bring the cars out of Tacoma and it is questionable if it is cost effective to bring cars home in Tacoma.
Wonder why the newspaper clamored for the Pierce County performance audit yet the are silent on this study? Wonder why the News Tribune isn’t clamoring for performance audits by truly independent auditors for Tacoma? Are they afraid all the free advertising dollars given to Tacoma will go down the tubes? Why is everyone afraid of a truly independent audit? What are they hiding?(6 AUG 98)
Tacoma has finally agreed it needs to do performance audits, but, it wants to gather all the data and give it to the auditors. This is the same city that allows vendors to keep city purchasing documentation then tells citizens that since the vendor has kept the documentation the citizen can't see it. In one case, the Tacoma Police Department can't account for the disposition of 427 hand guns nor does it want to explain. This is the city which denied release of criminal documentation stating the suspects were juvenile suspects. Yet, one juvenile suspect was born in l943 and another juvenile suspect was born in l954. This is the city who gives non-profits eg Safe Streets money to sub contract out services. The non-profits then tell citizens they don't have a right to see what services have been contracted out or to whom the sub contracts have been given. This is the city that alleges documents don't exist and then later ma gically the documents appear. (29 Mar 98)
The Tacoma City Council is amazed businesses want to move. Their magic answer-spend more money. Give the mayor a raise.
We have a city that doesn’t do annual performance evaluations of 70 % of it’s employees. Doesn’t do physical inventories on items valued under $5,000 even if the items are considered small, but, attractive e.g. hand guns.
The county just spent $250,000 for a performance audit and received in return ideas on how to save $6 to $10 million dollars of taxpayer money. Tacoma has an ordinance that requires performance audits. The recommendation for performance audits is for the city to do a performance audit of itself!
The city has business entrepreneurs such as pull tab operators. The city admits they are making the operators pay $2 million in taxes because the city needs the money not because the taxes benefit the businesses.
The city has business people
who have established Antique Row. Yet, outside business interests come to the are. They want the Antique Row businesses to move. The mayor and city council back the newcomer.
The city has a newspaper that doesn’t print the news nor demand
accountability from the city. People who speak at the city council meetings are interrupted, ignored or arrested.
This city’s strategy to get grant money because of high crime is back firing. People/companies are voting with their feet(29 Mar 98)
(This letter was slightly altered when I spoke before the Tacoma City Council on 24 March 98.) Their (Tacoma Police Department) justification for the purchase (of 23 new police vehicles)-"The new vehicles will replace vehicles that are either no longer operable or are no longer economically feasible to repair and maintain.". Yet, the police have not determined which ten police vehicles are to be replaced. In other words they are buying a product and then developing a need for the product.How did they know to purchase ten vehicles?
Four of the vehicles are to replace four totaled vehicles. One has to ask: 1. Were the vehicles totaled while the officers were on duty or driving them home?
2. How were the vehicles totaled? 3. If the officer who totaled the vehicle was the cause of the accident was he/she held financially responsible for wrecking the vehicle?
I have asked for a copy of the take home vehicle study to determine how cost effective it is to bring police vehicles home to Fox Island, Bremerton etc.. Ms. Carlson,the police legal advisor, told me the study will be available in April 98. (The start of the study was delayed because the police vehicles sat at the dump because the police couldn't equip them.) Wouldn't it make more sense, economically, to delay the purchase a couple weeks until the take home vehicle study is released to see what the auditors recommend? It is quite possible the auditors will recommend that the cars that are now
going out of the city be put back into use for all shifts. By delaying the purchase a couple weeks the city could possibly save itself almost one half million dollars. We do have the highest property taxes in the state. I can guarantee you if you keep on raising taxes instead of finding ways to economize more and more businesses and people will leave Tacoma.
(Postscript. Ironically two and one half hours after I e-mailed this letter to the Tribune the Tacoma Police Department got into a high speed chase on I-5 along with 14 other police cars from other areas. The two Tacoma police vehicles overshot the suspect, tried to turn around in a median and totaled two more police cars. Why were the officers on I-5 and what was the rush since 14 other vehicles were in the
chase?) (The city council approved the almost half million dollar purchase.)(29 Mar 98)
Termination for Public Convenience
The County may terminate the contract in whole or in part whenever the County determines, in its sole discretion, that such termination is in the interests of the County.
I wonder if this part of the auditor's contract caused them to agree with Sutherland and rewrite some of their findings?? Ms Phyllis A. Barrett
Tacoma, WA 9840-
Dear Ms. Barrett,
Thank you for your letter of September 29 about performance audits in Pierce County. I am pleased to enclose the documentation that you requested. The enclosures are:
The audits are being conducted by KPMG Peat Marwick, a "Big Six" accounting firm. The method of selecting KPMG is discussed at length in the enclosed minutes of the Performance Audit Committee, particularly the memo of June 25, l997.
You ask about the time frame for conducting the audits and the areas to be audited. The general approach is shown in the Request for Proposals (especially pages 4-5) and KPMG's proposal (especially section l, Technical Proposal). KPMG is now conducting the Phase I audit. It is a comprehensive review of county operations covering all departments except two federally-funded agencies (Human Services and Community Development); however, the number of staff per manager and layers of management are being analyzed in all agencies. The Phase I report, scheduled to be completed in February l998, will include substantive recommendations to improve county government. That report will also identify specialized audit topics for Phase II, which will be conducted between February l998 and June l999. The two year audit cycle will then begin again.
Your letter suggests performance audits of various Pierce County departments. All of the departments that you name are currently being audited in Phase I. Depending on the KPMG findings, further work on those agencies may be conducted in Phase II. You letter refers to a decision not to comply with the Charter amendment. I am not aware of such a decision and believe that the County is complying with the Charter amendment.
I congratulate you on convincing the Tacoma City Council to adopt a performance audit ordinance. It will be interesting to see how the City implements the ordinance. As part of the Pierce County audit, KPMG hopes to develop bench marking information to compare efficiency of operations in Pierce County, City of Tacoma, and several other jurisdictions.
Please feel free to contact me if you need more information or wish to discuss performance audit issues. My office number is 798-4927. If you want to talk with the KPMG auditors, they also work out of this office and may be reached at 798-2172.
Yours sincerely,
Matthew R. Temmel
Performance Audit Coordinator
Enclosures
Wendell Brown
Doug Sutherland
The proposal should develop at least two of these suggestions for performance audits or develop at least two other cross cutting topics.
The results from Phase I work would form the basis for recommendations for more specific detailed performance audits in Phase II.
Phase II
This phase shall consist of specific performance audits which are undertaken as a result of the Phase I analysis. These specific performance audits shall address, in depth, programs, departments, activities, functions, and processes as selected by the Performance Audit committee.
12.Termination for Public Convenience
The County may terminate the contract in whole or in part whenever the County determines, in its sole discretion, that such termination is in the interests of the County....
My Comment
My child at 14 unwittingly became involved with a young man aged l8, who I believe wanted to kill me for the inheritance. (I believe she was being blackmailed to keep me alive. One letter I found stated," I'm not turning and shivering in fear, I don't have to worry about whose going to be coming into my house, late at night, with a nine. I don't have to cringe in fear waiting for him to come. Living in fear, always wondering is today the day?, ...") The local enforcement community and judiciary have been totally unresponsive to my plight and I believe aggregated the situation.
I found another letter my child wrote,"...only when you see me standing over you with a knife will you see through my eyes the girls you have raped and the people you have killed..."Both city and county police refused to accept that document, also.. The young man whom I believe she was alluding to in the letters has now been arrested for statutory rape and trafficking in pornography. He is now awaiting sentencing.
DSHS sent me a letter stating they believed my daughter was involved in satanic activity. (Two black cats of ours are missing and a third was taken from our living room. Before my mother died she had her wedding and engagement rings made into a cross. The cross is also missing, but, the local police would not allow me to file a theft report. It had to be reported as "lost")The Tacoma Police Department and the City Assistant Prosecuting Attorney are another story all together. My daughter had a picture of three figures dressed in gothic garb(cloaks with hoods over their heads) standing over a woman on an altar. One figure had a knife and another man with leotards was in front of her with a knife. A picture similar in time frame was used as a screen saver in the county clerk's office. A county clerk employee on his own? initiative had telephone records sealed that revealed this young man had called my house in violation an anti-harassment order I had against him. Ted Rutt, the Court Clerk, explained the telephone company didn't want me to have the records. Unbeknownst to Mr. Rutt I had called the telephone company prior to my visit to him. They had faxed me a copy of the telephone records. I had the records in my lap when he stated it was the telephone company who didn't want me to have the records. Why Commissioner Orlando signed the order is a mystery since their was no motion filed to seal the record, the order didn't reflect who presented it etc. ./P>
It was a deputy county prosecuting attorney who didn't have enough money to prosecute for 23 stolen and forged checks, a stolen gun, a stolen automobile, violations of a diversion program, and under the Becca Bill for my child, but, did have enough money to sue me under the Becca Bill for my child, who was a runaway, not being in school after I had put her in school four times.(I acted as my own attorney and won the case.) It was an assistant county prosecutor, Chris Quinn-Brintall, who wanted me to forfeit all my rights as a parent. It was a county sub contractor who wanted my child to emancipate herself when she turned l6. It was the assistant deputy prosecutor who while addressing the court approached my daughter and declared, "She is the only one who knows what happened and she's not talking. It was a deputy prosecuting attorney who never notified me of any of my child's court hearings.
It is a deputy county prosecutor, Al Rose, who knows the young man mentioned above was violating his bail by "hanging out" at Wilson High School, set up three bail bond hearings, but, Mr.Rose never appeared at the hearings. It is Judge Steiner who advised the young man at supposedly his sentencing hearing that the young man is violating his bail by "hanging out" at Wilson High School and not to do it again. It was Judge Chushcoff who welcomed a witness for this young man with-"Col, I know how reputable you are."; didn't make the lt col swear in and let the young man go home with the LtCol. (The bail requirements stated this young man wasn't to be around minors.) The Lt.Col must have forgot he had 9 or 10 year old son. I also learned on the day of the hearing, the LtCol had a warrant out for his arrest for contempt of court and owed over $170,000 in IRS tax liens.
My daughter disappeared in the summer of l996. The Pierce County Sheriffs Office was asking for my child's dental records. One deputy laughed because I thought my child was dead because of their request. After I filed a complaint about his rudeness, this same deputy was sent to interview my daughter after she appeared again. In the interview, leading questions were asked and a discussion ensued as to whether I should be committed as a mental patient to a state hospital. Now, I am told the deputy didn't interview my daughter. (Wonder why the sheriffs office gave me a copy of a transcript that shows he did interview my child?) The list goes on. None of this will be addressed in the audit. What happens if the auditor happens across something the risk manager doesn't like? (I had given letters to Dennis Flannigan when he was on the Pierce County Council, but, he stated he didn't receive them. Former Councilman Flannigan stated the documents were diverted to the risk manager's office.) Will the auditor's contract be terminated?
In this whole mess I must give thanks to Kathleen Heppell, my daughter's probation officer, who I found to be highly professional, dedicated and only had my child's best interest at heart. I will be forever grateful she worked with my child.
Return to Accountability Home Page
phyllab@hotmail.com