Home › News › County News
Grand Jury audit report 'disservice,' officials say
Download this story as a podcast!
Related Links
RELATED STORIES
STORY TOOLS
More from County News
The county's auditor-controller, executive officer and Board of Supervisors all blasted last week's Grand Jury report accusing CEO Johnny Johnston of torpedoing Auditor-Controller Christine Cohen's efforts to get enough money and employees to properly audit the county.
In a discussion during Tuesday's Ventura County Board of Supervisors meeting, Johnston and Cohen both said the report contains many inaccuracies and misleading conclusions. The cuts over the past five years to the Auditor-Controller's Office have been similar to those in every department, and they haven't hamstrung the county's ability to audit its finances and operations, Cohen said.
Cohen's department has only two auditors, but that's because she hasn't been able to hire anyone to fill the other four spots, she said.
Members of the board also bristled at the report's sharp wording, and at the Grand Jury's process, which, they said, was excessively adversarial and secretive. Supervisor Kathy Long called the report "a complete disservice to the people of this county."
Long said later that she can't recall a previous Grand Jury being called out in such a way by the Board of Supervisors. She has worked as either a supervisor or a supervisor's aide since 1991.
It was also highly unusual for the Grand Jury to release its report at a news conference, Long said.
That made it look as if the Grand Jury was going out of its way to target Johnston, she said.
While Grand Jury investigations are always conducted in secret, Johnston said he thought the "veil of secrecy" was especially thick this time.
"I can only conclude that I was not consulted because I was not viewed as a resource or a person of interest, I was viewed as the prime suspect," he said.
Even Supervisor John Flynn, who said last week that he agrees with the substance of the report, said Tuesday "the way the Grand Jury report was handled was a big mistake."
"Sometimes grand juries come into their position with an agenda," Flynn said. "A grand juror should look at every issue the way a scholar would, you look at all the information and then you make your decision."
Grand juror David Grau was at the meeting but declined to comment.
The civil Grand Jury is a panel of 19 private citizens tasked with investigating waste and fraud in local government. Last week, it issued a report called "A Failure to Audit," which took Johnston and the board to task for allegedly underfunding the Auditor-Controller's Office.
The resulting lack of audits may have contributed to the atmosphere that allowed employees of the Public Guardian's Office to steal from the people whose assets they oversaw, the Grand Jury said.
Johnston and Cohen both said that was not fair. The Public Guardian's Office was audited before the theft was discovered, and the audit pointed out many of the management problems that contributed to the scandal. However, they were never fixed, Johnston said.
"This was not a failure to audit, it was a failure of oversight and a failure to correct," he said.
There were other problems with the Grand Jury report, Johnston said. For example, it says the Grand Jury could find no record of an audit of the Harbor Department. In fact, an audit was done in 1999 and is available to any who asks for it, he said.
Johnston also disputed the Grand Jury's finding that he has consolidated control of the county's day-to-day operations and budget planning, leaving the auditor-controller powerless to properly oversee the government's finances.
It is the board that makes the important decisions, he said, while he just carries them out.
"I think the fewer decisions I make, the better job I'm doing," Johnston said. "Let me put it this way: I am not the decider."
Posted by daffey44 on April 18, 2007 at 7:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The Harbor Dept had been last audited in 1999? This is 2007. Isn't it time there was another audit? The Grand Jury asked for the last complete audit, but no one in either the Harbor Dept or Audit Dept could find a record of such an audit. Interesting that an audit is now discovered, even if it's 8 yrs old.
The Grand Jury report was about internal controls, not about cash audits or change-of-management audits. Treasurer-Tax Collector Matheney was audited when he took office. And his cash-count is audited annually. But there was been no comprehensive audit of his Public Guardian's office in years, until the Board of Supervisors decided to pay for an outside audit after embezzelment was discovered.
Notice how much Auditor-Controller Cohen and Supervisor Flynn changed their positions in the few days since the report was released. Do you smell cover-up?
I suggest everyone read the report and not go merely by what Johnston says.
Posted by KatieTeague on April 18, 2007 at 8:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I would like to hear what Ron Bamieh has to say about the Grand Jury Report, etc. It seems to me that the Auditor-Controller should report to an outside agency (neither the BOS or the CEO) but I'm not sure this makes sense or is even legal.
I don't understand all the flip-flopping either. The LA Times article today presents a softer version of events. I don't smell a cover up but I am left confused. It sounds like now the Grand Jury's competency is in question.
Posted by Equitable_Enforcer on April 18, 2007 at 11:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I would also like to see Mr. Bamieh's take on the Grand Jury report.
Mr. Matheney's department is actually quite small. A knowledgeable and responsible department head should never, ever have to depend on outside audits to find fraud, waste or abuse. That is what internal audits are all about.
A good sampling technique by somebody with a good understanding of the department's operations should have surfaced the problems, especially in the Public Guardian's domain.
Posted by venturabob on June 14, 2007 at 9:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ladies and gentlemen of Ventura County there is NO control over the $1.6 billion of your tax dollars! This article is absolutely appalling! You have a CEO that takes no responsibility for costs and a Controller who thinks she can do effective audits with two people. I don't know the mix between financial and operational audits, but after reviewing her comments she probably doesn't know either. Now you roll those two winners into a Board of Supervisors who either flip flop or one who calls the report "a complete disservice to the taxpayers'. No, Miss Long--you and your cohorts are the real disservice to the taxpayers. The CEO and Controller coupled with the Board of Supervisors are a perfect recipe for disaster.
You know last night I wore a comment (type in the article title--Grand Jury says lack of auditors threat to county--it's the only way now to get there) giving support to poor Mrs. Cohen. Well, FORGET THAT! Johnston and Cohen can walk out the door together as far as I'm concerned.
A statement by the Johnston/Cohen tag team: "The cuts over the past five years to the Auditor-Controller's Office have ben similar to those in every department..." indicates that they haven't even seen the budget. They certainly could not have reviewed the "sacred cow" Fire Protection District's budget. This "budget nonsense" is not slowing Roper down. He's got six new additions which includes three new firefighter-paramedics who alone are in at a cost of $600,000. I don't know how that number works when you have an open employment opportunity for the same position with a salary range of $56,250-$72,135/year (+4.5% July). But who cares--certainly not Johnston or Cohen. Hey, that's $200,000 each folks! Heck, Roper is even building new fire stations even though, in my opinion, seem unnecessary. But what do I know? Well, no one knows anything. WE DON'T DO AUDITS! Mr Roper's budget is 12.5% higher than the FY2005-06 actuals and his Salaries and Benefits lead all County Departments (so you thought it was all those college educated executives, attorneys, medical examiners, etc.) at $160,563 per Full Time Equivalent employee. This is a full 58% higher than the average of all of the county departments. Nice cutbacks Bob! Please don't be confused--this is not salary only. It does include benefits which in the Fire Department are second to none.
Posted by venturabob on June 14, 2007 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
So, what should be done. Well, years ago I used to be a supervising internal auditor for a major corporation and this how we did it. The audit department did both financial (helped to offset the charges of the independent auditors) and operational audits. The audit department,which had it's own manager, reported to the corporate Chief Financial Officer, who in turn reported to the CEO. The audit teams went from division to division and run 2-6 week audits depending upon the size and complexity of the division and problems encountered during the audit. No division ever went for more than two years without an internal audit. The audit report was reviewed with division management and their responses were included in the final audit report. The audit report then went to the CFO, CEO, and the Corporation's Board of Directors. The audit findings were reviewed at EVERY Board of Directors meeting. The corporate CEO prepared well for these meetings and was held accountable! The audit function was completely separate form the divisions. The audit team had a right to any information that it deemed necessary during the course of an audit. Any disputes (very rare) were settled by the CFO and/or CEO. There was no holding back! Although the financial audits defrayed the outside audit costs, the operational audits really provided far greater cost savings to the corporation.
Well, guess what! This structure is COMPLETELY IMPOSSIBLE in the County of Ventura. If you doubt that just read the comments of your leaders. Forget the financial audits--maybe Cohen is a satisfactory bean counter. The only way I can see of controlling costs by doing operational audits is by having an independent firm do them. The county has no interest in them. This company would be contracted by the county but would be directed and managed by the Grand Jury. Two members of the Grand Jury, preferably with a financial/management private sector experience, would manage the audits. Any and all information would be accessible to the auditors during the course of their audits. The reports would be reviewed with County personnel (including Johnston and Cohen) and their comments would be included in the audit report. No Grand Jury report would be issued until all parties "agreed" or "agreed to disagree" on the findings of the auditors. The report would then be make public by the Grand Jury. Hey, folks, we're talking about $1.6 billion of your tax dollars! Wouldn't you like to know what's happening to them?
(Requires free registration.)
Article discussions on this site are to support community debates of issues related to our stories and editorials.
Discussions should not stray from the subject of the story or editorial.
We do not allow the following:
We reserve the right to delete threads and/or ban users for these or other reasons we deem necessary.
Opinions are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.