Thursday, April 2, 2015

Trail of the missing $4 million City revenue uncovered


Image result for robbing peter to pay paul picture
Finding the - $4 million trail of City inter-fund transfers:
1) Why did revenue enter Fund 22 from Fund 9, and
2) What related disbursements were made from Fund 22?
Which specific projects were funded or payments made, and why?
From Pacifica Tribune/Community/Desk of Lorie Tinfow, City Manager, 4/1/15.  

---  "There are three funds comprising the approximately $4 million imbalance and I'll try to explain the situation with each."

1.  "... Fund 38-Disaster Accounting, used when we respond to a catastrophic emergency." The emergency was 389 Esplanade 2010 Cliff erosion. ... "We were reimbursed for 75% of the work by the California Emergency Management Agency (CalEMA)."

2.  "... Fund 22-General Capital Improvements which received a transfer in 2003 from Fund 9-Street Construction of $2.2 million to cover capital projects newly completed or underway. Once again that loan must be paid back.

3.  "... Fund 22-includes a separate negative balance for expenses associated with other prior projects, effectively a third loan between funds."   Read article.
----------
Comment -  Although an outside CPA accountant has reviewed City Fund transactions (and the additional city expense of a forensic auditor is deemed not needed)-- still, City revenue transfers to and from Fund 22 affecting specific improvements or expenditures is a reasonable public disclosure. Thus, its assumed in the near future there will be a follow-up report at a City Council meeting.  

Note: The Shutterstock graphic is from a Fee Foundation for Economic Education article.

Posted by Kathy Meeh

38 comments:

Anonymous said...

City announcement of the whereabouts of MH370 imminent. Over to you Wolfie.

Anonymous said...

Since an outside auditor is not needed does that mean that the $4m has been found or does it mean that the money has been spent? Can the CPA explain where the money went?

Anonymous said...

This is the official explanation 1 year later? Underwhelmed.

Re item #1, what's this about a reimbursement of 75%? Was there more than 4 million unaccounted for? What happened to the reimbursed funds?

Re item #2 what project/s was that 2.2 million borrowed from Fund 9 in 2003 spent on?

Re item #3 WTF?

Anonymous said...

What the hell? THAT'S the answer we're going to get about what haopened to the 4 mil?! It raises more questions than it answers.

Sure hope the city isn't hoping to pass any bond measure/tax/assessment during the next two decades cuz they obviously have no clue about how to manage OUR money or answer for it.

MEGAFAIL!!!

Anonymous said...

What a geedamn minute here! Who decided "the additional expense city expense of a forensic auditor is deemed not needed"? The very people or their job-beholden puppets on whose watch the money, uh, went unaccounted for. And now another job-beholden puppet says she'll "try to explain". Hey, Ms. Tinfow, you know the golden glow you had last year when council allowed you to "discover and reveal" something that was hardly a secret (to some at least). Well, the glow is gone.

Anonymous said...

Say what? Item #3 says "Fund 22-includes a "separate negative balance for expenses associated with other prior projects, effectively a third loan between funds." Prior to what? 2003 or last year when this mess was finally revealed, ie, has this been a more recent or even continuous practice rather than just ancient history?

enough is enough said...

I'm not an accountant but I smell a rat. The only thing this fairy tale verifies is that we need a forensic audit to get to the bottom of this scary misuse of the public's funds and trust.
I want the pro-tem Mayor Digre to explain this to the public, ON CAMERA and take follow up questions.

Anonymous said...

That's contempt coming from city hall. Contempt. Well, right back at ya!

Anonymous said...

@814 You want to get the facts or just bash a legacy nimby? Even the inner circle has an inner circle. Digre wouldn't be my choice to explain this mess or to admit full knowledge of it before the disclosure last year. She's never driven the clown car.

Anonymous said...

Agreed.
Digre should explain this. She has the most history on council and insists on transparent government. Where's Keener on this. He wants to rebuild trust.
This explanation and conclusion is an insult.
Time to get it right council.

Anonymous said...

Hey City Council and CM Tinfow. See that article on "Community wisdom...."? See the lion with the piercing eyes? He's looking at you. Sees right through you.

Anonymous said...

Why won't this money thingie just go away? I'm going to cry.

Anonymous said...

If Digre could explain it, she actually would. And that's a comment on her integrity, not her intelligence.

Anonymous said...

I insist, no, I demand that pigs fly.

Good luck with that.

Chris Porter said...

Since this seemed to start in 2003, I am sure the beach renovation had something to do with fund transferring. As I recall, David Carmany wasn't approving any overspends and this led to some of then Council's displeasure with him and then in part to his demise. I don't know who finally moved monies around but I know it wasn't Steve Rhodes who seems to have taken the hit on all this.
Steve was a hardworking City Manager and I hope whatever final outcome is presented to the City after this through review will vindicate him.

Anonymous said...

The explanation needs to be so simple, so logical, so transparent that even Digre can explain it.
Anyone else would just be a spinner.
I want to hear it from her.

Anonymous said...

Hey guys, take a breath will you. Tinfrow's article on 4/1 was an April Fool's joke.

Anonymous said...

The pigs have been grounded.

Tom Clifford said...

Sorry anonymous 10:21 this is no joke. Ms. Tinfow does not want to spend money & time on what she views as old business. Transparent government and lose of public trust take a backseat current problems.

Anonymous said...

LMAO. Does anyone actually think this stuff ever stopped once it started? 2003 or 2015 or 2020... Pacifica is the same broke ass city spending money it doesn't have. The difference today is bookkeeping. We have a better bookkeeper. That's all this is about. Bookkeeping.

Anonymous said...

So, 2.2 mill for something or other in 2003. Then some amount for the Esplanade emergency, but, whatever amount that was, it was 75% repaid by whatever. So basically we still have no idea what the 2.2 was spent on and no idea what the roughly 1.8 million remaining was spent on or when. Oh, my goodness, yes, that's completely satisfactory. Look no further.

Anonymous said...

Digre can't figure out a parking ticket......
Now that Lancelle is jockeying around for another run at council, let her explain it.
Lancelle likely drew the money map with her buddy Vreeland anyway.
It will be a perfect political crime after she throws him under the bus.

Anonymous said...

Tom, I think the real joke is that we would accept that it is Tinfow calling the shots. This cover-up isn't about numbers, it's about politics.

Anonymous said...

Somewhere I think Lorie Tinfow has a calendar on which she's marking off the days til the next job. Has she moved here yet?

Anonymous said...

Oh I like history as much as any other Fixer, but I want to know about current events, too. Audit! Audit! Audit!

Anonymous said...

You could be right 1132. All the more reason for Nihart, Ervin and O'Neill to insist on a forensic audit. And yet, they don't. Anyone have clean hands in this mess?

Anonymous said...

Here's the link to the entire article in the Tribune.
http://www.mercurynews.com/pacifica/ci_27824235/tracking-city-funds

The "explanation" raises more questions than it answers and reads as a Phase 1 progress report with a very bad cliffhanger.
It sounds like a lot of bad bookkeeping happened over the years and those in the "know" sometimes take advantage of that. Just look at the city of Bell, Ca.

That being said, this was the past and Pacifica needs to look at the future and spend the little resources we have towards that direction. We are 3 years away from a 9% budget deficit (again) in this booming economy and that needs to be addressed. Finding what happened to the funds is not as important to me as much as finding out HOW it happened. If we are unable to find that out, we will be at risk at this scenario in the future. Let's close the transparency gap around transferring of monies between funds and correct any bookkeeping issues we've had in the past. Put check guards in place NOW so if there are questions in the future, there is an easily accessible paper trail.

Anonymous said...

KTVU Channel 2 News regularly advertises that they want to be contacted to investigate local issues of local importance.
I think a missing $4,000,000.00, (a huge percentage of our local budget), being swept under the rug by local officials would make for a very interesting investigative report.
Agree?

Anonymous said...

Nice try 1:03.......
Exposure, accountability and penalty is the only way to prevent reoccurrences of these types of shenanigans.
The reason our "present" is such a mess is because the "past" is always forgotten.
End this cycle now. Save our city from an ugly future.
Insist on a full blown third party investigation.

Kathy Meeh said...

Thanks 103! The article has been updated, and here's the easy link: Pacifica Tribune/Tracking City Funds.

Taking action to prevent the ongoing city revenue shortfall is core to fixing the city structural economic problem. Fix it, rather than fake it and hide it!

1:03 here said...

My argument was more around city funds spent on further investigation on this subject. There is no evidence of criminal wrong doing AT THIS TIME but it sounds like people are already ready with their pitchforks...

I agree with 1:14 and 1:20, an independent investigation is the ONLY way to go. This council and city leadership has lost its trust around this subject.

Anonymous said...

What 120 said! Time to flip over that rock and see what lies beneath. Not only will it illuminate the past and inform the present, it may invigorate our future. We can't afford not to.

Anonymous said...

114 Investigators love to hear that an investigation into where the money went can't be done because the money is gone. This council has basically used the "we're broke and stupid" excuse to avoid their fiduciary duty. Who can argue with that? It'll take an unbiased outside third party to get to the bottom of this pile.

Anonymous said...

Lancelle needs to sit on the hot seat. This started and festered during her reign.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, Lancelle. Right. City Hall has been moving these numbers around like tic-tac-toe for years. Times and faces change. Some folks must have been sweating like Bernie Madoff did when the market meltdown wiped out his ability to keep his Ponzi game going. What to do, what to do? I know! Let's tell Pacifica. Lights, cameras, actors take your marks. Action!

Anonymous said...

Many of the answers to the missing funds and more can be found here: Pacifica Watchdogs website.
The 2003 City Council was promulgating all types of unethical real estate transactions and habitat restorations with monies it didn't have (at least in the funds where it was supposed to come from). Why let legally accepted accounting principles/practices get in the way of saving the planet?

Anonymous said...

Good grief, Pacifica Watchdog. What a blast from the past. 2003 vintage. It could have been written today. Pacifica's collapse is imminent and Beach Blvd will save us. Is there a bigger pack of fools than us, anywhere?

Anonymous said...

So, the dogs knew in 2003. Honk if you believe none of the smarties on Council and in City Hall knew these funds were out of balance during all those intervening years. 2.2 mil down the rabbit hole in 2003. What about the rest of it?