that you decide we want to go and get an expert to come out and analyze the data and provide further comment. and mr. fried, one thing that i would say is that obviously the suggestions you're getting here, it may be that commissioners after the meeting think of additional points that they should always feel free to contact you. >> absolutely. i'm always available for anything else. chairperson campos: ok. thank you. why don't we open it up to public comment. thank you, mr. fried, for your good work on this. please come forward. >> good afternoon, again, commissioners. eric brooks, representing san francisco green party and the local grass roots organization, our city. it's really, really exciting to see this preliminary report because it shows exactly what advocates of rank choice voting have always said, which is that

voter participation is higher during rank choice elections and you can -- if you're part of any given political cadre that wants to downplay that and make look like that's not the case, you can do what happened over the last year and go to the media with cherry picked numbers and make it look like participation is lower during rank choice and higher during a runoff but we're seeing from actual numbers that have been crurched that that's not true, and that rank choice voting, as we've always said, increases participation. and so that's really good to see. and i would say, as far as looking for more information, i think it would be good to compare where we can in rank choice elections where people did have more than three choices, compare the error rate between that and what we had. also, ballot styles could be very important.

you know, what the ballot looks like and how easy it is for the voter to understand and i'd like to see that compared, like, what our ballot style was compared to other ballot styles that have been used for rank choice. commissioner olague: i think that would be interesting. >> i wanted to put in one note on the touch screen idea. sounds like it would be really effective. however, whenever that subject comes up, it's really important for voter clarity, hard-liners to get up and say that if we were to go to touch screens, it would be absolutely imperative that when a voter gets done voting, a physical, printed out ballot comes out right in their hands that they look at and take to the voting machine to put a hard paper ballot that they have seen with their own eyes into the collection basket so that nobody can game the system electronically but it's really exciting to see that what we've been saying for years and years and years is exactly right which

is that when you have rank choice, you get more participation, not less, and of course we save money which is a big deal. chairperson campos: thank you, mr. brooks. next speaker, please. >> hello, my name is david carey. i'd like to thank mr. fried for the information that he's putting together. i'd like to point out a few items about it. one is that when he's comparing san francisco's june primaries to november turnout and making some comparisons to that to some of the proposals that have been put further, it's important to keep in mind that those proposals actually proposed some september primaries where turnout is likely to be much, much lower than it is in june primaries with other state ballot items on them and so if you had a september primary, even bumping things up to 80% to 90% isn't going to get you to 50% of the november turnout. the other thing that i'm glad

mr. fried is showing is that san francisco has elections where the percentage of invalid over-voter ballots is highest and that's not rank choice voting. it's the plurality multicandidate elections for the school board and community college board so if san francisco really wanted to focus on how can you reduce the amount of invalid votes, we'd focus on what can we do for those elections, not rank choice voting. the other point is, that it's not just the invalid votes, it's the exhausted votes, as well. for example, compared to the mayoral 2010 election, using rank choice voting, or, excuse me, the mayoral 2011 rank choice voting, and the 2010 school board election, the school board

election had a higher rate of exhausted votes than the mayoral election did. so doing something about those plurality multicandidate elections could improve -- would be the place to start for improving both rates of invalid votes and exhausted votes. the other thing i'd point out is that the multicandidate plurality elections, when you mark those ballots, you mark three candidates all in a column. that's exactly the sort of voting that is invalid for rank choice voting and for a small number percentage of voters, that's a source of confusion. so turning the school board and the college board elections into multicandidate rank choice voting would actually simplify things for voters and would help reduce the rates of over-voting in the rank choice voting elections we have already. thank you. chairperson campos: thank you

very much. is there any other public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. again, mr. fried, thank you very much for your good work and we look forward to the additional information. madam clerk, please call the next item. madam clerk: item no. 5, consideration and final approval of sf lafco budget for fiscal year 2012/2013. chairperson campos: mr. fried? >> we presented the budget at last month's meeting for a first vote. this is the second vote. no changes have been made to what we're recommending. the staff is recommending that while we have the legal ability to accept all the money that the city offers to us under state statute that we are actually recommending to return that money for this year but simply maintain our rights to the allocated amount in future years should we need it. chairperson campos: great. thank you very much. is there any public comment on item 5. seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, if we can get a motion, motion by commissioner avalos, seconded by commissioner

olague, if we can take that without objection. without objection and the item finally passes. thank you. item 6, please? madam clerk: item no. 6, authorization to extend two lafco staff positions. chairperson campos: miss miller. >> as you will recall, we have board of supervisors by ordinance passed lafco with monitoring and advising the san francisco public utilities commission and implementation of the c.c.a. program. to further that task, we entered into an mou with sfpuc in 2009 which provided non-general fund funds to provide for those activities and subsequently this commission, through working with city and county staff, authorized the hiring of two staff -- or, actually, the setting up of two staff positions for that work. mr. fried was hired in our

senior program officer position. the community development assistant, we did originally fill. that person left the job. i've not refilled it because that position is really for once we get into program launch, but those two positions are term positions and they were to be termed out as of august of 2012. so this item before you is to extend that, since we've had an extension of the launch of our c.c.a. program, is to extend that term another year. by that time, we believe the program will be launched. if you've got other questions, i'd be happy to answer them. chairperson campos: thank you very much, miss miller. i think the extension makes sense. i think that at the time this happened, the expectation was that we wouldn't need the positions for a period longer than what was originally intended but clearly that's not the case so i think it makes sense to do that. and the extension is for how

long? >> for one year. chairperson campos: for one year. >> one fiscal year. chairperson campos: great. any comments or questions? why don't we open it up to public comment? any member of the public would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed and colleagues can we get a motion to authorize that? a motion by commissioner avalos, seconded by commissioner olague, if we can take that without objection. item no. 7, madam clerk? madam clerk: approve the extension of the mou with the san francisco public utilities commission for the c.c.a. program. chairperson campos: thank you and before we turn it over to ms. miller, mr. fried, congratulations i think are in order. ms. miller. >> this is similar to the previous item which is once again the mou. we thought the program would be launched by this time so the mou had a term date which we're beyond now so we want to extend it until june 2013. chairperson campos: great. thank you. another one-year extension. any public comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed.

motion by commissioner avalos, seconded by commissioner olague. if we can take that without objection? item 8. madam clerk: item no. 8 is public comment. chairperson campos: any member of the public who would like to speak on any item within the jurisdiction of lafco not otherwise on the agenda. seeing none, public comment is done. item 9. madam clerk: item no. 9 is future agenda items. chairperson campos: colleagues, any future agenda items? any member of the public would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is closed. last item. madam clerk: last item isa, jowrnt. chairperson campos: meeting adjourned. thank you, everyone, and have a good weekend. thank you to staff and to the clerk for their good work.

>> good afternoon, everyone. welcome to the regular meeting of the government audits and oversight committee. my name is supervisor farrell. i'm also joined by supervisor elsbernd. i would like to thank the members of sfgtv for the broadcast. do we have any announcements? >> please make sure to silence

all cell phones and electronic devices. items at the upon today will appear on the may 22 agenda. during on the department's progress on implementation of audit recommendations by the comptroller -- controller. supervisor farrell: we have only one item on the agenda today. >> good afternoon. i am tonia lediju, director of audits. we are here to speak about our audit follow-up for the last quarter. basically, the benefits for audit work is not only in the findings reported or the recommendations, but the benefits of auditing is the implementation of the recommendations that have come out of the process. by conducting audits -- audit

follow ups, it helps the department in sure that they are the implementing the change as stated. it enhances accountability, and it also allows us to ultimately assess the value of our work. our office does two kinds of follow up work, regular and field follow up. our regular procedures are done for all reports and memorandums. they are required to report on the implementation status at 6 months, one year, and two years. in the course of the follow-up process, we may select certain audits for field follow up. in that process, we go back into the department, gathered evidence, -- to gather evidence. factors that could qualify an audit as a high risk include large financial impacts,

significant weaknesses that make the department vulnerable to fraud, safety and high risk of fraud. this follow-up process that we are using also fulfills the requirement of the san francisco charter, which requires the audit to report on plans for implementing the recommendations come at any cost or savings, that is reflected in the department proposed budget, and if relevant, the basis for the department decided not to implement one of the recommendations. on this slide, we will talk about recommendation status and follow-up. after we received a response from the department, and nodded to reduce the response and based on the departments reported action, makes a determination about whether these actions would resolve the problem underlying the recommendation. open means the recommendation has not been fully implemented.

contested means the department indicated it would not implement that recommendation. this could be due to lack of resources. the department believed that the previously existing process is sufficient. closed means of the department has fully implemented the recommendations, the department has implemented a sufficient alternative to the recommendation, or the recommendation is no longer relevant. the recommendation could become a longer relevant because it is related to something specific to a software system or a contract. the fall of status is based on the department's responsiveness to our follow-up request. active means the department never provided the response to a follow up request. we will continue to follow up

beyond our regular two-year cycle. open means the department provided the response. closed means all recommendations and have a status of closed. elapsed, we will present the outstanding recommendations to the committee. outstanding recommendations will also be considered in future audit work. for our regular follow-up program, close does not mean that we attest to the recommendation being fully implemented or has done any investigation to verify the recommendation has been adequately resolved. we only a test of whether our recommendation was adequately resolved when we do a field follow up. our regular follow-up process is based on what the department reports it has done to implement our recommendations. over the next four slides, i will provide a summary of our

regular follow-up activity for the last quarter, january through march. and then i will give an overview of our field follow up activities. i will discuss some high-risk audits in greater detail. these six follow-ups are considered open. we received responses to follow- up request on these audits, but there are still one or more outstanding recommendations that have a status of open or contested. for four of these audits, the department are in process of implementing the outstanding recommendations. for more information about these audits, please see the summary document that is available by the door. it will also be posted to our website. those are airport commission, human-rights, fire department, public utilities, audits of crystal springs, and the arts commission. the two audits marked by an

asterisk will be discussed in greater detail. this table shows the one act of audits. of the 49 recommendations, one was determined to be closed and two in process. associated risks for this audit is high. we have recovered $4,292 in subtenant rent. however, it had not yet collected $120,852 of other funds do. -- due. there are some recommendations to investigate further potential lost revenue due to some of the issues uncovered by the audit. i apologize -- they have recovered 42,000. >> it has the date of november, 2010. we are talking a while ago? is this an ongoing --

>> we released the report in 2010. we are continuing to follow up on the work. supervisor farrell: thank you. >> this audit was a lease agreement. it is a rock quarry from the least side. modern trends some of this provisions require specialized -- monitoring some of these provisions require specialized knowledge. puc is working with us to identify appropriate vendors. puc is here to discuss this audit for there. i do not know if you want to do the entire presentation. supervisor farrell: why don't we have puc, so we can deal with it

issue by issue? >> good afternoon. i'm joined here today by my colleagues. i am the director of insurance and internal controls. we have taken these recommendations quite seriously and we had implemented a series of actions to directly address the recommendations but management responses have been prepared and they are under current pending review. we would like to share some of our recent actions and successes in the past six months to resolving these findings. in the areas of personnel's skill sets, lease administration comic industry best practices, and lease administration software. regarding personal skill sets, we retrained existing staff on the software that we have in

place and the analytical tools. this includes areas such as payment tracking, timely collections. for a lease administration, we have resolved late payment functionality in the legacy software. we now have the functionality to monitor late payments. we have been visiting the management regarding their adherence to these provisions. we have been in consultation with the city's attorney's office. >> is there any dispute about the money that is owed? is it just a matter of collecting it? >> a little bit of both. there have been some disputes in terms of translating what exactly where the requirements for the leases. there were expired, up to a certain point. it is still left in discussing right now. if you would like some more in

depth details -- regarding industry best practices and the policies and procedures, we did hire a lease administration console to look at the existing operational practices to see if they were in line with industry best practices. we have incorporated some of the recommendations, which have led to the development of a comprehensive manual. that is near finalization. as part of that, we talked to a mining consultant about how exactly the monitored and audit a rock quarry operation. in order to fully understand information, you would require specialized expertise. we reached out to cities service auditor and we have been working and leveraging their existing auditor pool. supervisor farrell: ok.

>> and finally, the lease administration software. we have a system called colonial and it is quite antiquated. it is not very flexible for some of the complex permits and leases that we have. we will be implementing a new software that is used by a lot of private and public agencies. it will give us the ability to monitor such complex provisions. eventually, will replace the existing legacy system by the end of the calendar year. supervisor farrell: new software, great. i get it. we need a lot of that inner city government. mining consultant, i understand. the other stuff, about how to collect -- manuals are great, but let's collect the money that is owed to us. how comfortable do you feel going into the future about

being able to do that effectively? this is billing practices. it happens every day all over the world. >> she has been working very closely with staff to ensure that these practices are being adhered to and being done in the division itself. those practices, everyone is aware. they are doing that. in regards to the audit, we still are in discussion with management to collect the remaining amounts. we have also been in discussion with the city attorney's office to talk about how much of this is applicable,, time has passed, what is applicable and what is not. supervisor farrell: ok. colleagues, any questions? is there more? thank you very much. tonia, are you planning on

moving to the next one? >> we are in close contact with puc. i am comfortable and confident that they will -- they are moving in the right direction as it relates to the everyday practice is. they are diligently trying to resolve the issues. supervisor farrell: great. >> as it relates to this slide, this table represents the three follow-ups we have determined to be closed. for the audits of pg &e franchise fees, two recommendations were made. this issue is ongoing and parts of the current audit puc is actively working with the city attorney to address the issue. because the current audit will be subject to the same bed of

the follow-up process, we have closed recommendations for this earlier audit. as a result, some of those issues are carrying forward in our current audit. we are working with the right organizations to move forward. and hopefully resolve some issues as we move forward. for puc and dpw's recommendations, there were related to increasing communication of policies and procedures to contractors. for field follow ups, our office, we use a risc based approach to collect specific recommendations -- risk based approach to collect specific recommendations. we looked at the most prevalent

or most high-risk of those particular recommendations. we gather evidence to determine if the department's implementation adequately resolve the problem underlying the recommendation. and then we issue a reporting on our findings. our field follow ups go to the same follow-up process as are other reports and memorandums for recommendations determined to be only partially implemented. we will follow up at six months again, one year, and two years. we have in process of the public utilities commission, we're following up on an audit related to the parsons of water system improvement program. we selected 18 of the 26 recommendations for testing and expects to issue a follow-up memo in this quarter. at the office of citizen complaints, we are conducting a second field follow-up of the audits of the department. the original report had 45 recommendations directed at the occ, the police commission, the

police department. in the previous follow-up, evaluation was issued in 2009. we tested eight recommendations and found four to be fully implemented. in our current follow-up evaluation, we are testing to of those recommendations. we find that they are partially implemented. we will issue the memorandum in this quarter. we are also following up on a 2008 audit that cost multiple to -- across multiple departments regarding payment control. it included 12 recommendations across several departments. we are in the process of determining which recommendations we will include in the field fallout. we also -- follow up. we are working on our adult probation follow up work.

case management included 31 recommendations. we are in the process of working with the department to select a sample of those recommendations. our field follow ups that we have completed, this is what this slide presents. it is that the mta, portsmouth plaza, and then the indirect late submission for central subway. as you can see for portsmouth, there were 18 total recommendations, eight tested, -- six fully implemented, and two partially implemented. for central subway, we looked at 6, and they're all fully implemented. as it relates for the airport commission, we issued our audit report of the contractor in july of 2011. this audit have several findings with