SCO
City of Dos Palos December 2015
Read the report at City of Dos Palos December 2015 ↗
CITY OF DOS PALOS
Audit Report
SPECIAL GAS TAX STREET IMPROVEMENT FUND
July 1, 2006, through June 30, 2014
TRAFFIC CONGESTION RELIEF FUND
July 1, 2006, through June 30, 2014
PROPOSITION 1B FUND
July 1, 2007, through June 30, 2014
BETTY T. YEE
California State Controller
December 2015
BETTY T. YEE
California State Controller
December 16, 2015
The Honorable Jerry Antonetti
Mayor of the City of Dos Palos
2174 Blossom Street
Dos Palos, CA 93620
Dear Mayor Antonetti:
The State Controller’s Office audited the City of Dos Palos’ Special Gas Tax Street
Improvement Fund for the period of July 1, 2006, through June 30, 2014. We also audited the
Traffic Congestion Relief Fund for the period of July 1, 2006, through June 30, 2014, and the
Proposition 1B Fund for the period of July 1, 2007, through June 30, 2014.
Our audit found that the city accounted for and expended its Special Gas Tax Street
Improvement Fund, Traffic Congestion Relief Fund, and Proposition 1B Fund in compliance
with requirements, except that the city overstated the fund balance in the Traffic Congestion
Relief Fund by $4,340 as of June 30, 2014. The city overstated the fund balance because it did
not expend all of its fiscal year 2006-07 allocations.
If you have any questions, please contact Mike Spalj, Chief, Local Government Audits Bureau,
by telephone at (916) 324-6984.
Sincerely,
Original signed by
JEFFREY V. BROWNFIELD, CPA
Chief, Division of Audits
JVB/ls
cc: Manuela Sousa, Finance Director
City of Dos Palos
Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund, Traffic Congestion
City of Dos Palos Relief Fund, and Proposition 1B Fund
Contents
Audit Report
Summary ............................................................................................................................ 1
Background ........................................................................................................................ 1
Objective, Scope, and Methodology ................................................................................. 2
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 3
Follow-Up on Prior Audit Findings ................................................................................. 3
Views of Responsible Officials .......................................................................................... 4
Restricted Use .................................................................................................................... 4
Schedule 1—Reconciliation of Fund Balance ...................................................................... 5
Finding and Recommendation .............................................................................................. 6
Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund, Traffic Congestion
City of Dos Palos Relief Fund, and Proposition 1B Fund
Audit Report
Summary The State Controller’s Office audited the City of Dos Palos’:
Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund for the period of July 1,
2006, through June 30, 2014;
Traffic Congestion Relief Fund (TCRF) for the period of July 1, 2006,
through June 30, 2014; and
Proposition 1B Fund for the period of July 1, 2007, through June 30,
2014.
Our audit found that the city accounted for and expended its Special Gas
Tax Street Improvement Fund, Traffic Congestion Relief Fund, and
Proposition 1B Fund in compliance with requirements, except that the city
overstated the fund balance in the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund by
$4,340 as of June 30, 2014. The city overstated the fund balance because
it did not expend all of its fiscal year 2006-07 allocations.
Background The State apportions funds monthly from the Highway Users Tax Account
in the Transportation Tax Fund to cities and counties for the construction,
maintenance, and operation of local streets and roads. The highway users
taxes derive from State taxes on the sale of motor vehicle fuels. In
accordance with Article XIX of the California Constitution and Streets and
Highways Code section 2101, a city must deposit all apportionments of
highway users taxes in its Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund. A
city must expend gas tax funds only for street-related purposes. We
conducted our audit of the city’s Special Gas Tax Street Improvement
Fund under the authority of Government Code section 12410.
Chapter 91, Statutes of 2000, (Assembly Bill 2928) as amended by
Chapter 636, Statutes of 2000, (Senate Bill 1662) and Government Code
section 14556.5, created a Traffic Congestion Relief Fund in the State
Treasury for allocating funds quarterly to cities and counties for street or
road maintenance, reconstruction, and storm damage repair. Cities must
deposit funds received into the city account designated for the receipt of
State funds allocated for transportation purposes. The city recorded its
TCRF allocations in the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund. We conducted
our audit of the city’s TCRF allocations under the authority of Revenue
and Taxation Code section 7104.
Senate Bill 1266, Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and
Port Security Bond Act of 2006, was introduced as Proposition 1B and
approved by the voters on November 7, 2006, for a variety of
transportation priorities, including the maintenance and improvement of
local transportation facilities. Proposition 1B funds transferred to cities
and counties shall be deposited into an account that is designated for the
receipt of State funds allocated for streets and roads. The city recorded its
Proposition 1B Fund allocations in the Proposition 1B Fund. A city also is
-1-
Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund, Traffic Congestion
City of Dos Palos Relief Fund, and Proposition 1B Fund
required to expend its allocations within four years following the end of
the fiscal year in which the allocation was made and to expend the funds
in compliance with Government Code section 8879.23. We conducted our
audit of the city’s Proposition 1B Fund under the authority of Government
Code section 12410.
Objective, Scope, Our audit objective was to determine whether the city accounted for and
and Methodology expended its Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund, Traffic
Congestion Relief Fund, and Proposition 1B Fund in compliance with
Article XIX of the California Constitution, the Streets and Highways
Code, Revenue and Taxation Code section 7104, and Government Code
section 8879.23, Revenue and Taxation Code section 7104, and
Government Code section 8879.23.
To meet the audit objective, we performed the following procedures:
Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund
Reconciled the fund revenue recorded in the city ledger to the balance
reported in the SCO’s apportionment schedule to determine whether
Highway Users Tax Account (HUTA) funds received by the city were
completely accounted for.
Judgmentally selected sample expenditure transactions and verified
proper documentation and eligibility to determine whether HUTA
funds were expended in accordance with the criteria above.
Analyzed and tested sample transactions to determine whether
recoveries of prior HUTA fund expenditures were identified and
credited to the Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund.
Reviewed the fund cash and liabilities accounts for unauthorized
borrowing to determine whether unexpended HUTA funds were
available for future street-related expenditures.
Interviewed city employees and reviewed policies and procedures to
gain an understanding of the city’s internal controls and accounting
systems related to this audit.
Traffic Congestion Relief Fund (TCRF)
Reconciled the TCRF revenue recorded in the city ledger to confirm
that the TCRF allocations received by the city agreed with the SCO’s
apportionment schedule.
Judgmentally selected sample expenditure transactions and verified
proper documentation and eligibility to determine the city’s
compliance with the criteria above.
Reconciled the city’s “Schedule of Expenditures as Reported in the
Streets and Roads Annual Report” with the SCO’s “Average Annual
Expenditures Computation of Discretionary Funds” to determine
compliance with the maintenance-of-effort (MOE) requirement.
-2-
Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund, Traffic Congestion
City of Dos Palos Relief Fund, and Proposition 1B Fund
Proposition 1B Fund
Reconciled the Proposition 1B revenue recorded in the city ledger to
confirm that the Proposition 1B allocations received by the city agreed
with the SCO’s apportionment schedule.
Judgmentally selected sample expenditure transactions and verified
proper documentation and eligibility to determine the city’s
compliance with the criteria above.
We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally
accepted government auditing standards. Those standards require that we
plan and perform the audit to obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to
provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our
audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a
reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions based on our audit
objectives.
We did not audit the city’s financial statements. We limited our audit scope
to planning and performing the audit procedures necessary to obtain
reasonable assurance that the city accounted for and expended its Special
Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund, Traffic Congestion Relief Fund, and
Proposition 1B Fund in accordance with the requirements of the Streets
and Highways Code, Revenue and Taxation Code section 7104, and
Government Code section 8879.23. Accordingly, we examined
transactions, on a test basis, to determine whether the city expended funds
for street-related purposes. We considered the city’s internal controls only
to the extent necessary to plan the audit.
Our audit found that the City of Dos Palos accounted for and expended its:
Conclusion
Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund in compliance with
Article XIX of the California Constitution and the Streets and
Highways Code for the period of July 1, 2006, through June 30, 2014.
Traffic Congestion Relief Fund in compliance with Article XIX of the
California Constitution, the Streets and Highways Code, and Revenue
and Taxation Code section 7104 for the period of July 1, 2006, through
June 30, 2014, except as noted in Schedule 1 and described in the
Finding and Recommendation section of this report. The finding
required an adjustment of $4,340 to the city’s accounting records.
Proposition 1B Fund in compliance with Government Code
section 8879.23 for the period of July 1, 2007, through June 30, 2014.
Follow-Up on Prior Our prior audit report, issued on February 7, 2003, disclosed no findings.
Audit Findings
-3-
Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund, Traffic Congestion
City of Dos Palos Relief Fund, and Proposition 1B Fund
Views of We discussed the audit results with city representatives during an exit
conference on June 26, 2015. Darrel Fonseca, City Manager; Manuela
Responsible
Sousa, Finance Director; and Michael Smith, Public Works Director,
Officials
agreed with the audit results. Ms. Sousa further agreed that a draft audit
report was not necessary and that the audit report could be issued as final.
Restricted Use This report is intended for the information and use of the City of Dos Palos
and the SCO; it is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone
other than these specified parties. This restriction is not intended to limit
distribution of this report, which is a matter of public record.
Original signed by
JEFFREY V. BROWNFIELD, CPA
Chief, Division of Audits
December 16, 2015
-4-
Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund, Traffic Congestion
City of Dos Palos Relief Fund, and Proposition 1B Fund
Schedule 1—
Reconciliation of Fund Balance
July 1, 2013, through June 30, 2014
Special Gas
Tax Street
Improvement
Fund
Highway Traffic
Users Tax Congestion
Allocations 1, 3 Relief Fund 2
Beginning fund balance per city $ 8,907 $ 4,340
Revenues 153,472 –
Total funds available 162,379 4,340
Expenditures (123,729) –
Ending fund balance per city 38,650 4,340
Timing adjustment:
Accrual of June 2014 Highway Users Tax apportionment
(Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement
No. 34) 4,981 –
SCO adjustment: 4
Finding—TCRF spending requirement not met 4,340 (4,340)
Ending fund balance per audit $ 47,971 $ –
___________________________
1 The city receives apportionments from the State Highway Users Tax Account, pursuant to Streets and Highways
Code sections 2103, 2105, 2106, 2107, and 2107.5. The basis of the apportionments varies, but the money may be
used for any street purpose. Streets and Highways Code section 2107.5 restricts apportionments to administration
and engineering expenditures, except for cities with populations of fewer than 10,000 inhabitants. Those cities may
use the funds for rights-of-way and for the construction of street systems. The audit period was July 1, 2006, through
June 30, 2014; however, this schedule includes only the period of July 1, 2013, through June 30, 2014.
2 Government Code section 14556.5 created a Traffic Congestion Relief Fund (TCRF) in the State Treasury for
allocating funds quarterly to cities and counties for street and road maintenance, reconstruction, and storm damage
repair. The TCRF allocations were recorded in the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund. The audit period was July 1,
2006, through June 30, 2014; however, this schedule includes only the period of July 1, 2013, through June 30,
2014.
3 Senate Bill 1266, Highway Safety, Traffic Reduction, Air Quality, and Port Security Bond Act of 2006, introduced
as Proposition 1B, provided funds for a variety of transportation priorities. The audit period was July 1, 2007,
through June 30, 2014. The city did not receive any Proposition 1B revenues and did not incur any Proposition 1B
expenditures during FY 2013-14; therefore, it is not included in this schedule.
4 See the Finding and Recommendation section.
-5-
Special Gas Tax Street Improvement Fund, Traffic Congestion
City of Dos Palos Relief Fund, and Proposition 1B Fund
Finding and Recommendation
FINDING— During fiscal year 2006-07, the city did not expend all of its $35,453
allocations of the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund (TCRF) within the fiscal
TCRF spending
year following the fiscal year in which the allocations were made, as
requirement not met
required by Streets and Highways Code section 2182.1(g). The
unexpended allocation is $4,340.
Streets and Highways Code section 2182.1(g) requires a city to expend its
TCRF allocation within the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which
the allocation was made. In addition, the code indicates that funds not
expended within that period shall be returned to the State Controller's
Office.
Recommendation
The city should return the unexpended TCRF allocation of $4,340 to the
State Controller’s Office.
However, during the audit, the city provided additional expenditure
information from its Gas Tax Fund to be considered for reclassification to
eliminate the unexpended TCRF allocation.
We reviewed the additional documentation and determined that they were
eligible TCRF expenditures.
The city provided a copy of Journal Entry #095, dated June 25, 2015, to
reclassify the Gas Tax Fund expenditures to the TCRF Fund.
-6-
State Controller’s Office
Division of Audits
Post Office Box 942850
Sacramento, CA 94250-5874
http://www.sco.ca.gov
S15-GTA-0026