Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript


[Audit Committee Meeting on December 20, 2022.]

[00:00:03]

ALL RIGHT.

IT IS 1:30 PM DECEMBER 20TH, 2020, 2022.

AND WELCOME TO THE CITY GARLAND AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETINGS.

UH, I AM CHAIRMAN ROBERT SMITH.

WITH ME, I HAVE COUNCIL MEMBERS MOORE AND COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIAMS, AND WAY TOO MANY CITY STAFF FOR THIS LATE IN THE YEAR.

UH, ITEM NUMBER ONE IS APPROVAL OF THE SEPTEMBER 30TH, 2022 MINUTES.

UH, MOVE.

WE HAVE AN, UH, UH, OKAY.

.

HEY, LET'S GO.

Y'ALL ARE IN A HURRY.

I GET IT.

THAT'S GOOD.

ALL RIGHT.

WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE BY, UH, MEMBER MOORE AND A SECOND FROM MEMBER WILLIAMS. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? HEARING DOWN.

THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

UH, AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO, ALARM PERMITTING PROGRAMMED AUDIT.

GO AHEAD, SIR.

CHAIRMAN, I WILL KICKSTART, UH, THEN I WILL HAND OVER TO ALEX.

UH, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU, THE CHAIRMAN FOR REQUESTING THIS AUDIT.

UH, AND THAT'S WHY IT WAS ADDED TO THE AUDIT COM AUDIT PLAN.

THE, THE, THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS AUDIT WAS TO DETERMINE, I MEAN, OF COURSE, WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THIS, UH, UH, THIS PROGRAM, UH, SINCE WE IMPLEMENTED IT.

SO IT'S NOT JUST BECAUSE YOU ASKED FOR IT, YOU'RE FINE , BUT YOU, YOU DID REQUEST THIS AUDIT.

YEP.

ANYWAY.

YEP.

YEP.

ALL GOOD.

ALL GOOD.

THE OBJECTIVE WAS TO DETERMINE IF SERVICES PROVIDED AND PAYMENTS PROCESSED BY THE THIRD PARTY VENDOR ARE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY ORDINANCE AND CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITION.

UM, UP UNTIL 2018, UH, THE CITY STAFF MANAGE THIS PROGRAM.

OVERALL.

THEY STILL DO, UH, THE, OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT MANAGES THIS, BUT IN 20, TOWARDS THE END OF 2018, WE DECIDED TO OUTSOURCE THIS TO PUBLIC SAFETY CORPORATION.

OR SOME OF YOU MAY KNOW, UH, THEM AS CRY WOLF.

SO, UM, AS YOU'RE AWARE, UM, WE DO HAVE A PERMITTING PROCESS, UH, PER THE ORDINANCE.

IF YOU, UM, HAS HAVE AN ALARM SYSTEM, UH, WITHIN YOUR RESIDENCE OR, UH, BUSINESS, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PERMIT, UH, REQUEST A PERMIT FOR THAT.

AND, UH, THE FEES ARE DIFFERENT FOR, AND I WON'T GO INTO ALL, ALL OF THAT DETAIL HERE, BUT ANYWAYS, SO THIS THIRD PARTY IS SUPPOSED TO MANAGE THE PERMITTING PROCESS AS WELL AS FALSE ALARM, UM, NOTIFICATIONS AND MAINTENANCE OF THAT.

AND SO THEY'RE IN CHARGE OF SETTING IT UP, PROVIDING THE, APPROVING ALL THE APPLICATIONS, AND WORKING WITH THE POLICE DEPARTMENT IN ASSESSING THE RIGHT FEES AND ALL OF THAT STUFF.

SO THEY, THEY, THEY DO THAT.

AND WE ENTERED THIS AGREEMENT IN 2018, I BELIEVE WE STARTED IMPLEMENTING THIS PROGRAM THROUGH THEM IN 2019.

UH, BASED ON THE CONTRACT, IT'S A REVENUE SHARING CONTRACT.

UH, ONCE YOU, UH, DEDUCT ALL THE OPERATIONAL FEES, UH, THE CITY, UH, GETS TO KEEP 88% OF THE GROSS, UH, DEPOSIT, AND THE CONTRACTOR GETS 12%.

UH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS SINCE 2018, SINCE WE MOVED TO THEM, UH, OUR REVENUE HAVE GONE UP.

UM, SO DURING OUR AUDIT SCOPE, WHICH IS FROM 2019 THROUGH 2022, UH, THE CITY, UH, GROSS DEPOSIT WAS APPROXIMATELY 3.2 MILLION.

AND THE CITY ENDED UP GETTING TWO POINT CLOSE TO 2.7 MILLION IN NET PAYMENTS.

ANYWAYS, SO THE HIGH LEVEL, THAT'S THE BACKGROUND.

UH, I JUST WANT TO THANK, UH, THE POLICE CHIEF AND HIS STAFF.

UH, THEY WORKED EXTREMELY CLOSE WITH US, PROVIDED ALL THE INFORMATION.

I ALSO WANT TO HANG THE, THE VENDOR IN THIS, IN THIS CASE, WE WERE ABLE TO OBTAIN ACCESS TO THEIR SYSTEM.

ALEX WAS ABLE TO RUN A NUMBER OF REPORTS, UH, AND THEY WERE AVAILABLE FOR ANY OF OUR QUESTIONS.

THEY PROVIDED ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WE NEEDED, EVEN WHEN WE FOUND, UH, OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT, UH, THEY WERE VERY RECEPTIVE.

SO JUST WANTED TO SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH YOU.

WITH THAT, I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO ALEX WHO'S GONNA GO OVER ALL THE, UH, OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT THAT WE IDENTIFIED.

OKAY.

YEAH.

SO FOR THE ISSUE, NUMBER ONE, OUTSTANDING BALANCE.

SO THE VENDOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SITTING OUT INVOICES TO CUSTOMERS AND COLLECTING PAYMENTS FROM CUSTOMERS.

AND WHAT WE FOUND WHILE WE WERE TESTING IS THAT THE VENDOR WAS NOT PERFORMING ANY MORE COLLECTIONS PROCESS AFTER, UM, INVOICES HAD BEEN OUTSTANDING FOR 128 DAYS OR FOR 120 DAYS.

AND SO AS OF OCTOBER 6TH, WE THOUGHT THERE WAS ABOUT 5,000 ACCOUNTS WITH, UH, ABOUT 1.5 MILLION OF AN OUTSTANDING BALANCE HERE.

AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE SOME DETAILS IN HERE.

BUT, UM, AND SO THE CAUSE OF THIS IS BECAUSE THE VENDOR WAS NOT INSTRUCTED TO PERFORM COLLECTIONS FOR ANYTHING ONCE IT HIT PAST 120 DAYS.

[00:05:01]

UM, IT'S LIKE, UH, THE HUNDRED, 120 DAYS MARK, AND THE EFFECT IS DUE TO THEM LOO OR THE CITY LOSING REVENUE.

AND OUR RECOMMENDATION, OH, SORRY.

OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO, UH, WORK WITH CITY ADMINISTRATION TO COME, COME WITH A CRITERIA TO DECIDE ON WHAT EXACTLY POINT THEY WANT TO EITHER PURGE OUTSTANDING INVOICES OR, UM, STILL COLLECT FOR THE OUTSTANDING INVOICES AND AFTER.

AND THE SECOND PART OF THAT WOULD BE TO IMPLEMENT A COLLECTIONS OR PURGING PROCESS FOR THOSE INVOICES THAT ARE OUTSTANDING, OR 20 DAYS ARE OLDER.

AND MANAGEMENT CONCURRED WITH THAT.

AND THEIR ACTION PLAN IS THAT, UH, THE VENDOR'S GOING TO PURGE ANY, UM, INVOICES THAT ARE OLDER THAN TWO YEARS, AND THE VENDOR WILL THEN START TO COLLECT ON ANY INVOICES UP TO THE TWO YEAR MARK.

SO BASICALLY ANYTHING TO THE TWO YEAR PERIOD BEFORE THAT WILL STILL BE COLLECTED.

BUT AFTER THAT WILL BE PURGED.

AND THIS WILL BE THE IMPLEMENTATION DATE FOR THIS IS JANUARY OR DECEMBER 1ST, 2022.

UH, ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? OKAY, THE NEXT ISSUE, PAYMENTS.

WHILE WE WERE TESTING, WE SAW THAT THERE WERE FOUR SENIOR ACCOUNTS THAT WERE CHARGED THE NORMAL RESIDENTIAL RATE INSTEAD OF THE, THE, UH, DISCOUNTED RATE.

AND WE ALSO IDENTIFIED THAT ONE SENIOR ACCOUNT WAS CHARGED AN OUTDATED FEE.

AND ALSO WHILE WE WERE DOING TESTING, UM, WE NOTICED THAT THERE WERE SOME PAYMENTS THAT ARE MADE TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT BY CUSTOMERS, LIKE WHERE, LIKE THE CHECK, THEY'LL TAKE THE CHECK TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

AND SO FOR THOSE CHECKS, WE LOOKED AT THOSE AND WE FOUND THAT THERE WERE FOUR CHECKS THAT WEREN'T BEING PROCESSED TIMELY.

UM, THOSE CHECKS HAD LIKE AN AVERAGE OF 22 DAYS THAT IT TOOK FOR THEM TO, FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO GET THE CHECK AND FOR THEM TO ENTER THE CHECK INTO THE SYSTEM.

THE NEXT BULLET IS WE SAW THAT THERE WAS AN OVERPAYMENT FOR THE CAD, UM, BIDIRECTIONAL PAYMENTS OF $880.

AND THE LAST ISSUE UNDER THIS ONE IS WE ALSO IDENTIFIED A $250 REVENUE SHARE WASN'T PAID BY THE VENDOR.

THE CAUSE OF THIS IS BECAUSE THE SENIOR CITIZENS AREN'T ABLE TO BE, HAVE THE ACCOUNT BE CREATED ONLINE, LIKE USING THE ONLINE APPLICATION.

THE SECOND CAUSE IS BECAUSE OF THE FEES AND PAYMENTS AREN'T BEING, OR, OR YEAH, THE ACCURACY AND THE FEE OR THE FEES AND THE PAYMENTS AREN'T BEING MONITORED.

UH, AND THE EFFECT IS THAT THE SENIOR CITIZENS AREN'T RECEIVING THEIR DISCOUNTED RATES AND THAT THE CUSTOMERS, UM, AREN'T, UM, ARE, ARE BASICALLY KIND OF GETTING A DELAYED BANK STATEMENT OR, OR BANK TRANSACTION, AND THEN THEIR BANK ACCOUNT.

AND THE LAST EFFECT FOR THIS ONE IS THAT THE CITY IS OVERCHARGED FOR VENDOR SERVICES.

UM, OUR RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS ONE WAS TO ASK THE VENDOR TO ALLOW OTHER CHOICES TO BE CREATED IN THE ONLINE, UM, PROCESS, LIKE OTHER ACCOUNTS TO BE CREATED ONLINE, AND TO, UM, HAVE THE GARLAND PD TO MAKE SURE THAT CUSTOMER PAYMENTS ARE BEING, UM, PROCESSED TIMELY.

AND TO HAVE THE VENDOR, UM, ISSUE A REIMBURSEMENT FOR THE CAD OVERPAYMENT.

AND TO ALSO HAVE THE VENDOR FIX THE REVENUE SHARE PAYMENT ISSUE.

UH, MANAGEMENT CONCURRED, AND THEY STATED THAT, UM, THE VENDOR'S WORKING ON LETTING THE SENIOR SYSTEMS, UM, HAVE THE OR APPLY ONLINE.

AND ALSO THAT THE, UH, PAYMENTS ARE BEING, UM, PROCESSED WEEKLY, AND THE VENDOR CORRECTED THE CAD OVERPAYMENT AND THE, UM, REVENUE SHARE PAYMENT ISSUE.

AND THE IMPLEMENTATION DATE FOR THESE IS THAT THIS IS ALREADY IN PROCESS CHAIR.

CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY CLARIFY ONE THING, EVEN PRIOR TO THIS, SENIOR CITIZENS WERE ABLE TO APPLY ONLINE.

IT'S JUST THAT, THAT CLASSIFICATION, THE DROP.

I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY.

YEAH.

SO ANYBODY COULD APPLY FOR PERMIT ONLINE.

IT'S JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE, ALL THE WRONG RATE.

YEAH.

RIGHT.

YEAH.

LIKE THERE WAS ONLY LIKE RESIDENTIAL, LIKE THE STANDARD RESIDENTIAL RATE AND THE COMMERCIAL RATE ONLINE, THAT WAS BEFORE THAT.

SO THEY, THEY COULD, COULD APPLY ONLINE, BUT THEY WOULDN'T GET THE

[00:10:01]

DISCOUNT RATE.

GOT IT.

OKAY.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? NO.

RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

MR. CHAIRMAN.

UH, WOULD YOU EXPLAIN TO ME, UH, YOU SAY YOU MENTIONED THE CHECKS THAT, THAT WERE DROPPED OFF AT PD.

YES.

CAN YOU EXPLAIN, UH, CITY MANAGER THAT COLLECTION PROCESS? WHY, WHY? LET ME SEE, I ASK, ASK THIS QUESTION.

WHY DID WE ESTABLISH THAT PROCESS OF HAVING CHECKS? I KNOW PD HAS OVERSIGHT ON THIS PROGRAM, BUT CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN TO ME, CHECKS BEING DROPPED OFF, YOU CAN ACTUALLY GO IN AND LEAVE CHECKS FOR, FOR THE ALARMS AT PT.

CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN TO ME? CAN I? YEAH.

JEFF, YOU WANT PLEASE, SOMEBODY, PLEASE.

WELL, I'LL LET CHIEF DO IT.

GIVE ME A LITTLE, SO THE QUESTION IS WHY DO WE ALLOW THAT? YEAH.

YEAH.

WHY, WHY IS, WHY IS THAT, WHY IS THAT A TASK? UH, THAT'S BEEN CONFORMED BY PD, BUT WE HANDLE THE ALARM SYSTEM.

I, I, I KNOW YOU HAVE OVERSIGHT.

TRADITIONALLY, WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, BEFORE CRY WOLF, PEOPLE WOULD COME IN, DROP A CHECK OFF, FILL OUT AN APPLICATION.

OKAY.

UH, A A BIG, I WOULDN'T SAY MAJORITY, BUT A BIG NUMBER OF, ESPECIALLY OUR SENIOR CITIZENS STILL PREFER THAT METHOD.

OKAY.

UH, VERSUS GOING ONLINE.

AND THERE'S OTHERS THAT PREFER THAT METHOD VERSUS GOING ONLINE JUST TO COME IN, FILL OUT AN APPLICATION, WRITE A CHECK.

AND SO WE STILL ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT.

OKAY.

WHAT, WHAT'S THE IMPACT OF THAT PROCESS, IF ANY? CHIEF ON YOUR RESOURCES? MINIMUM.

MINIMUM, YES.

OKAY.

THE, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE ALARM AS FAR AS, UH, THE WORKLOAD, IT'S THROUGH THE FALSE ALARMS, THROUGH, UH, THROUGH THE FEES ISSUED FOR FALSE ALARMS, THAT TYPE STUFF.

UM, BUT COLLECTING AND, AND SENDING THE APPLICATION TO CRY WOLFF, IT'S NOT A, IT'S NOT A OVERBURDENSOME TASK.

AND IT ALSO GIVES US A CHANCE TO GIVE OTHER OPTIONS FOR INDIVIDUALS THAT DON'T WANNA DO IT ONLINE.

OR MAYBE THEY'RE USED TO DOING IT IN PERSON AT THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, MAYBE THEY'RE NOT QUITE SURE WHAT KREW WOLFF IS, AND A LITTLE NERVOUS ABOUT IT.

SO WE WANNA GIVE THOSE FOLKS THAT OPTION TO, TO COME IN AND DROP IT OFF WITH US.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

OKAY.

AND MY, I WANNA PUT 'EM ALL TOGETHER, MR. TO MOVE THIS MEETING ALONG.

MY, MY SECOND QUESTION GOES BACK TO, UH, YOU SAID IN YOUR PREVIOUS PORTION OF THE REPORT ABOUT THE VENDOR, UH, UH, THEY WERE SORT OF, THEIR CAP WAS 120 DAYS ON COLLECTIONS, RIGHT? AND THAT, YEAH.

YEAH.

FIRST ONE, YEAH, THEY WERE STOP BASICALLY BEFORE LIKE THEY WERE STOPPING AT 120, NOT DOING MORE COLLECTIONS AFTER THAT.

OKAY.

WAS THAT PUBLISHED, ESTABLISHED BY THE VENDOR OR BY, BY US.

WAS THAT A VENDOR POLICY OR A CITY POLICY? I THINK IT, YOU KNOW, I'M TRYING TO REMEMBER BACK CUZ THIS WAS RIGHT WHEN THE TRANSITION OF ME COMING IN AND, AND MITCH GOING OUT.

SO I, I THINK THEY QUESTIONED US AT THE TIME ABOUT DO WE WANT TO SEND THESE TO COLLECTIONS? AND WE SAID WE MADE THE DECISION NOT TO SEND THEM TO COLLECTIONS, BUT HOW THE 120 DAYS WAS ESTABLISHED, I DON'T RECALL, I DON'T RECALL IF THAT WAS OUR DECISION OR THE VENDOR'S DECISION.

WE DO NEED SOME TIMELINE AND WE NEED TO MAKE A DECISION WHAT TO DO WITH THE, WITH THE OLDER ONES THAT HAVEN'T BEEN PAID.

BUT I DON'T RECALL HOW 120 DAYS WAS ESTABLISHED, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.

OKAY.

SO NOW IN THE RECOMMENDATION WE ARE, WE'VE CHANGED THAT, RIGHT? AM I CORRECT MR. THE MANAGER, IS THAT RIGHT? THE REC THE RECOMMENDATION IS TWO YEARS.

IT'S TWO YEARS IS TO KEEP, UH, UH, TO KEEP IT AND, AND REQUEST PAYMENT FOR TWO YEARS AND THEN TO PURGE AFTER TWO YEARS.

I THINK THAT'S A FAIR RECOMMENDATION.

OKAY.

AND CHIEF, DO WE KNOW, WHAT DOES THAT COLLECTION PROCESS LOOK LIKE ON A DELINQUENT SOMEBODY? IT LOOKS LIKE WHAT ACTUALLY, WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS? YOU BRIEFLY TELL ME ABOUT IT.

IT STARTS WITH A MAILING, UH, AND FOLLOWED BY OTHER MAILINGS.

UM, THERE MAY BE A PHONE CALL, UM, IT'S NOT THE SAME AS YOU WOULD GET THROUGH A COLLECTIONS AGENCY, BUT IT'S CRY WOLF, UH, USING THEIR METHODS FOR COLLECTIONS.

OKAY.

IF, IF I COULD, UM, HI.

HISTORICALLY, AND, AND THIS GOES WAY BACK, COUN, , I, I EVEN REMEMBER THE TERMS USED COUNCIL DIDN'T WANT TO SEND G***O

[00:15:01]

AFTER CITIZENS FOR FALSE ALARMS, UH, SINCE THEY OFTEN HAPPENED.

RIGHT.

SURELY BY ACCIDENT.

OKAY.

MITCH, I, I THOUGHT I SO YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING TO THIS? YOU, YOU PROBABLY HAVE SOMETHING.

COME ON, MITCH.

YOU PROBABLY HAVE A HISTORIC PERSPECTIVE THAT CHIEF DOESN'T HAVE.

ALONG WITH WHAT MR. BRADFORD WAS SAYING.

GOING BACK HISTORICALLY WITH FALSE ALARMS, WE'RE TRYING TO HANDLE THAT A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY THAN, THAN WHAT WE DO, UM, UH, TYPICALLY WITH OTHER TYPES OF COLLECTION.

SO, BUT THERE'S STILL A PROCESS IN PLACE AND IT'S REACHING OUT TO THESE FOLKS TO HANDLE THEIR, THEIR PERMITS AND THEIR FEES, SO.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

AND WHAT I'M HEARING IS IT'S MITCH'S FAULT.

YEAH, THAT'S WITH TOO, I MEAN, THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I HEARD.

, YOU MAKE ME FEEL, RIGHT? YEAH.

YES.

THAT'S, I'M GLAD YOU PICKED UP ON THAT.

I, I DIDN'T QUIET, BUT YOU, YOU WERE BEING NICE ABOUT IT, BUT, RIGHT.

ED, DID YOU HAVE SOME COMMENTS? YEAH, PLEASE, SIR.

SO WHAT I'M GETTING IN THE END THEN IS THAT WE REALLY KIND OF HAVE AN HONOR SYSTEM HERE, UH, THIS POINT, THIS PROGRAM.

AND THAT IS IF AT THE END OF TWO YEARS A PERSON DOES NOT, UH, STILL PAY, UH, WE'LL PURGE AND, AND WE MOVE ON.

IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? IT'S A LOT OF BARK WITH NO BITE.

OKAY.

YEAH.

YEAH.

OKAY.

UM, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S STILL VERY EFFECTIVE BECAUSE OF THE INCOME THAT I HERE WE'RE COLLECTING.

UH, SO AS A RESULT OF THAT, UH, VERY GOOD SYSTEM.

THANK YOU.

AND I THINK I REMEMBER BACK WHEN WE DID THIS, UH, CUZ IT WOULD'VE BEEN NEAR THE BEGINNING OF MY COUNSEL TERM, IS THAT WE NEVER WANTED ANYBODY TO QUESTION IF THEY HIT THE PANIC BUTTON ON THEIR ALARM IF SOMEBODY WOULD COME.

RIGHT.

AND AS LONG AS THEY HAD A MONITORING SERVICE, WE'RE NOT WORRIED ABOUT WHETHER YOU PAID THE FEE IN THAT MOMENT.

HELP US COMING.

SO THIS IS WORKING IS INTENDED, I THINK, RIGHT? THE, THE GOAL OF THE PROGRAM IS TO OFFSET THE COST OF, OF RESPONDING TO FALSE ALARMS. YEAH.

AND I, I THINK WE'RE MEETING THAT GOAL.

VERY GOOD.

VERY GOOD.

AND, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ONLY MAJOR ISSUES I SEE, OBVIOUSLY THAT SENIOR RATE IS A BIG DEAL, UH, GETTING THAT CORRECTED, AND I'M GLAD IT'S DONE.

UH, BUT, YOU KNOW, TO, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER WILLIAMS' POINT, I'VE GOT GRANDPARENTS IN THEIR LATE EIGHTIES WHO PREFERRED TO DRIVE THEIR CABLE BILL UP TO THE CABLE STORE AND HAVE THAT PERSONAL INTERACTION AND THAT THAT'S WHAT PART OF THEIR, THEIR SO SOCIAL STRUCTURE.

AND SO HAVING PEOPLE COME IN AND TALK TO THE POLICE AND, AND HAVING THAT FRIENDLY FACE AND ESTABLISHING THAT RELATIONSHIP IS A PRETTY GOOD THING.

YES, SIR.

SO IT IS VERY GENERATIONAL, THOUGH.

UH, MY GENERATION WOULD PREFER NEVER TO TALK TO ANYBODY AND JUST DO EVERYTHING ONLINE.

SO .

ALL RIGHT.

OKAY.

UH, WE HAVE A FEW MORE FINDINGS.

YEP.

SO FOR THE, THE NEXT ISSUE, ISSUE NUMBER THREE, UH, COUNSELING WEBSITE.

SO WE IDENTIFIED THAT THERE WERE THREE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS THAT HAD AN INCORRECT DESIGNATION AND THAT, UH, THE VENDOR OR THE VENDOR HAS NOT REACHED OUT TO ALARM COMPANIES TO TRY AND GET AN UPDATED CUSTOMER LISTING SINCE 2019.

OH, SORRY, GO AHEAD.

DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? NO.

OKAY.

YEAH, THEY HAVEN'T REACHED, THEY HAVEN'T DONE THAT SINCE 2019, SINCE THEY TOOK OVER, UM, THE ALARM PROCESS.

AND THE THIRD BULLET WE KIND OF ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THERE, IT'S LIKE THE ABILITY TO, FOR THE CUSTOMER TO NOT CREATE THE ACCOUNT LINE.

SO WE HAVE TO GO BACK INTO THAT IN MORE DETAIL.

AND THE LAST BULLET IS THAT THE CITY AND THE VENDOR'S WEBSITES ARE OUTDATED.

UH, THE CAUSE THE FIRST CAUSE OF THIS, WE ALREADY KIND OF TALKED ABOUT ON THE PREVIOUS FINDING.

THE SECOND BULLET IS THAT THE CON OR THE VENDOR ISN'T REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACT TO REACH OUT TO ALARM COMPANIES ON A RECURRING BASIS AND GET THE, UM, USER LIST.

AND ALSO THAT THE, UM, THE SITTING IN THE VENDOR WEBSITES AREN'T BEING UPDATED WITH THE, WITH ACCURATE INFORMATION.

THE EFFECT OF THIS IS THAT ACCOUNTS ARE, ARE AREN'T BILL OR, OR SORRY, THE FIRST ONE WE ALREADY COVERED.

THE SECOND BULLET UNDER THE EFFECT IS THAT THE, UM, ALARM OWNERS MIGHT NOT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORDINANCE AND THE CITY MIGHT NOT KNOW ALL THE CURRENT ALARM USERS AND CUSTOMERS COULD BE MISINFORMED OF FEE AMOUNTS.

OUR RECOMMENDATION TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, THE FIRST ONE WE COVERED, ALREADY COVERED BEFORE, THE SECOND RECOMMENDATION IS FOR THEM, IS FOR THE, TO AMEND THE CONTRACT WITH THE VENDOR TO REQUIRE THEM TO REACH OUT TO THE ALARM COMPANIES TO GET THAT UPDATED VENDOR LISTING AND TO UPDATE

[00:20:01]

THE VENDORS AND CITY'S, UM, ALARM WEBSITES THEY CONCURRED.

AND THEIR ACTION PLAN.

THE FIRST ONE WE'VE ALREADY COVERED IN THE PREVIOUS ONE, THE SECOND ONE, UM, THEY STATED THAT THE VENDOR HAS AGREED TO REACH OUT TO THE ALARM COMPANIES IN TWICE A YEAR TO GET THE MOST UPDATED CUSTOMER LISTING.

AND ALSO THAT THE CITY AND THE VENDOR ARE WORKING TOWARDS UPDATING THEIR WEBSITE.

AND THEY SAY THE IMPLEMENTATION DATE IS, THESE ARE CURRENTLY IN PROCESS.

ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? NOT NECESSARILY A QUESTION, BUT IT SOUNDED LIKE THE CONTRACT WAS POORLY WRITTEN TO BEGIN WITH.

THE VENDOR WAS ACTUALLY DOING THE VERY MINIMUM, IT WOULD'VE SOUND LIKE, UH, TO, TO ADHERE TO THE CONTRACT, UH, NOT REACHING OUT TO THE VENDORS TO ASSURE THAT WE HAD, UH, THE APPROPRIATE INFORMATION NOT GOING PAST 120 DAYS, UH, TO CONTINUE THE COLLECTIONS AND ALL OF THAT.

IS THAT, IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? IS THAT WHAT WE'RE FIXING? I I THINK YOU'RE SEEING SOME ISSUES THAT AUDIT HAS CAUGHT.

THAT'S CERTAINLY AN ISSUE THAT WAS NOT IN THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT.

IT WAS SOMETHING WE REQUESTED FROM THEM TO DO, UH, TO REACH OUT TO THE VENDORS, BUT IT WAS NOT TO DO IT ON A REOCCURRING BASIS.

BUT I HOPE THAT DOESN'T GIVE YOU A BAD IMPRESSION OVERALL OF THIS VENDOR.

OUR EXPERIENCE WITH THEM IS THEY'RE VERY RESPONSIVE.

UH, WHEN WE ASK THEM TO MAKE THESE CHANGES, THEY'RE ON IT RIGHT AWAY.

UH, I THINK SOME OF IT IS WE, YOU KNOW, PUTTING THE, IMPLEMENTING THIS IN PLACE, SH WE SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT.

YES.

IN THE BEGINNING.

THAT'S RIGHT.

UM, BUT, UH, GOING BACK TO THE VENDORS OR, OR TO THE ALARM VENDORS AND ASKING THEM FOR A CUSTOMER LESS CERTAINLY SHOULD BE ON THERE.

AND THEY'RE VERY RECEPTIVE TO THAT SUGGESTION.

AND, AND THEY'VE ALREADY IMPLEMENTED.

SO ARE WE RE, ARE WE, UH, PUTTING ANYTHING IN THE CONTRACT NOW THAT WILL, WHAT? I HEAR YOU SAY THAT, WELL, THE VENDOR HAS AGREED TO DO IT.

THAT'S GREAT.

BUT ARE WE REDOING THE CONTRACT TO ASSURE THAT IN THE, IN THE FUTURE IT IS NOT A SITUATION OF THEY'RE JUST DOING IT, IT'S THERE, IT'S CALLING FRONT TO DO IT.

WHEN IT'S TIME TO REDO THE CONTRACT, WE CAN, UH, THEY'RE TELLING US THEY'LL DO IT.

IF THEY DON'T FOLLOW THROUGH WITH WHAT THEY'RE TELLING US, YOU KNOW, WE MAY CAN REDO THE CONTRACT.

LIKE I SAY, RIGHT NOW, EVERYTHING, WE'RE ASKING THEM TO PUT THE, THE SENIOR CITIZEN ONLINE TO CHANGE SOME OF THE WORDING TO THE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE DOING IT.

SO, UM, WE CAN ADD THAT WHEN WE RESIGN THE CONTRACT, WE CAN ADD THAT WORDING IN THERE.

THANK YOU, CHIEF.

I MIGHT AS WELL JUST STAY UP HERE.

YEAH, RIGHT.

? YEAH.

COUNCILMAN MOORE.

99, 9 0.9% OF MY QUESTION.

CHIEF, WHEN IS THIS, WHEN IS THE CONTRACT UP FOR RENEWAL AND, AND WHAT'S THE LENGTH OF CONTRACT? THE LENGTH IS TYPICALLY TWO YEARS, BUT I DON'T KNOW THAT ANSWER THAT QUESTION WHEN IT'S UP FOR RENEWAL.

YOU KNOW THAT ANSWER TO THAT? NO.

YEAH, I'M SORRY.

I DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER TO THAT.

I CAN GET IT FOR YOU.

IT'S USUALLY, IT'S TWO, TWO YEAR PERIOD.

IT'S USUALLY A TWO YEAR PERIOD.

SO, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHERE WE, WE HAVE RENEWED THE CONTRACT ONCE, UH, BUT WHEN THAT'S RENEWAL IS UP, I'M NOT SURE.

I'LL HAVE TO CHECK ON THAT.

OKAY.

YOU KNOW, MITCH, I, I HAVE IT.

OH, YOU HAVE IT? OKAY.

UH, IT'S ACTUALLY, THE INITIAL TERM WAS THREE YEARS.

THREE YEARS, OKAY.

YEAH.

AND THEN IT'S RENEWED EVERY YEAR, I BELIEVE.

OKAY.

YEAH.

SO WE CAN, WE CAN INCLUDE THAT WORDING ON THE NEXT ONE.

WHEN DO THE NEXT RENEWAL? THREE, I MEAN, UP IN OCTOBER, I BELIEVE.

THREE YEARS.

AND RENEWABLE ANNUALLY.

YEAH.

OKAY.

OKAY.

SO CHIEF, YOU SAID YOU ARE, YOU, YOU ARE COMFORTABLE AND SATISFIED WITH WAY IT'S OPERATING NOW? WELL, WITH THESE SUGGESTED CHANGES, YES.

WITH THESE CHANGES.

OKAY.

WELL, I'D JUST LIKE TO ECHO WHAT COMES FROM MOORE SAID THAT I'VE BEEN SEEING CUZ MEMORY FADES AND PERSONALITIES COME AND GO.

YEAH, I'D LIKE TO SEE ALL OF THOSE THINGS IN A CONTRACT WITH THE VENDOR.

AND I DON'T KNOW, WHEN IT COMES TO RENEWAL, ARE WE LOOKING AT PRETTY MUCH A SOLE SOURCE VENDOR OR, UH, THE SAME VENDOR JUST RE-UPPING? OR DO WE DO AN RFP? ARE WE, YOU KNOW, DO WE SEE WHAT ELSE IS OUT THERE? BUT YOU'RE GETTING INTO PURCHASING QUESTIONS NOW.

I, I, I DON'T, I DON'T, WE'RE SATISFIED WITH THIS VENDOR.

WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO CHANGE IF, IF WE CAN RE-UP WITH THIS VENDOR WITHOUT GOING THROUGH ANY PROCESSES, OUR PLAN IS TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT.

UH, BUT WHEN DOES IT REACH TO THE POINT THAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO BY LAW? I'M NOT SURE.

OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

BUT WE, I MEAN, BUT CHANGING THIS FOR THE NEXT CONTRACT WOULD BE EASY FOR US.

WE CAN GET THAT CHANGED.

OKAY.

ALRIGHT.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU.

THANKS CHAIR.

ALL RIGHT, ALEX.

OKAY.

UH, THE NEXT ISSUE, UH,

[00:25:01]

NUMBER FOUR, SECURITY.

UM, WHILE WE WERE DOING OUR TESTING, WE SAW THAT THE VENDORS AND ADMIN SITE DIDN'T HAVE A SECURITY PROTOCOL ENABLED.

AND ALSO THAT THE CONTRACT DIDN'T HAVE WORDING TO REQUIRE THE VENDOR TO PRO OR TO PERFORM A SOC TWO, UM, AND, AND SUBMIT THE RESULTS TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THE, THE CAUSE OF THIS IS BECAUSE THERE WASN'T, UM, MONITORING OF THE WEBSITE SECURITY PROCESSES AND THERE WAS A LACK OF SOC TWO AWARENESS AND THE EFFECTS IS THAT THE, UM, THE WEBSITES COULD BE EXPLOITED AND THEY COULD BE VULNERABLE, UH, VULNER VULNERABILITIES THAT ARE UNKNOWN.

OUR RECOMMENDATION TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WAS FOR THE VENDOR TO FIX THE SECURITY ISSUE THAT WE IDENTIFIED AND TO ASK THE VENDOR TO PERFORM A RECURRING SECURITY REVIEW AND TO ALSO, UM, CONSIDER CHANGING THE CONTRACT TO MAKE IT SO THAT'S A REQUIREMENT FOR THEM TO PERFORM THE SOC TWO AND TO REPORT TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

THEY CONCURRED AND THEY STATED THAT THE VENDOR HAS FIXED THOSE OR, OR HAS IMPLEMENTED THOSE FOR NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO, AND THAT THE VENDOR HAS ALSO AGREED TO PERFORM THE SOC TWO REPORTS ANNUALLY AND SEND THOSE RESULTS TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

AND THESE CHANGES ARE CURRENTLY IN PROCESS.

ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE A LOT OF COMMENTS, BUT NO QUESTIONS.

RIGHT.

? I HAD TO LEARN THAT.

I THINK IT'S THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER, SO IT'S NO, WELL, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S THE IDEA THAT WE DON'T WANT THE BAD GUYS TO GET A LIST OF EVERY ONE OF OUR RESIDENTS WHO HAS AN ALARM AND JUST DOING THE BARE MINIMUM OF SECURITY WOULD BE NICE.

UM, ANYWAY, LOTS OF COMMENTS.

NO QUESTIONS.

MOVING ON.

OKAY, THE LAST FINDING, NUMBER FIVE, THE APPEALS.

SO WE IDENTIFIED THAT THERE WERE APPEALS THAT WERE TAKING PLACE UP TO A YEAR AFTER THE INVOICE WAS SENT OUT, EVEN THOUGH THE ORDINANCE STATES THAT THE TIME LIMIT IS 10 DAYS.

AND WE ALSO IDENTIFIED THAT THE VENDOR DIDN'T HAVE A REPORT THAT HAD THE CUSTOMER APPEAL DETAILS.

THE CAUSE OF THIS IS THE, THE POLICE, THE GARLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT WANTED, UH, FLEXIBILITY FOR THE APPEAL DEADLINES AND THAT THE VENDOR WASN'T PREVIOUSLY REQUESTED TO CREATE A CUSTOMER APPEALS REPORT.

THE EFFECT IS THAT IT COULD BE, UH, A WASTE OF RESOURCES WERE LIKE DUE TO SERVICES BEING, OR, AND FEES MIGHT ALSO BE COLLECTED LATE.

AND ALSO THAT IT, IT MADE IT DIFFICULT TO MONITOR, UM, APPEAL TIMELINES FOR, AND, UH, THE RECOMMENDATION WAS FOR POLICE DEPARTMENT TO REEVALUATE THE, UM, APPEAL DEADLINE.

AND THE SECOND PART OF THAT IS TO ASK THE VENDOR TO CREATE A REPORT THAT CREATES THE CUSTOMER APPEAL INFORMATION.

THEY CONCURRED AND THEY SAID THAT THEY'RE WORKING ON CHANGING THE ORDINANCE FOR, TO MAKE IT, UH, CHANGING FOR THE 10 DAYS TO A LONGER DAY THERE.

AND THAT THE VENDOR HAS ALSO AGREED TO, UH, KEEP ADDITIONAL APPEAL DETAILS AND THE CHANGES ARE CURRENTLY IN PROCESS.

CHIEF, DID YOU WANT US TO INCLUDE A RECOMMENDATION FROM THE AUDIT COMMITTEE, UH, THAT SUPPORTS THAT, THAT GOAL ON CHANGING THE APPEAL DATE? YES.

AND ALLOWING US FLEXIBILITY BECAUSE A LOT OF THESE APPEAL, I MEAN A LOT OF THESE ALARMS ARE MAYBE AN INDIVIDUAL THAT HAD A MEDICAL EMERGENCY AND THEY'RE IN THE HOSPITAL AND THEY COME HOME AND THEY'VE GOT A STACK OF BILLS AND NOW THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.

AND WE'RE, WE'RE VERY LENIENT ON THIS.

UM, AND SO IF THEY CAN COME IN AND GIVE US A GOOD REASON, WE DISMISS IT.

AND EVEN VACATIONS, SEASONAL VACATION, SLOW DOWN, YOU NAME IT.

10 DAYS IS JUST, IT'S TOO SHORT.

IT'S WAY TOO SHORT.

UM, WHAT, UH, WHAT'S YOUR, YOUR, YOUR GOAL? I THINK WE RECOMMENDED 30 DAYS, BUT EVEN THAT TO, FOR SOME DISCRETION ON SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT.

OKAY.

OKAY.

UM, I MEAN, 30 IS EASY.

UH, I'M SURPRISED WE PUT THIS IN ORDINANCE FORM.

I'M, I'M SURPRISED IT'S NOT JUST INTERNAL POLICY THAT YOU GUYS HAVE.

THE, THE FLEXIBILITY TO SET PROBABLY, YEAH.

THAT PROBABLY WOULD BE BEST IS, IS NOT TO SET A DATE.

YEAH.

I THINK I'D LIKE TO TAKE THAT OUTTA THE ORDINANCE ENTIRELY.

I THINK.

YEAH, I THINK, I THINK IT'S, I THINK THEY'D BE BETTER, BIGGER

[00:30:01]

PART OF THE INTERIM POLICY LEAVING YOU CHIEF YOUR DEPARTMENT WITH THE DISCRETION.

YEAH.

TO GO EITHER WAY WITH, WITH THAT.

NOW ONE OF THE THINGS YOU MENTIONED THAT COME IN NOW, UH, WOULD A, WOULD A PHONE CALL DO OR SOMETHING, AND I'M THINKING ABOUT SENIORS NOW.

YEAH.

UH, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY GET BACK AND MAYBE THEY CAN'T FOR, FOR, FOR SOME REASON HEALTH OTHERWISE.

UM, MAY ONE TO THINK AS PART OF YOUR INTERNAL P POLICY, YOU KNOW, IF IF IF THEY, IF THEY'RE ABLE TO CALL IN, THEY CAN'T PHYSICALLY COME DOWN TO PD, BUT THEY, THEY CAN CALL DOWN AND SOMEONE ASK A SERIES OF QUESTIONS, WOULD THAT BE SUFFICIENT? SURE.

THEY CAN CALL, THEY CAN COME IN.

OKAY.

AGAIN, WE'RE VERY LENIENT ON THIS.

WE JUST WANT TO KNOW YOU'RE TAKING CARE OF THE PROBLEM REALLY IS IS THE GOAL HERE, SO, OKAY.

OKAY.

BECAUSE CUZ BILLS PARTICULARLY FROM THE CITY, THE SENIORS, IT FRIGHTENS THEM.

RIGHT.

I CAN, I CAN TELL YOU RIGHT, AS SOON AS YOU'VE GOT CITY OF GARLAND, IT'S THAT THAT BLOOD PRESSURE GOES, I'M TELLING YOU WHAT HAPPENS TO IT.

AND THE EASIEST WAY WE CAN MAKE IT FOR THEM TO, IF THEY CAN PICK UP THE PHONE AND CALL THIS NUMBER AND SURE.

YES.

AND DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT, I, I THINK THAT WOULD BE VERY VALID.

VERY, VERY.

IT'S NOT JUST SENIORS.

I GET THAT POWER BILL EVERY MONTH.

WELL, I, I, I, I, I KNOW, BUT YOU KNOW, BUT YOU GOT SOME STUFF YOU CAN TAKE.

SENIORS CAN'T TO RELIEVE THE PRESSURE.

SO AT, AT YOUR AGE.

OKAY.

CHIEF, THANK YOU.

YES.

I THINK THAT, UH, BASED ON EVERYTHING THAT I'VE HEARD, FIRST OF ALL, THE AUDIT COMMISSION AUDIT DEPARTMENT, YOU'VE DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB IN IDENTIFYING WHAT THE CONCERNS ARE OF THIS, UH, THIS ORDINANCE.

AND AS A RESULT OF THAT IMPLEMENTATION NOW IS GONNA GIVE YOU A GOOD CHECK AND BALANCE, GOING TO GIVE YOU A PROCESS BY WHICH, UH, UH, THE VENDOR KNOWS EXACTLY WHAT TO DO, WHEN TO DO IT, AND HOW TO GO ABOUT DOING IT.

AND IT STILL GIVES YOU DISCRETION IN THE WAY OF, UH, BEING LENIENT AND BEING SENSITIVE TO HOW IT'S BEING IMPLEMENTED.

SO I THINK THAT, UH, WE'RE IN A GOOD POSITION NOW TO GO FORWARD.

YES, SIR.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

ALEX, BRING US HOME.

THAT'S IT.

THAT'S IT? YEP.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, MEMBERS, UH, WE HAD A, I'VE GOT THE, THE NOTES HERE, UH, THE HIGH POINTS.

UM, BUT OUR TAKEAWAY FROM THIS IS, UH, AUDIT COMMITTEE WILL RECOMMEND, UH, REMOVAL OF THE APPEALED TIMELINE FOR ORDINANCE AND LEAVE THAT AS A DEPARTMENT LEVEL POLICY.

WE GOOD THERE? THUMBS UP, THUMBS DOWN.

AND TO, TO ASSURE THAT THE, UH, THE LANGUAGE AND THE CONTRACT LANGUAGE IN OCTOBER OF 2023 GETS UPDATED.

AND I'LL LOOK TO LEGAL FOR THAT ONE.

IT'S ACTUALLY AUGUST.

AUGUST.

YEAH.

I MISSED AUGUST EARLIER.

OKAY.

VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU, GENTLEMEN.

THANKS.

ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER THREE, TAKE HOME VEHICLES AUDIT CHAIRMAN, I'M GONNA KICKSTART, UH, YES, SIR.

AS PATRICIA AND AARON PREPARES FOR THIS, UH, THIS AUDIT AGAIN, UH, WAS REQUESTED BY AN AUDIT COMMITTEE MEMBER COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS, UH, REQUESTED THIS AUDIT.

UH, SO, UH, WE HAD FOUR OBJECTIVES, UH, AND WE'LL, WE'LL SHOW THAT IT'S ON PAGE TWO.

UH, DETERMINE IF THE TAKE HOME VEHICLE DIRECTIVE IS UP TO DATE AND INCLUDES RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS SUCH AS ALL RECESSION, PROPER USE, LIABILITY COVERAGE, AND REIMBURSEMENT CRITERIA NUMBER TWO WAS TO DETERMINE IF THE CITY MAINTAINS A CURRENT AND A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF TAKE HOME VEHICLES.

UH, PART THREE WAS TO DETERMINE IF TAKE HOME VEHICLE ASSIGNMENTS ARE JUSTIFIED UNREASONABLE.

AND LASTLY, WE WANTED TO VERIFY HOW TAXABLE VALUE OF TAKE HOME VEHICLE IS DETERMINED AND HOW THE EMPLOYEE PAYROLL REDUCTION IS CALCULATED.

LITTLE HISTORY ABOUT THIS PROGRAM.

UH, THIS PROGRAM WAS IMPLEMENTED BACK IN 1977, UH, COME WAY FORWARD IN 2008.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS WE WERE NOT, UM, ASKING EMPLOYEES TO REIMBURSE UP UNTIL THAT TIME.

IN 2008, THE RECESSION HIT.

THAT'S WHEN THE CITY DECIDED, UH, THE EMPLOYEES WILL HAVE TO PAY THEIR PORTION OF THE FUEL REIMBURSEMENT.

AND THAT'S WHEN WE IMPLEMENTED THAT.

UH, DURING THE FIRST FEW YEARS, WE DID HAVE SOME VERY GOOD MONITORING.

UH, THE RATES WERE GOING UP AND DOWN, AND WE DID, UH, JUST THE RATES.

UH, WE CAME UP WITH A FORMULA.

UH, WE WERE ENSURING THAT, UH, TAXABLE FRINGE BENEFITS WERE CALCULATED, UH, ON EMPLOYEES, PAYROLL, ALL OF THAT STUFF.

BUT THEN THE, AS YOU ALL ARE AWARE, THE THE FUEL RATE, UH, FUEL CH COSTS HAVE GONE DOWN.

AND SO WE, AND PLUS WE HAD SOME MANAGEMENT CHANGE.

UH, RISK MANAGEMENT WAS VERY INVOLVED WHEN ROBBIE WAS HERE.

HE RETIRED.

SO, UH, AT THAT POINT, UM, THERE WASN'T A LOT OF OVERSIGHT.

AND, UH, AND THE DIRECTIVE CLEARLY EXPLAINS WHAT IS CONSIDERED A TAKE HOME VEHICLE AND, UH, WHAT IS CONSIDERED A STANDBY VEHICLE.

A STANDBY VEHICLE IS A TAKE HOME

[00:35:01]

VEHICLE, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S USED ON A ROTATING BASIS.

SO IT'S NOT THAT ONE EMPLOYEE TAKES THE VEHICLE HOME EVERY DAY.

IT'S, IT COULD BE A ROTATIONAL BASIS.

FOR EXAMPLE, WATER DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE MAY TAKE IT HOME ON MONDAY, TUESDAY, AND WEDNESDAY.

EMPLOYEE B MAY TAKE IT HOME THURSDAY, FRIDAY AND SATURDAY.

SO, UH, THAT IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT.

OUR FOCUS WAS MAINLY ON THE TAKE HOME VEHICLES.

IF A VEHICLE IS ASSIGNED TO AN INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEE AND IF HE'S TAKING IT HOME, WHAT CONTROLS DO WE HAVE TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE TRACKING THOSE? WE ARE, UH, WE ARE ENSURING THAT, UH, PER THE IRS'S REGULATION, THAT IS A TAXABLE FRENCH BENEFITS.

ARE WE CAPTURING THAT INFORMATION? SO HIGH LEVEL, UM, WE WANTED TO LOOK AT THE DIRECTIVES, THE CONTROLS MENTIONED IN THE DIRECTIVE.

WE WANTED TO SEE HOW WE WERE MONITORING IT.

UH, WE ALSO WANTED TO SEE HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE TAKING THIS HOME.

SO THERE WAS A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE COVERED IN THE AUDIT.

UH, THE FORMAT OF THIS AUDIT IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT, I HOPE, UH, THAT'S OKAY WITH YOU.

UH, AND PATRICIA AND ERIN AND DID A VERY GOOD JOB.

UH, ROBERT GAN, WHEN HE WAS WITH US, UH, HE, HE STARTED KICKSTARTED THIS AUDIT, BUT PATRICIA FINISHED IN AN ERIN ASSIST PATRICIA WITH CONDUCTING ANALYSIS AND FINALIZING THOSE REPORTS.

I'M GONNA TURN THIS OVER TO THEM.

THEY'RE GONNA GO OVER THE, WHAT WE FOUND.

AND MITCH, I DO WANNA THANK HIM.

UH, I KNOW WE, WE DIDN'T, WE, YOU SHOWED THIS REPORT TWO WEEKS AGO.

I ASKED HIM, MITCH, I KNOW YOU HAVE A LOT ON YOUR PLATE.

UH, IT'S TWO WEEKS ENOUGH FOR YOU TO GO THROUGH EVERYTHING.

HE SAID, GE, LET'S PUT THIS BEHIND.

I WILL GET THE RESPONSE BACK TO YOU.

I KNOW HE'S VERY BUSY TOWARDS THE END OF THIS YEAR.

UH, REALLY DO WANNA APPRECIATE HIM.

AND HE, WE DID SEND HIM A LOT OF INFORMATION ANALYTICS THAT WE CAME UP WITH ALL OF THAT STUFF.

AND HE WAS ABLE TO, AND HE, I KNOW HE'S WORKING WITH OTHER DEPARTMENTS, SO DO WANNA APPRECIATE HIM FOR, FOR WORKING WITH US WITH THAT, UH, PATRICIA AND AARON, I THINK AARON IS GONNA KICKSTART.

I WILL.

ALL RIGHT.

SO, UM, WE FOUND THAT, UH, THE CITY HAS ABOUT, UH, OVER 2000 VEHICLES.

UM, AND SO WE WERE ABLE TO IDENTIFY 197 OF THEM AS TAKE HOME VEHICLES BY FEEDBACK FROM THE DEPARTMENTS AND ALSO, UM, SOME PAYROLL DEDUCTION REPORTS AND FRINGE BENEFIT REPORTS.

SO IN THESE FIRST COUPLE GRAPHICS, UM, THAT'S JUST A BREAKDOWN OF TAKE HOME VEHICLES BY DEPARTMENT AND THEN TAKE HOME VEHICLES BY TYPE.

SO I'LL MOVE INTO OUR FIRST OBSERVATION.

SO WE WANTED TO DETERMINE IF THE CITY WAS BEING, UH, REIMBURSED THE ACTUAL COST OF THE FUEL USED IN COMMUTES WITH THESE TAKE HOME VEHICLES.

SO, UM, THE FLEET DEPARTMENT PROVIDED CONSUMPTION DATA, UM, THAT INCLUDED AVERAGE FUEL COST PER MILE BASED ON EACH VEHICLE.

UM, SO WE'VE AVERAGED THOSE COSTS BASED ON THE VEHICLE TYPE.

AND THERE WE CAN SEE THE CUMULATIVE AVERAGE IN THAT TABLE BELOW, UM, FOR ABOUT 15 CENTS PER MILE, UM, FOR 2021, AND THEN 23 CENTS AND 2022.

WE THEN WANTED TO APPLY THAT DATA TO THE ACTUAL COMMUTE MILEAGE BASED ON THE TAKE HOME VEHICLE AGREEMENTS FOR EACH EMPLOYEE THAT HAS A TAKE HOME VEHICLE.

UM, AND WE CALCULATED OUT THAT THE CITY, UH, THAT THIS COST THE CITY ABOUT, UH, $283,000 IN FY 21 AND $419,000 IN FY 22.

AND THEN WE ALSO, UM, LOOKED AT THE COMMUTING MILEAGE, UM, MULTIPLIED BY THE FUEL RATES USED IN THE TAKE HOME VEHICLE AGREEMENTS.

THE FUEL RATES AND THE AGREEMENTS HAVEN'T BEEN UPDATED SINCE 2015, SO THAT'S WHY YOU SEE A MUCH, UH, LOWER REIMBURSEMENT RATE THERE.

UM, AND THAT'S THAT FIRST COLUMN ON THE LEFT IS IF ALL EMPLOYEES WERE TO REIMBURSE THE CITY.

UM, AND THE COLUMN ON THE RIGHT IS TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THOSE THAT WERE EXEMPT FROM REIMBURSING, AND THEN ALSO A FEW THAT, UM, THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT DID NOT HAVE ON FILE THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN REIMBURSING.

AND THEN I'LL MOVE ON TO OBSERVATION NUMBER TWO.

SO WE WANTED TO DETERMINE IF EMPLOYEES, UH, WHO, WHO WAS REIMBURSING FOR FUEL USAGE OR WHO WASN'T.

UM, SO GOING TO THE NEXT GRAPHIC, UM, OF THOSE 197 TAKE-HOME VEHICLES, WE FOUND THAT 20 WERE EXEMPT.

AND THEN 177 WERE NOT EXEMPT, BUT ONLY 160 WERE ACTUALLY, UM, BEING DEDUCTED FROM THEIR PAYROLL FOR REIMBURSING THE CITY.

UH, 17 WERE NOT FOUND WITHIN FINANCE RECORDS.

UM, AND THAT COULD BE DUE TO DEPARTMENTS NOT TURNING THOSE INTO THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

FOR OBSERVATION THREE, WE WANTED TO CHECK THE SAME THING WITH FRINGE BENEFITS BEING REPORTED.

SO, UM, THIS IS AN IRS REQUIREMENT AND, UM, THE ONLY TAKE-HOME VEHICLES THAT ARE EXCLUDED FROM THIS REQUIREMENT ARE PUBLIC SAFETY VEHICLES LIKE, UM, LAW ENFORCEMENT VEHICLES, UH, FIRE, PUBLIC SAFETY, THOSE TYPES.

[00:40:01]

SO WE FOUND THAT, UH, 29 OF THE 197 SHOULD HAVE BEEN, UM, BEING REPORTED FOR RECEIVING FRINGE BENEFITS.

UH, BUT WE ONLY HAVE 18 BEING REPORTED BY THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT.

UM, AGAIN, THIS IS, UH, DUE TO DEPARTMENTS NOT SUBMITTING THOSE THV AGREEMENTS TO THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT SO THEY CAN ACCURATELY REPORT THAT FRINGE BENEFIT.

AND THEN WE ALSO WANTED TO LOOK AT, UH, THE MILEAGE, UH, COMMUTE RANGE, UM, BECAUSE WE NOTICED THAT THERE WERE A LOT OF THEM OUTSIDE OF GARLAND.

SO THIS BAR GRAPH JUST SHOWS, UM, STARTING FROM THE LEFT, GOING RIGHT, UM, LESS THAN 10 MILE COMMUTE THAN 10 TO 20 MILES, 20 TO 30, AND THEN OVER 30 MILE COMMUTE.

AND THIS IS A ONE WAY DISTANCE.

AND THEN BELOW THAT, UH, WE ALSO WANTED TO, TO SHOW A DEPICTION OF, UH, WHICH COMMUTES WERE LOCAL VICE OUTSIDE OF GARLAND.

AND THEN THIS IS JUST A MAP DEPICTION OF ALL OF THE ADDRESSES LISTED ON THE TAKE HOME VEHICLE AGREEMENTS.

OKAY.

SO FOR OBSERVATION NUMBER FIVE, WE WANTED TO KNOW IF THE PROGRAM WAS BEING MANAGED APPROPRIATELY AND DETERMINE AND COMPREHENSIVELY AND DETERMINED THAT IT WAS NOT.

UM, THE RESPONSIBILITIES ARE DISPERSED AMONG THE FINANCE FLEET AND RISK MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENTS EACH WITH, UH, VARIOUS ROLES, BUT VERY LITTLE COORDINATED EFFORT.

THERE IS NO CENTRALIZED TRACKING AND EACH DEPARTMENT WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT A DIFFERENT DEPARTMENT, UH, WAS PRESIDING OVER THE PROCESS.

THE CURRENT TAKE HOME VEHICLE AGREEMENT FORM IS A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING, UM, AND IS REPETITIVE OF, UH, THE TAKE HOME VEHICLE DIRECTIVE.

UM, THE, WHEN THE CALCULATIONS WERE NOT COMPLETED BY THE DEPARTMENT'S FINANCE DEPARTMENT WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE EMPLOYEE WAS EXEMPT FROM REIMBURSING THE CITY FOR, FOR FUEL USAGE.

BUT WE THINK THAT MAYBE THAT WAS BECAUSE DEPARTMENTS WEREN'T QUITE UNDERSTANDING THE FORM, UM, FOR THE LACK OF INFORMATION ON THAT WAS ON THERE.

AND THE AGREEMENT, UM, HAS NOT BEEN SENT TO THE CITY MANAGER FOR APPROVAL BY ONE DEPARTMENT FOR AT LEAST TWO YEARS FOR ALL OF THOSE VEHICLES.

UM, COPIES OF THE EXECUTED AGREEMENTS WERE NOT DISTRIBUTED TO ALL OF THE RELEVANT DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING BACK TO THE ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT WITH THE CITY MANAGER'S SIGNATURE.

AND THE AGREEMENTS WERE NOT BEING REVIEWED AND UPDATED ANNUALLY AS FUEL COSTS CHANGE AND COMMUTE MILES CHANGE, OR WHEN THERE IS A CHANGE IN VEHICLE TYPE.

UM, WE DID MAP, UH, ERIN GOT HER DATA FROM, UH, WE MAPPED THE GOOGLE MAP, UH, ADDRESSES BASED ON WHAT HR HAD LISTED FOR THE EMPLOYEE'S ADDRESSES AND COMPARED THAT TO, UH, THE TAKE HOME VEHICLE AGREEMENTS.

AND WE DID FIND SOME DISCREPANCIES THERE.

SO ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ONE? NO.

OKAY.

SO, OB OBSERVATION NUMBER SIX, UH, OUR CITY VEHICLE DRIVING REQUIREMENTS BEING MET.

UM, AND ACCORDING TO THE GENERAL SAFETY RULES FOR MOTOR VEHICLE AND EQUIPMENT OPERATION IN THE CITY'S SAFETY MANUAL MOTOR VEHICLE RECORD CHECKS WOULD BE CONDUCTED ANNUALLY FOR ALL EMPLOYEES.

WE INQUIRED WITH RISK MANAGEMENT AND WAS INFORMED THAT THEY HAVE NOT CONDUCTED THOSE DRIVING RECORD, UH, REQUESTS SINCE 2017 OR 18.

SO THE CITY IS NOT AWARE OF WHETHER EMPLOYEES WITH TAKE HOME VEHICLES ARE MAINTAINING VALID LICENSES AFTER THEIR INITIAL HIRE DATE, OR WHETHER TICKETS, ACCIDENTS, OR OTHER INFRACTIONS MIGHT IMPACT, UH, AUTHORIZATION AND LIABILITY.

THE DEFENSIVE DRIVING COURSE, UM, IS ALSO A REQUIREMENT, UM, FOR EMPLOYEES WHO DRIVE FOR THE CITY, WHETHER IT'S THEIR OWN VEHICLE OR A CITY VEHICLE.

AND TO YOU DO THAT EVERY THREE YEARS.

RISK MANAGEMENT DOES, UH, CONDUCT THE DEFENSIVE DRIVING AND PROVIDES HUMAN RESOURCES, UH, WITH THE ATTENDANCE LIST.

BUT WE DID FIND, UH, 38 NON-POLICE EMPLOYEES WITH TAKE HOME VEHICLES, BUT 17 OF THEM, UH, HAVE NOT COMPLETED THE DEFENSIVE DRIVING ON OBSERVATION NUMBER SEVEN IS THE DIRECTIVE.

CURRENT AND COMPREHENSIVE.

THE DIRECTIVE HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED SINCE 2008.

AS JED POINTED OUT.

UM, WE REVIEWED THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES OF OTHER LOCAL GOVERNMENT TAKE HOME VEHICLE PROGRAMS, UM, TO DETERMINE DESIGN AND BEST PRACTICES.

UH, THE CURRENT DIRECTIVE DOES LACK REFERENCE TO OTHER CITY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES AND AMIT SOME BEST PRACTICE BEST PRACTICES.

AND SOME EXAMPLES ARE THE CITATIONS AND ACCIDENTS THAT I MENTIONED.

UM, RESPONSE TIME STANDARDS WHETHER PASSENGERS AND CARPOOLING IS, UH, HYBRID AND ELECTRIC VEHICLES ARE NOT DISCUSSED.

UM,

[00:45:01]

OBSERVATION NUMBER EIGHT ARE STANDBY PLANS BEING MAINTAINED? AS JED MENTIONED, UH, STANDBY VEHICLES ARE TYPICALLY ON A ROTATION.

UH, VARIOUS EMPLOYEES USE THEM ON A SCHEDULE AND THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A STANDBY PLAN IN PLACE FOR THAT.

UM, BUT WHAT WE DETERMINED IS THAT THE 10 DEPARTMENTS, UH, THAT RESPONDED THAT THEY HAD STANDBY VEHICLES, ONLY TWO HAD APPROVED PLANS AND SIX DEPARTMENTS HAD SOME DOCUMENTATION BUT HAD NOT MET ALL DIRECTIVE REQUIREMENTS, UM, AND WERE NOT APPROVED.

AND THE REMAINING TWO DEPARTMENTS DID NOT HAVE ANY TYPE OF DOCUMENTATION OR APPROVED PLAN.

SO FOR OUR RECOMMENDATIONS, UM, THE FIRST ONE, WE RECOMMENDED THAT ADMINISTRATION EVALUATE THE CURRENT THV ASSIGNMENTS TO DETERMINE IF ALL CURRENT TAKE-HOME VEHICLES ARE NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE, AND WHETHER TO IDENTIFY WHICH STAFF WOULD BEST SERVE THE CITY BY HAVING A TAKE-HOME VEHICLE, A CAR ALLOWANCE, OR A MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENT FOR PERSONAL VEHICLE USE.

MANAGEMENT CONCURRED AND RESPONDED THAT MANAGING DIRECTORS REGULARLY REVIEW TAKE-HOME VEHICLE ASSIGNMENTS TO ASSURE THEIR NECESSARY AND APPROPRIATE CITY MANAGEMENT WILL CONTINUE TO WORK WITH MANAGING DIRECTORS TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE OVERSIGHT OF THIS PROGRAM.

AND THE ACTION PLAN IS FOR CITY MANAGEMENT TO REVISE THE CURRENT CITY DIRECTIVE AND RELATED POLICIES AND PROCEDURES IN THE SECOND QUARTER OF THIS YEAR.

THE SECOND RECOMMENDATION IS, UH, FOR ADMINISTRATION TO DIRECT THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT TO BEGIN APPLYING TAXABLE FRINGE BENEFITS TO COMPLY WITH IRS REQUIREMENTS AND OBTAINING FUEL USAGE REIMBURSEMENT FOR ALL APPLICABLE TAKE-HOME VEHICLE ASSIGNMENTS.

MANAGEMENT CONCURRED AND RESPONDED.

COMPLIANCE WITH IRS REGULATIONS IS PARAMOUNT.

THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS MANUAL IN NATURE, REQUIRING THE COMPLETION OF A WRITTEN FORM.

THE FORM MUST BE SUBMITTED IN MUL MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS FOR PROCESSING, AND THEREFORE HAS SEVERAL POTENTIAL POINTS OF FAILURE.

ONCE THE CITY DIRECTIVE IS UPDATED, THIS MANUAL PROCESS WILL BE REVISED TO MINIMIZE, IF NOT ELIMINATE POTENTIAL POINTS OF FAILURE.

CURRENT OVERSIGHTS OF TAXABLE FRINGE BENEFITS ARE IN THE PROCESS OF BEING CORRECTED NOW, AND THE ACTION PLAN IS THE SAME AS ABOVE.

CITY MANAGEMENT IS REVISING THE CURRENT CITY DIRECTIVE AND RELATED POLICIES PROCEDURES, UM, IN THE SECOND QUARTER THIS YEAR.

UH, RECOMMENDATION NUMBER THREE, UH, WAS FOR ADMINISTRATION TO REEVALUATE THE CURRENT TAKE HOME VEHICLE STRUCTURE AND PROCESS TO ESTABLISH A CENTRALIZED TRACKING FUNCTION AND OVERSIGHT RESPONSIBILITIES.

UH, SEVERAL BULLET POINTS TO CREATING A DATABASE, UM, REVISING THE AGREEMENT AS NECESSARY, UPDATING THE FUEL RATES ANNUALLY.

UM, MANAGEMENT CONCURRED AND STATED THAT MANAGING DIRECTORS WILL REMAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR APPROVAL OF THE VEHICLE ASSIGNMENTS AS REQUIRED.

CITY MANAGEMENT WILL REMAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR OVERSIGHT OF THE ENTIRE PROGRAM.

PORTIONS OF THE CURRENT DIRECTIVE WILL NO LONGER BE IN EFFECT, WHICH WILL ELIMINATE SOME OF THE LISTED RECOMMENDATIONS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO UPDATING THE FUEL RATES ANNUALLY AND COLLECTING ACCURATE COMMUTE.

MILEAGE REIMBURSEMENTS, EMPLOYEE REIMBURSEMENT OF THE AVERAGE FUEL COST FOR MILEAGE TO AND FROM HOME WAS ORIGINALLY IMPLEMENTED DURING THE 2008 RECESSION.

CITY MANAGEMENT INTENDS TO ELIMINATE THIS FUEL REIMBURSEMENT REQUIREMENT WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REVISED DIRECTIVE IN THE SECOND QUARTER OF 2023.

HOWEVER, A MAXIMUM DISTANCE AND RESPONSE TIME WILL BE IMPLEMENTED.

MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT OF THE APPROPRIATE ASSIGNMENT AND USE OF TAKE HOME VEHICLES REMAINS A PRIORITY.

AND AS STATED ACTION PLAN IS THAT CITY MANAGEMENT IS REVISING THE CURRENT DIRECTIVE.

RECOMMENDATION NUMBER FOUR WAS TO UPDATE THE DIRECTIVE TO FURTHER CLARIFY ELIGIBILITY AND JUSTIFICATION CRITERIA, ADDITIONAL VEHICLE TYPES AND OTHER, UH, USAGE BEST PRACTICES.

IDENTIFIED MANAGEMENT CONCURS AND STATES THAT THE CITY OF DIRECTIVE IS BEING REVISED TO CLARIFY THE ASSIGNMENT, USE MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT OF THE TAKE HOME VEHICLES, UH, AND SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED BY THE SECOND QUARTER AGAIN OF 2023.

ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION TO CON RECONSIDER THE CITY REQUIREMENTS FOR EMPLOYEES WHO DRIVE CD VEHICLES SUCH AS PERFORMING THE DRIVING RECORD CHECKS AND COMPLETING DEFENSIVE DRIVING COURSES.

MANAGEMENT CONCURS AND THE REVISED CITY DIRECTIVE DRIVING RECORD CHECKS WILL BE REQUIRED.

THE REQUIREMENT TO COMPLETE DEFENSIVE DRIVING IS OUTDATED AND WILL NO LONGER BE REQUIRED.

CITY MANAGEMENT WILL BE REVISING THE DIRECTIVE AGAIN, SECOND QUARTER OF 2023.

AND THE FINAL RECOMMENDATION IS TO ENSURE DEPARTMENTS WITH TAKE HOME VEHICLES DEVELOPED STANDBY PLANS AS APPROPRIATE WITH CITY MANAGER APPROVAL AND MANAGEMENT, UH, CONCURS AND STATED THAT THE REVISED DIRECTIVE WILL CLARIFY THE USE OF BOTH TAKE HOME VEHICLES AND STANDBY VEHICLES AS APPROPRIATE BY CITY MANAGEMENT TO BE IMPLEMENTED SECOND QUARTER OF 2023.

THANK YOU.

YOU BET.

MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY FOR JUST A MINUTE.

ABSOLUTELY.

THANK YOU.

SO THANKS AGAIN TO JED AND THE WHOLE TEAM FOR HELPING US WITH THIS POLICY.

JUST TO POINT OUT A FEW THINGS, THIS IS A POLICY OF COURSE THAT,

[00:50:01]

UM, AS PATRICIA HAS STATED, WAS WRITTEN IN 2008.

YOU KNOW, THE TIMING OF THAT WAS THE GREAT RECESSION, AS IN MY FORMER CAPACITY IN MY FORMER JOB.

UH, WHAT WAS GOING ON AT THAT TIME IS A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW TO MITIGATE COSTS.

AS YOU KNOW, THERE WERE SIGNIFICANT FINANCIAL CHALLENGES FOR THE CITY, UH, AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH, AS IF WE LOOK BACK THEN AS WE'VE GONE THROUGH NOW VERY FEW CITIES, I THINK WE'VE ONLY FOUND ONE IN THE STATE OF TEXAS, HOUSTON CHARGES ANY KIND OF FEE FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES FOR FUEL TO AND FROM HOME, THAT KIND OF THING.

VERY FEW DO, NONE OF THEM DO IN NORTH TEXAS.

UM, SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, A LOT OF THINGS THAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE ARE AN OUTDATED DIRECTIVE THAT WAS WRITTEN IN 2008 THAT HAS A MANUAL PROCESS.

YOU FILL OUT A FORM MANUALLY BY HAND, DO MANUAL CALCULATIONS THAT GET TURNED IN, THAT HAS TO THEN GO UP THROUGH MULTIPLE, UP THROUGH A SUPERVISOR, UP TO A DIRECTOR, TO A MANAGING DIRECTOR, AND THEN HAS TO MAKE IT TO MULTIPLE DEPARTMENTS.

THE, THE RS CALCULATIONS ARE MANDATORY.

WE HAVE TO DO THOSE.

IT'S SIMPLY A MATTER OF NOT GETTING THAT FORM TO EVERY PLACE THAT IT NEEDED TO GO.

THAT'S THE CHALLENGE WITH ANY KIND OF MANUAL PROCESS.

NOW, HAVING SAID THAT, AS WE REVIVE THE DIRECTIVE, OUR PLAN IS TO NO LONGER IMPLEMENT OR UTILIZE THAT FUEL TO AND FROM HOME, WHICH IS ONE OF THE THINGS WHILE WE'VE INCLUDED AND TALKED ABOUT, INCLUDING A RESPONSE TIME FACTOR.

AND THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN PART OF THE DECISION MAKING, RESPONDING IN A TIMELY FASHION, CUZ THOSE WITH TAKE HOME VEHICLES HAVE THAT AFTER HOURS WEEKEND HOLIDAY RESPONSE.

YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S ONE OF THE POLICE VEHICLES OR SOMEBODY WITH A BUCKET TRUCK OR WHATEVER IT IS THAT THEY NEED TO BE ABLE TO RESPOND.

SO AS WE GO THROUGH AND REVISE THIS DIRECTIVE IN HERE IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS, AND I PUT IN THERE, UH, DEFINITELY BY THE, THE END OF THE SECOND QUARTER, WE'RE LIKELY GONNA HAVE IT DONE WELL BEFORE THEN.

UM, BUT WE'LL BE CLEANING UP A LOT OF THESE PROCEDURAL THINGS AND DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE 14 YEARS AGO.

IT JUST NEEDS TO BE UPDATED AND IT NEEDS TO BE MODERNIZED.

UH, AND IT NEEDS TO BE, UM, CENTRALIZED BETTER THAN WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST.

ANYTIME YOU HAVE A MANUAL PROCESS AND SOMEONE HAS TO FILL OUT A FORM AND MAKE COPIES OF IT AND SHUFFLE IT TO A LOT OF DIFFERENT PLACES, YOU'RE GONNA FIND POINTS OF FAILURE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE FINDING IN THIS.

SO WE'LL BE CLEANING UP THAT PROCESS OF FAILURE.

WE DO, MANAGEMENT DOES WORK WITH THE MANAGING DIRECTORS ALREADY ON WHO HAS TAKE-HOME VEHICLES.

A LOT OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT YOU'VE SEEN HAS BEEN DOCUMENTATION FAILURES AND THOSE PROCESSES.

SOME OF THE THINGS I THINK IS ONE OF THE BULLET POINTS WE JUST TALKED ABOUT.

WE TALK ABOUT THE STANDBY PLANS THAT ARE IN THE CURRENT DIRECTIVE.

WELL, WE'RE GONNA TAKE CARE OF THAT BY INCLUDING THAT IN THE DIRECTIVE ITSELF.

HERE'S HOW THE STANDBY PLANS WORK, HERE'S WHO QUALIFIES, THAT KINDS OF THINGS.

SO A LOT OF THESE THINGS WILL BE TAKING CARE OF AS WE REVISE THAT DIRECTIVE.

SO, BUT WE APPRECIATE THE TEAM, JED AND HIS TEAM FOR HELPING US WITH THE PROCESS, CATCHING THESE THINGS.

SOME OF THE THINGS WE'LL LOOK AT, AND AS, AS YOU'VE SEEN, THEY'VE, THEY'VE POINTED OUT THERE'S MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO, UH, A TAKE HOME VEHICLE PROGRAM.

YOU COULD SURVEY A HUNDRED CITIES AND PROBABLY FIND A HUNDRED DIFFERENT WAYS THAT, THAT THEY DO THINGS.

BUT THERE ARE SOME CENTRAL, UH, POINTS THAT WE LOOK AT.

AND THEN THE MANAGEMENT DECISIONS OF WHY ARE WE ALLOWING THIS? WHO HAS THESE VEHICLES? WHO'S APPROVED TO HAVE THE VEHICLES AND EVERYTHING THAT GOES ALONG WITH THAT.

SO I KNOW LIKE IN POLICE, WHICH HAS THE BULK OF OUR TAKE HOME VEHICLES, ABOUT 80% OF 'EM ARE.

SO, UH, THEY HAVE A VERY INTENSIVE PROGRESS ON, ON, ON WHO GETS ASSIGNED TO TAKE HOME VEHICLE.

AND IT'S ONLY FOR RESPONSE AFTER HOURS TYPE RESPONSE OR MOSTLY FOR AFTER HOURS RESPONSE SITUATIONS, SROS, NPOS, DETECTIVES, THAT KIND OF THING.

SO AS WE GO THROUGH, AS WE ISSUE THE NEW DIRECTIVE, UH, HERE IN THE COMING MONTHS, UH, FIRST PART OF NEXT YEAR, WE'LL BE ABLE TO CLEAN UP A LOT OF THE PROCEDURAL ISSUES, ISSUES.

AND THEN ONCE WE DO THAT, THAT WILL TAKE CARE OF THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN POINTED OUT.

SO, ALL RIGHT.

AND THEY WON'T BE DOING DEFENSIVE DRIVING.

I'M NOT SURE WHY THAT GOT INCLUDED IN 2008.

YEAH, THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHERS.

I'LL COME BACK TO THAT ONE.

TYPES OF DRIVING THINGS, BUT DEFENSIVE DRIVING IS PROBABLY NOT THE BEST USE OF EMPLOYEES TIME IN DEALING WITH DRIVING CITY VEHICLES.

COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS, YOUR HONOR.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR GOOD JOB.

WELL DONE.

THANK YOU, ED, FOR, FOR DOING THIS AUDIT.

THANK YOU, MITCH.

UM, THE ONLY THING I REMEMBER IN MY PREVIOUS LIFE, UM, I REMEMBER THAT THE SYSTEM WAS MANUAL.

MM-HMM.

.

I DID REMEMBER THAT.

AND, UH, SO I

[00:55:01]

APPRECIATE THE RECOMMENDATIONS.

UH, THE FINDINGS, NOTHING, NOTHING SURPRISING.

PARTI REALLY, IT DIDN'T SURPRISE ME AT, AT ALL.

UH, YOU KNOW, UH, TALKING TO, TO FOLKS FROM OTHER CITIES AROUND, YOU KNOW, THERE'VE BEEN SOME HORROR STORIES RELATED TO VEHICLE AND, AND FLEET.

WE, FORTUNATELY WE'VE NOT HAD ANY OF THOSE HORROR STORIES IN GARLAND THAT I RECALL.

UM, AND THAT'S WHAT A, THAT'S WHAT A POLICY REVIEW PREVENTS.

UH, I BELIEVE IN BEING PROACTIVE RATHER THAN REACTIVE.

BUT, UM, MITCH, UH, I WAS GLAD TO HEAR YOU SAY, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT STEPS ARE GONNA BE TAKEN TO ADDRESS THIS? I THINK THIS IS GONNA BE A MARATHON RATHER THAN A SPRINT.

AND WHAT, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, I'D LIKE TO SEE IS AS THIS AUDIT BEING A CATALYST THAT WE COME UP WITH SORT OF A LIVING DOCUMENT FOR FUTURE, A ROADMAP, IF YOU WILL.

ALRIGHT.

AND, UH, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO HAVE COUNCIL HAVE SOME, UM, THAT YOUR PLAN INCLUDE SOME PERIODIC UPDATES.

UH, YOU KNOW, AS YOU AS, AS YOU AND THE TEAM WORKS ON THIS, YOU KNOW, CUZ I'M, I'M SURE YOU'RE GOING TO, YOU'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO DO, DO ALL OF IT IN THREE MONTHS.

THAT'S NOT THE EXPECTATION, BUT MAKING PROGRESS.

SO THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME, SOME, SOME TIMELINES IN, IN YOUR, UH, FOR LACK A BETTER TERM, I'LL USE ACTION PLAN, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM.

OKAY.

TO SEE WHAT WE ARE DOING, YOU KNOW, TO IMPROVE THIS, THIS PROCESS.

AND I ALSO, IF THERE ARE SOME, UH, BUDGETARY IMPACTS OF, OF OUR CHANGES, POLICY CHANGES, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO, I'D LIKE TO SEE THOSE IN THERE.

ALSO, I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHAT, WHAT THOSE IMPACTS ARE.

SURE.

RIGHT.

FOR FINANCIAL, YOU KNOW, AND IF THERE'S SOME STAFFING IMPACTS TO IMPLEMENT TO ADDRESS THESE FINDINGS.

SO THOSE, THOSE ARE TWO AREAS THAT I'D LIKE TO SEE IN, IN THERE ALONG WITH YOUR PLAN IF THAT IMPACT.

BUT IF WE COULD GET SOME PERIODIC UPDATES ON JUST PROGRESS, I'D APPRECIATE IT.

UM, I APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH.

SURE.

BUT, UH, LOOKING FORWARD TO IT.

AND AGAIN, THANKS TO OUR AUDIT TEAM FOR, FOR UNDERTAKING THIS ONE.

I KNEW THIS WAS ONE OF THE, THE, UH, ARCHIVE AREAS OF ARCHIVE FOR THE CITY OF GARLAND AS, AS I CALLED IT.

MM-HMM.

UH, ONE OF THOSE THINGS THAT YOU JUST KIND OF DO.

AND HE JUST KIND OF FLOATS ALONE.

AND I KNOW IT HAD BEEN A WHILE, UH, CUZ JED LOOKED AT ME KIND STRANGE WHEN I ASKED HIM ABOUT THIS.

HE, HE KIND KINDA SMILED AT ME.

HE, HE DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING, BUT HE LOOKED AT ME, YOU KNOW, BUT, BUT, UH, UH, BUT I THINK IN, UH, IN THE WHOLE SCHEME OF THINGS AND WHAT WE ARE ABOUT HERE IS PROCESS IMPROVEMENT.

AND, UH, SO WE'VE, I THINK WE'VE GOT THE FOUNDATION TO DO THAT NOW.

SO.

SO MITCH, CAN WE GET, AS YOU WORK ON THIS PLAN WITH, WITH THE TEAM, CAN WE BUILD IN THOSE UPDATES? SO DO WE KNOW WHERE WE ARE? YES, SIR.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO UPDATE MAYBE Q3 OR Q4 NEXT YEAR BACK AUDIT COMMITTEE JUST FOR A QUICK UPDATE.

YES, SIR.

OKAY.

ABSOLUTELY.

OKAY.

ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

YES, SIR.

COUNCILMAN MOORE.

I JUST WANT TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION TO, UH, COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS FOR REQUESTING THE AUDIT AND FOR YOUR STAFF FOR CONDUCTING IT.

UH, THANK GOD FOR AUDITS.

, UH, YOU'VE IDENTIFIED, UH, A LOT OF THINGS THAT, UH, MATTER OF FACT THIS ENTIRE PD, UH, POLICY PROCEDURES NEEDS TO BE REVAMPED.

AND AS A RESULT OF THAT, UH, I THINK THAT WE AS A COMMITTEE SHOULD PROBABLY BE REQUESTING THAT.

ARE YOU PRETTY, UH, SATISFIED, MITCH, WITH THE, UH, RECOMMENDATIONS THAT ARE COMING FROM THE AUDIT COMMITTEE? SOUNDS LIKE YOU ARE.

SURE.

I MEAN, WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF DISCUSSIONS AND THESE THINGS AS WE CLEAN UP THE DIRECTIVE ITSELF, UM, A LOT OF THE OBSERVATIONS ARE GONNA GO AWAY ONCE WE FIX THOSE MANUAL PROCESSES AND IS NO LONGER A MANUAL PROCESS AND A LOT OF THE CALCULATIONS AND OTHER THINGS THAT WERE DONE OVER TIME.

SO WE'LL BE ABLE TO CLEAN THIS UP, UM, AND HAVE A VERY APPROPRIATE FUNCTIONAL DIRECTIVE.

AND AGAIN, I DO WANNA POINT OUT, JUST MAKE SURE, I MEAN, A LOT OF IT WAS DOCUMENTATION PROC, YOU KNOW, PROBLEMS, SHORTCOMINGS THAT WASN'T GETTING DONE.

THERE WAS A LOT, THERE WERE STILL WAS OVERSIGHT IN MANAGEMENT AND DISCUSSION AT THE MANAGEMENT LEVEL FOR THE TAKE HOME VEHICLE PROGRAM.

UH, BUT HAVING SAID ALL THAT, WE'LL BE ABLE TO CLEAN UP THE REST OF THE PROCESS AND MAKE IT VERY CLEAR, YOU KNOW, AS WE WERE HAVING SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS

[01:00:01]

I WAS READING, NOT ONLY THE DIRECTIVE, BUT THE FORM ITSELF.

AND THERE WAS A COUPLE PLACES WHERE I'M LIKE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS.

YOU KNOW, AND I, YOU KNOW, I, I GET IT.

AND THAT CONFUSING PARTS OF IT IS WHAT LEADS TO MISTAKES DOWN THE ROAD.

SO OUR GOAL WILL BE ABLE TO REWRITE THE DIRECTIVE IN A FASHION WHERE IT'S REAL EASY TO UNDERSTAND AND CLEAR FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED, THAT HAS A TAKE ON VEHICLE.

AND THEN THE MANAGEMENT PART OF THAT, THAT'S INVOLVED AS WELL.

SO I WOULD SUPPORT, DEFINITELY SUPPORT, UH, COMING BACK IN, UH, THIRD QUARTER, UH, FOURTH QUARTER'S FINE, BUT I THINK WE NEED TO SEE SOMETHING AT LEAST BY THE THIRD QUARTER THAT KIND OF GIVES US AN UPDATE OF WHERE WE ARE.

AND, UH, I, I WOULD ALSO CONCUR WITH, UM, COUNCILMAN WILLIAMS. THERE MAY BE SOME PERIODIC UPDATES, BUT I'M NOT REALLY, I THINK THAT'S SIX MONTHS.

WE NEED TO HAVE THIS PRETTY MUCH, AT LEAST KNOWING WHO GOT THE VEHICLES AND IF THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

SO WITH THAT, UH, WITHOUT PROLONGING IT, I CONCUR WITH ALLON.

UH, QUICK QUESTIONS.

UM, THERE'S, I GUESS ROUGHLY $150,000 BUDGET IMPACT.

YES, SIR.

UH, WITH THAT CHANGE, UH, DO WE START THAT NEXT