{"database": "mytown-research", "table": "audit_findings", "rows": [[19, "wa-sao", "1020959", "2016-002", null, "WA", "City of Soap Lake", "City/Town", "0325", "5365345", "no_match", "Washington State Auditor's Office", "Accountability audit \u2014 City of Soap Lake", "Accountability", 2016, "2015-01-01", "2016-12-31", "2018-05-17", "misappropriation", null, null, null, "The City lacks proper oversight for the acquisition, sale and tracking of assets in the Police Department", "Background \nThe City of Soap Lake serves a population of about 1,550 Grant County citizens. \nThe City Police Department has four full -time employees, including one Police \nChief and two officers. \nIn June 2016, our audit r eported the Police Department did not use assets in an \nauthorized and approved manner and recommended the City strengthen controls \nover acquisition, tracking and sale of assets. However, our current audit identified \ncontinued concerns. \nDescription of Cond ition \nThe Police Department is responsible for most functions surrounding the \u201ccash \nonly\u201d sales of Police Department assets, as well as asset acquisition and tracking, \nwhich creates an increased risk for potential misuse and misappropriation. These \ncontrol weaknesses allowed the following to occur: \n1. City records indicate that in March 2015, a Reserve Officer paid $700 to the \nCity for a 1999 Chevrolet Blazer police vehicle. One day later, Department \nof Licensing (DOL) records show he signed a \u201cvehicle release of interest\u201d \nform transferring ownership to a close relative of the Police Chief at that \ntime. The Reserve Officer said the former Police Chief asked him to act as \nthe original buyer to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest. \n2. In May 2015, the City acquired a cargo trailer valued at $8,000 through the \nLESO 1033 military surplus program, which allows law enforcement \nagencies to acquire military assets for current law enforcement purposes at \nno cost, except the travel and/or shipping expenses associated with \nacquisition. Less than a year later, the City traded the trailer to a City Police \nOfficer in exchange for two radar units with a total value of $4,000 \naccording to the sales record. However, the City was unable to demonstrate \nthat the City received the units as part of this particular trad e deal, or that \nthe trade was equitable. Additionally, the buyer listed in the City\u2019s records \ndid not agree to the buyer listed in the DOL sales record. City records \nshowed the buyer as a third party, while DOL records show the buyer was \nthe Police Officer. \n3. On October 5, 2016, the City Council approved the Police Department\u2019s \nrequest to surplus 125 items, most of which were firearms, based on a \n \n \nWashington State Auditor\u2019s Office Page 11 \nprovided list. One vendor bid on the purchase of the entire lot. A review of \nthis sale revealed the following: \n\uf0b7 The City could not demonstrate it advertised the sale as required by \nState law (RCW 63.32.020). \n\uf0b7 The list of firearms the City Council approved for surplus was not the \nsame as the list of firearms the vendor received for bid. Three firearms \nnot approved by the City Council were included on the list given to the \nvendor, and two firearms on the surplus list were not on the list given to \nthe vendor. \n\uf0b7 Police Department employees then personally purchased seven firearms \nfrom the vendor. A City police officer purchased three firearms the same \nday the vendor received them. The current Police Chief purchased four \nfirearms the following day. According to the vendor, it sold these \nfirearms at the same price it paid the City for them. \n4. In May 2014, the City established an asset inventory policy requiring staff \nto track all assets valued over $500 and assign a City asset number. While \nthe City was documenting Police Department asset tracking to meet City \npolicy requirements, the Police Department\u2019s asset tracking had the \nfollowing weaknesses: \n\uf0b7 Department staff did not consistently add assets to the City\u2019s tracking \nspreadsheet. We identified 13 assets purchased or acquired through \ntrade, totaling $7,595, directly from Police Department employees, \nbetween February 2016 and December 2016 that were not listed on the \nCity\u2019s asset tracking spreadsheet as of April 2017. Assets included \nfirearms and radar units. \n\uf0b7 The City did not independently verify the City\u2019s receipt of these 13 \nassets. We attempted to physically confirm that these assets were within \nthe City\u2019s possession. However, due to City sales records not including \nuniquely identifiable information at the t ime of acquisition, we were \nunable to confirm if these assets were within their possession. We found \nthe Department did have similar assets in their possession, but only \nbased on the item\u2019s general type. \nCause of Condition \nDespite past audit recommendat ions, the City Council and Mayor have not taken \naction to implement proper oversight or independent monitoring of the acquisition, \nsale and tracking of Police Department assets. \n \n \nWashington State Auditor\u2019s Office Page 12 \nEffect of Condition \nWithout adequate tracking and monitoring procedures, asset s are vulnerable to \nmisappropriation, misuse or loss, which City staff might not be detect promptly, if \nat all. In addition, lack of adequate documentation over Police Department asset \nsales and surplused items made it very difficult to determine whether the City: \n\uf0b7 Safeguarded assets properly. \n\uf0b7 Received the best price for City assets purchased from or sold to Police \nDepartment personnel, which is a possi ble violation of State law \n(RCW 42.23.070). \n\uf0b7 Suffered a loss. \nRecommendations \nWe strongly recommend the Ci ty Council and Mayor take actions to adequately \nsafeguard its Police Department assets by strengthening controls over asset \ntracking. This should include, but not be limited to: \n\uf0b7 Increasing segregation of duties and monitoring over transactions \ninvolving City employees \n\uf0b7 Completing independent, periodic inventories \n\uf0b7 Maintaining up-to-date asset listings \n\uf0b7 Documenting adequate tracking information for identification \nWe also recommend the Police Department present complete and accurate \ninformation to the City Council for surplus, including identifiable tracking \ninformation especially when the disposition of firearms are involved, to comply \nwith State law (RCW 9.41.09 and 63.32.010). \nWe further recommend the City review all purchase and trade sales documentation \nrelated to items involving Police Department employees so the City receives the \nbest price benefit and that a potential loss does not occur. \nCity\u2019s Response \nThank you for the invitation to provide a written response to the preliminary draft \naudit report of the City of Soap Lake for the audit period 2015 through 2016. \nYour preliminary draft includes an audit finding which describes the City's alleged \nlack of pro per oversight for the acquisition, sale, and tracking of assets in the \nPolice Department. The draft audit report concludes that without \"adequate \ntracking and monitoring procedures\", City assets may be vulnerable to loss, \n \n \nWashington State Auditor\u2019s Office Page 13 \nmisuse, or misappropriation. After identifying two 2015 sales of surplus property \nand a 2016 City Council approval to surplus 125 items, the audit acknowledged the \nCity's 2014 adopted asset inventory and tracking policy while identifying two \nweaknesses in the police department's internal asset tracking procedures related to \nnot consistently adding assets to the City's tracking spreadsheet, and not \nindependently verifying receipt of newly acquired assets. \nA new Police Chief was hired in January, 2017. The new administration promptly \nimplemented many reforms to create a more efficient and accountable police \ndepartment, and the new Chief continues to review and make improvements to the \ndepartment's internal administration, including asset tracking and inventory. All of \nthe recommendations cont ained in the draft audit report have been addressed by \nthe Mayor and/or the Chief and are substantially completed. A complete asset \ninventory with description, serial or VIN number, and asset tag number, was \nprovided to the City Council at its February 21, 2018 meeting. \nThe City appreciates the diligence of the Auditor's Office in providing monitoring \nand oversight to local government operations and welcomes its input and \nrecommendations on how to improve the City's overall performance objectives. \nAuditor\u2019s Remarks \nWe appreciate the City\u2019s commitment to resolve the issue noted and we will follow-\nup during the next scheduled audit. \nApplicable Laws and Regulations \nThe City\u2019s asset inventory policy requires all assets over $500 to be tracked, \nassigned as property of City of Soap Lake, and assigned an asset number. \nRCW 42.23.070 (1) prohibits municipal officers from using their position to secure \nspecial privileges or exemptions. \nRCW 43.09.200 Local government accounting \u2013 Uniform system of accounting, \nrequires the State Auditor to prescribe the system of accounting and reporting for \nall local governments, and requires the system to exhibit true accounts shoing the \nreceipt, use and disposition of all public property. \nChapter 3.3.5.10 of the Budgeting, Accounting, and Reporting System (BARS) \nmanual requires a physical inventory of capital assets. \n \n \n \n \n \nWashington State Auditor\u2019s Office Page 14", "https://portal.sao.wa.gov/ReportSearch/Home/ViewReportFile?arn=1020959&isFinding=false&sp=false", "2026-07-30 13:24:54"]], "columns": ["rowid", "source", "report_number", "finding_number", "muni_id", "state", "entity_name", "entity_type", "entity_ext_id", "place_geoid", "match_method", "auditor", "report_title", "audit_type", "fiscal_year", "period_start", "period_end", "published_date", "finding_category", "severity", "questioned_cost", "cost_basis", "finding_title", "finding_text", "report_url", "fetched_at"], "primary_keys": ["rowid"], "primary_key_values": ["19"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 0.4943879903294146, "source": "MyTown", "source_url": "https://mytown.theboringparts.com", "license": "CC BY 4.0", "license_url": "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"}