Conservancy denies any misuse of funds




Conservancy denies any misuse
of funds
By Michael Picarella
pic@theacorn.com

According to a May 4 state audit, the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy misused $7 million in public-approved bond money that was earmarked for open space acquisitions and parkland restoration in Los Angeles and Ventura counties.


The Office of State Audits and Evaluations, which examined the conservancy’s spending through June 2003, accused the conservancy of applying $4.2 million in bond money toward planning, education and facilities renovations instead of using it for parkland purchases. The conservancy charged for operating expenses such as phones, cellular phones, Internet service, access pagers, postage, conferences, vehicle costs and other items as direct grant expenses); and using more than $1 million in bond money to pay for legal fees. The audit questioned possible double billing as well.


According to a written response to the audit from Michael Berger, chairman of the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority, the conservancy’s land-management arm, "(The MRCA governing board) recognizes that constant improvement is essential to being an effective and responsive instrument for the people we serve.


"We honestly appreciate the efforts of the Office of State Audits and Evaluations, and where they have been constructive in their criticisms, such recommendations have—in conjunction with our own internal review—led to the changes in organizational structure and procedures that have been described (in written responses now available online at www.smmc.ca.gov/audit.html)," Berger said.


The state audit criticized the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy for its relationship with the Mountains Recreation and Conservation Authority. "There’s the appearance that the conservancy is, in effect, awarding grants to itself, and that the authority’s project managers are monitoring themselves."


The conservancy allegedly used bond money to pay the MRCA $269,700 for administering a $3 million land acquisition, according to the audit. Auditors reported that the authority charged 350 times the overhead assessed by six other state agencies, including the Department of Fish and Game, the Department of Water Resources and the Coastal Conservancy.


According to the conser-vancy’s executive director Joseph Edmiston, "There are no duplicate charges," he said. "(The audit) said that we have an overhead charge and other conservancies didn’t have overhead charges. The point we make in our audit response is that those other conservancies had state employees that were doing this work.


"The Coastal Conservancy has over 80 employees," Edmiston said. The Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy only has five, he said.


"There’s no duplication between what the conservancy employees do and what the MRCA employees do," Edmiston said. "We just don’t have enough conservancy employees to get the job done."


Regarding grant monies that the audit said the conservancy used for administrative costs, Edmiston responded, "The attorneys say that it’s perfectly valid to do that.


"The lawyers made a very strong point," Edmiston said, and you don’t need a lawyer to point this out—we don’t wake up in the morning, throw a dart at the map of the Santa Monica Mountains and say, ‘Okay, where the dart landed, that’s the property that we’re going to try and acquire.’ There’s a full planning process that goes into that."


That planning process requires administrative overhead, Edmiston said.


Regarding the conservancy spending money for the authority’s legal fees, Edmiston said that the attorney general ruled that such action was 100 percent legal.


"The bond funds can be used for essentially any purpose that results in the acquisition of property," Edmiston said.


Other conservancy and authority responses to the audit are on the website listed previously, which include many details.


"In the attachments to that response, there’s a real comprehensive legal opinion that goes to the legality of every single one of those things (mentioned in the state audit)," Edmiston said.


Nevertheless, the conservancy and authority will make some changes to their operating procedures, according to Edmiston.


"The various board chairs—wherever there’s a contract between the conservancy and the MRCA—instead of the staff executing that contract, that contract will be executed by the respective chairpersons of the governing boards of the MRCA and the conservancy," Edmiston said.


"In the future when we give grants, the attorney general’s office will give us an opinion about those grants.


"Also, we will make sure that all the people that work in the financial department of the MRCA report to the Conejo general manager of the Conejo district, who also serves as the financial officer of the MRCA."


Edmiston defended how the money has been spent.


"We have taken spending the public’s dollars extremely seriously. That’s why people should look at our web page (to see our audit response) that goes point by point, dollar for dollar."


California will audit the conservancy and the authority again in January. It’s a routine procedure, according to Edmiston.



Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *