Inspector general accuses Chicago election board of financial irregularities

The Chicago Board of Election Commissioners was accused Tuesday of spending money on unnecessary expenses, denying benefits to which employees were entitled and failing to adequately prepare to continue operations in the event of terrorist attack or natural disaster.

Inspector General Joe Ferguson’s latest audit takes aim at the city election board on the day that early voting began and the clock started ticking on the 28-day march to one of the most unpredictable mayoral elections Chicago has seen in decades.

“Public faith in elections is essential to a healthy democracy. It is therefore vital that [the election board] is able to provide assurance that the taxpayer resources devoted to the election process are spent in a transparent and accountable way,” Ferguson was quoted as saying in a press release.

The inspector general applauded the board’s “willingness to address the absence of oversight from its funders” at the city and county, “some of the consequences of which” were outlined by his audit.

“While some degree of independence is necessary to ensure the integrity of elections, greater oversight of this public agency in the future will bolster voter and taxpayer confidence in this critically important function,” he wrote.

The audit covered 2015 and 2016 for financial transactions and 2013 through 2017 for human resources practices and contingency planning.

The audit found “significant gaps in financial administration” of everything from vendor payments, cost allocations, and budgeting, to employee reimbursements, payroll, contracting and cash management,” the inspector general said.

Although the election board was first informed of those oversights in 2009, it “did not implement many of the corrective actions it committed to undertake” at that time, Ferguson wrote.

The audit specifically concluded that the election board:

• Spent $3 million from the city and $294,935 from the county on vendor and employee reimbursements that were either “recorded in the wrong year, violated policies, and/or were inaccurate or lacking supporting evidence.”

• Improperly retained $28,247 in state grant funds that were spent and later re-funded.

• Failed to “reconcile hourly payrolls,” resulting in an “accrued debt” of $28,733 owed to the city and $22,835 to the county.

• Failed to record the executive director’s vacation time, triggering an “accrued obligation … for a lump sum of $24,615 upon retirement.”

• Made payments to three vendors totaling $324,588 more than contracts allowed.

• Awarded 27 procurements totaling $5.6 million that violated internal policies and 27 procurements totaling $1.8 million with “no written contract or similar documentation.”

• Did not fulfill its obligations under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

• Could not account for $1,427 in cash and checks from its revenue-generating operations.

• Authorized $908,790 in over-spending for personnel during the four-year period ending in 2017 because of “inaccurate budgeting.”

• Budgeted inaccurately for personnel, resulting in $908,790 in overages between 2013-2017.

• Has “no transparent hiring practices, no standardized system for raises based on performance evaluations, and no succession plans for critical positions.”

• Lacks an “updated contingency plan” in place that would match “best practices” established by the Election Assistance Commission.

“Without such a plan, the election board “cannot assure the public that it would be capable of maintaining the continuity and integrity of election operations in the event of a disruption, attack or natural disaster,” the inspector general wrote.

Ferguson made a host of recommendations to correct the inequities and oversights and generally tighten the ships.

They range from “regular independent, external audits,” and developing both financial policies and a contingency plan to involving the purchasing department in all procurement activities and developing “standardized and transparent hiring, compensation, and performance management policies.”

The election board agreed with some of the IG’s suggestions.

But Election board spokesman Jim Allen said Ferguson is “mistaken in suggesting there is no contingency for an emergency in an election.”

“The Board deploys the supplies for every precinct to be able to function with paper ballots and paper poll books so that even in the event of a massive power outage or equipment failure, voting can and will continue,” Allen wrote in an email.

“The voting equipment is designed, certified, programmed and tested to be able to operate independently of any computer systems in the main office – and voting equipment can even continue to perform, for a time, without electricity. “

The “decentralized” design of is tailor-made to make certain that “a hacking attack on any central computer system would have absolutely no impact on voting or the election results,” Allen said.

Throughout the audit, the election board challenged Ferguson’s authority and the board of commissioners “declined to meet” with his auditors.

That’s despite the fact that the chief judge of the Circuit Court system has designated Ferguson “as an independent external auditor.”

View this document on Scribd