City Clerk Operations – Public Requests, Record Retention, and Lobbyist RegistrationG~ MIAMIBEACH
OPBI DEPARTMENT
Internal Audit Division INTERNAL AUDIT REPORT
TO:
FROM:
Kathie G. Brooks, Interim City~~/
James J. Sutter, Internal Audito/
7
DATE:
AUDIT:
PERIOD:
July 9, 2012
City Clerk Operations-Public Requests, Record Retention, and Lobbyist Registration.
October 1, 2009 through July 31, 2011
This report is the result of a regularly scheduled audit to verify compliance to State regulation,
as well as City ordinances and policies and procedures governing public records requests,
records management and disposal, as well as lobbyist registration.
INTRODUCTION
The Office of the City Clerk is dedicated to providing customer service while making public
information easily accessible to all users. They also perform numerous responsibilities, which
are derived from the City Charter, City Code, or administratively. Functions performed by City
Clerk's administration and staff include, but may not be limited to:
• Performing as secretary to the City Commission and Redevelopment Agency including
o Scheduling Meetings for the City Commission and RDA, Participating in the
Agenda preparation, and after action reporting
o Processing resolutions, ordinances, and agreements and following up on their
status of completion if applicable.
o Audio recording meetings using Business Information System software (B.I.S.).
o Processing City Board and Committee applications, appointments
o Compiling advertising and posting weekly meeting notices
• Coordinating and updating of the City Code of Ordinances
• Maintaining and updating the text-based Folio Search Database and the City's document
imaging system (Laser Fiche).
• Processing of public records requests
• Oversight of public record retention requirements
• Processing lobbyist registration.
• Processing Domestic Partnership Registrations.
• Handling Financial disclosures required by code.
• Processing general and special elections.
• Processing passport applications and renewals.
• Answering and responding call from 604-City (functioning as a call center).
In addition, they have oversight over the Central Services Division and the Special Master
administrative responsibilities.
Considering the numerous activities and responsibilities of the Office of the City Clerk, internal
audits of their operations have been broken down in different engagements taking into account
the risks and exposure to the City with respect to their operations and functions. For example,
an audit of the Central Service's operations was completed in Fiscal Year 2009, while an audit
of the Special Master Operations was later concluded in Fiscal Year 2010. Both divisions report
administratively to the City Clerk Office, as previously stated.
We are committed to providing excellent public service and safely to all who live, work, and play in our vibrant, tropical, historic communily.
Internal Audit Report
City Clerk Operations -Public Requests, Record Retention, and Lobbyist Registration
July 9, 2012
Under this premise, this audit engagement has been focused on three areas of responsibility
under the Office of the City Clerk. Those areas were: processing of public records requests,
compliance to public record retention requirements, and compliance to lobbyist registration
r~quirements. However, due to their uniqueness and separate record retention requirements,
this audit did not consider and/or included any procedures with respect to Police and Fire
records since they are handled by their respective departments.
To evaluate and assess established processes and related controls and requirements, Internal
Audit reviewed the Florida Public Records Act, represented on Chapter 119 of the Florida
Statutes, as well as governing administrative code rules relating to archives and records
management. These administrative rules can be found mainly on chapter's 1 B-11, 1 B-24, and
1 B-26 of the Florida Administrative Code. In addition, Ordinance No. 2010-3689, as codified on
Chapter 2, Article VII, Division 3, Sections 2-482 and 2-485 of the City Code, were reviewed
with respect to Lobbyist registration and requirements. Finally, departmental policies and
procedures were also examined in order to identify risks and related controls in order to verify
their adequacy to reduce, remove, or mitigate the respective risks.
OVERALL OPINION
The Office of the City Clerk has performed their responsibilities regarding the management and
disposal of City public records adequately and in compliance to state requirements promulgated
under chapter 119 of the Florida Statutes and the Florida Administrative Code. In addition, they
have materially complied with City requirements with respect to lobbyist registration and
reporting. However, during our audit, we were able to identify areas in need of corrective action,
additional compliance and possible improvements with respect to citywide operations regarding
the management and disposal of public records and the enforcement of certain provisions of the
City code as follows:
1. Documentation for costs associated with the research and processing of Public Requests
needs improvement.
2. Late filing fines associated with the late filing of lobbyist expenditure or fee disclosure
reports, as established under Section 2-485(d) of the City Code were not consistently
assessed and collected.
3. Public Records Request arrival date and time are not always being accurately recorded
upon arrival in contradiction to stipulated policies and procedures.
4. No Citywide policies and procedures are currently implemented and consistently followed by
all City Departments with respect to the retention and destruction of public record
information.
5. Departmental records custodians have not been identified and frequently updated by each
and every city department and/or division with the City Clerk Office showing poor
collaboration and teamwork.
6. Efficiencies and initiatives should be considered that could lead to greater streamlining
processes, faster responses, better services and lower costs regarding records
management and public records request processing.
Page 2 of 10
Internal Audit Report
City Clerk Operations-Public Requests, Record Retention, and Lobbyist Registration
July 9, 2012
Additional details regarding these areas in need of corrective action and/or improvements can
be found on the "Finding, Recommendations, and Responses" section on this report.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this audit is to verify compliance to State regulation, as well as City ordinances
and policies and procedures governing public records requests and records management and
disposal. To verify that adequate controls are in place to reasonably ensure the integrity,
reliability, and accuracy of records pertaining to record destruction and lobbyist registration
while eliminating, reducing, or mitigating risks associated with the same.
SCOPE
1. Confirm that detailed policies and procedures exist and are documented and consistently
followed by the City Clerk, as well as incumbent departments and/or incumbents.
2. Ensure that sufficient controls exist and that accurate and reliable records exist to be
provided in a timely manner upon request from any user.
3. Verify compliance to Sunshine Law and State Statutes regarding these areas.
4. Verify that sufficient documentation and approvals exist to document records destruction.
5. Confirm that the process for Registration for Lobbyist is handled in accordance to City
ordinances and other governing legislation.
FINDINGS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND MANAGEMENT RESPONSES
1. Finding -Documentation for costs associated with the research and processing of Public
Requests needs improvement.
Chapter 119, §119.07(d) states in reference to public records requests that "If the nature or
volume of public records requested to be inspected or copied is such as to require
extensive use of information technology resources or extensive clerical, or supervisory
assistance by personnel of the agency involved, or both, the agency may charge, in
addition to the actual cost of duplication, a special service charge, which shall be
reasonable and shall be based on the cost incurred". This language has also been
incorporated in the City Clerk's policies and procedures for further reference and to be
consistently followed. In addition, the Office of the City Clerk has defined and/or
established through policies and procedures that any request that requires half an hour of
labor or more is considered "extensive" and should be subjected to a charge equal to the
rate of the employee (fringe benefits not included) whose normal scope of duties include
performing the function.
Results from our testing and inquiries showed that records regarding the use of resources
in resolving and responding to public requests (including time allocations, individuals
involved, hourly rates, number of pages copied, etc.) are not kept by the City Clerk's office,
nor by any City department involve in responding to the requests. Out of a total of twenty
(20) public records requests reviewed in our audit, only two (2) reflected possible fees
(Request #s 5840 and 6044). However, no documentation substantiating the calculation
was documented and kept in file. The amounts estimated under these two requests were
$21.00 under records request number 5840 for copies of an employee file, and an
estimated $5,912.80 under records request number 6044 for a large volume of documents,
including e-mails, documents, letters and/or electronic documents exchanged with
Page 3 of 10
Internal Audit Report
City Clerk Operations-Public Requests, Record Retention, and Lobbyist Registration
July 9, 2012
determined individuals and companies respectively.
Recommendation( s)
In order to improve documentation of resources utilized in researching and/or responding to
public records requests, the City Clerk should create a standard printable electronic form to
be used by the City Clerk and incumbent departments when responding to a public records
request. This form should include a section to reflect time spent by personnel and/or
supervisory time and payroll charge rate used in resolving and/or responding to the
request. In addition, it should account for number of copies, identifying whether single or
double sided, and the applicable photocopy rate. Other fields (CD or type of media used)
should be included as necessary to ensure that all resources utilized and costs incurred are
accounted for in the form.
This form should be maintained on-line and used when responding to all public records
requests in order to document, substantiate, and serve as audit trail for resources
employed in providing public records request responses and/or resolutions. Procedures
should be updated and training provided to all departmental records custodian liaisons in
order to understand, familiarize, and use the form consistently.
Management's Response(s)
The City Clerk's Office will design a standard form ("Cost of Labor Form"). The form will be
available on the Internet. The form will be submitted with every Public Record Request
entered and submitted to the department handling the request. If the labor is less than 30
minutes, the form will not be necessary. The City Clerk's Office will check with IT to be sure
this form can be made part of the new public record request database, therefore
automatically e-mailed with the public record request to the department responsible for
handling it. The Cost of Labor Form must reference the public records request number and
the MCR number. The MCR must reference the public records request number. A draft of
the Cost of Labor Form will be submitted to Internal Audit for their approval.
2. Finding -Late filing fines associated with the late filing of lobbyist expenditure or fee
disclosure reports, as established under Section 2-485(d) of the City Code were
not consistently assessed and collected.
As per section 2-485 of the City Code, all lobbyists subject to lobbyist registration
requirements shall submit to the City Clerk a signed statement under oath, as provided in
the same section, listing all lobbying expenditures, as well as compensation received for
the preceding calendar year with regard to the specific issue on which the lobbyist has
been engaged to lobby. A statement shall be filed even if there have been no expenditures
or compensation during the reporting period. Additional details regarding this requirement
can be found in the above mentioned section of the City Code.
However, Chapter 2, Article VII, Division 3, § 2-485(d) of the City Code expressively states
that "the City Clerk shall notify any lobbyist (or principal) who fails to timely file the
expenditure or fee disclosure reports referenced in sections 2-485 (a) and (b). In addition
to any other penalties which may be imposed, as provided in section 2-485.1, a fine of
$50.00 per day shall be assessed for reports filed after the due date. Any lobbyist who fails
to file the required expenditure report by April 30 shall be automatically suspended from
lobbying until all fines are paid, unless the fine is appealed to the Miami-Dade County
Ethics Commission".
Page 4 of 10
Internal Audit Report
City Clerk Operations -Public Requests, Record Retention, and Lobbyist Registration
July 9, 2012
Fourteen lobbyist files out of 181 files as of August 23, 2011 were randomly selected in
order to verify compliance to requirements overall. Out of the fourteen files, three instances
within our audit period were noted in which revenue/expenditure reports were filed late.
However, corresponding late filing fines totaling $750.00 for the three instances were not
assessed and/or collected. Later inquiries with personnel suggested that no late fines with
respect to the requirements of Section 2-485(d) have been assessed or pursued under any
circumstance.
Recommendation( s)
The City Clerk should consider whether it is appropriate to review past instances in which
applicable late filing fines were not assessed, as required by City Code and retroactively
assess them and collect them. At a minimum, going forward, late filing fines should be
assessed in accordance to City Code requirements. Should any challenges exist or should
the assessment of such fines or filing requirements be deemed impractical by the
department, then a revision to the ordinance should be considered. In such case, a legal
opinion should be sought to ensure that proper steps are taken, including whether or not a
referendum would be required to reduce such existing requirements.
Management's Response(s)
The City Clerk's Office implemented this recommendation with the 2012 Lobbyists
Expenditure filing. We sent letters for fines of $50 per day per issue to all lobbyists that filed
late. The list was submitted to the Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics. Fines were
appealed by the lobbyist, and after the hearing, the fines were either waved or drastically
reduced by the Miami-Dade Commission on Ethics. We will not be able to implement
retroactively.
3. Finding -Public Records Request arrival date and time are not always being accurately
recorded upon arrival in contradiction to stipulated policies and procedures.
According to staff from the City Clerk Office, public records requests are usually received
by the department through different means including e-mails, letters, in person, over the
phone, etcetera. However, no matter which means are used, current documented policies
and procedures require that a "Request Research" form is filled upon receipt of the public
records request. This form will reflect the request number, date and time received, contact
information of the individual and/or entity placing the request, a description of the request
criterion, and the name of the City employee first contacted regarding the request. This
form is not only used as supporting document and tracking tool for the request, but is also
used as a primary source document when tracking the time it takes to resolve and respond
to the request, information required and measured under the department's performance
score card.
Results from our testing showed that out of twenty sampled public records request, one
was observed as being resolved in one minute. The request involved creating an audio
copy of a Special Master case hearing, which would most likely than not involve more than
one minute from the time the request is received, to the time in which a response and the
audio copy can be provided to the requestor. As a result of this finding, Internal Audit
inquired regarding the possible causes and was explained that it is possible that because
the individual receiving the request did not anticipate investing too much time in gathering
the requested data, it was very possible that the research was conducted prior to filling the
"Research Request" form and that the request had been opened and close thereafter.
Page 5 of 10
Internal Audit Report
City Clerk Operations -Public Requests, Record Retention, and Lobbyist Registration
July 9, 2012
Although results from our testing did not identified this incident as a common practice, not
creating the "Research Request" form immediately upon receive of the request directly
contradicts with established policies and procedures and is not considered best practices.
In addition it undermines the reliability and accuracy of data reported under the
department's performance score card.
Recommendation( s)
A "Research Request" form should be filled immediately upon receipt of a public records
request. The form can be found in the City's website and can be filed electronically or in
hard copy, depending on the requestor's preference. In addition, the Office of the City
Clerk could consider providing a refresher training session to ensure that all policies and
procedures are fully understand and consistently followed by all applicable personnel.
Management's Response(s)
The City Clerk's Office will inform staff to complete a Research Request Form on every
request received by telephone or in person immediately upon receipt and before entering in
the log/computer. As the issue raised by this finding is predominantly found in the City
Clerk's Office, staff will receive refresher training on the proper procedures to be followed.
4. Finding -No Citywide policies and procedures are currently implemented and consistently
followed by all City Departments with respect to the retention and destruction of
public record information.
The management, retention and/or disposal of municipal public records are predominantly
governed by procedures and regulations established by the State through Statutes and
Administrative rules. These requirements and regulations can be found on Chapter 119 of
the Florida Statutes and on Chapters 1 B-11, 1 B-24, and 1 B-26 of the Florida Administrative
Code. Procedures stipulated under these governing rules and regulations require optimal
organization and record management practices including how to file and group together
documents and records for storage and subsequent destruction upon eligibility.
Results from our inquiries showed that currently there are no citywide policies and
procedures to be consistently followed by City Departments. In addition, no evidence
regarding annual follow ups and record destructions was available from the majority of the
City Departments. This finding represents an area of concern given that one of two
possible scenarios could be continuously occurring. On one hand departments and
divisions could be destroying records without following state requirements or on the other,
best practices for records management are not followed resulting in an excessive
accumulation of records eligible for destruction and thus contributing to higher storage
costs incurred by the City.
Despite this finding, a review of seven (7) records destructions requests, representing
100% of the requests during our audit period, showed that the City Clerk did follow proper
procedures in reviewing them and ensuring that proper signatures, descriptions and
approvals were reflected prior to destroying any records and in compliance to state
requirements. Record destruction eligibility was also properly verified by the City Clerk
Staff.
Recommendation(s)
Citywide Policies and Procedures referencing State requirements and regulations should
be created and distributed to each department director for immediate implementation and
Page 6 of 10
Internal Audit Report
City Clerk Operations-Public Requests, Record Retention, and Lobbyist Registration
July 9, 2012
consistent following. In addition, the City Clerk could consider organizing a training session
with all City department's Records Custodians to ensure their understanding of the
requirements and the importance of adhering to them in a continuous basis.
Management's Response{s)
On or about May 2, 2012, the City entered into a Professional Services Agreement with
SML, Inc. to develop a comprehensive citywide records retention and management plan.
Work on this project commences on June 25, 2012. It is anticipated that this partnership
with SML will ensure that departments and divisions only destroy records pursuant to state
requirements, and thereby reduce storage costs of both physical and electronic records.
5. Finding -Departmental records custodians have not been identified and frequently
updated by each and every city department and/or division with the City Clerk
Office showing poor collaboration and teamwork.
Identifying and training records custodians in each of the City's departments and/or
divisions is an imperative task to ensure proper communication and compliance with State,
County, and City regulations and requirements. However, during our audit, Internal Audit
learned that accomplishing this task has proven to be a challenging task to City Clerk Staff.
Documented efforts by the City Clerk Staff in obtaining updated names and contact
information from all departments regarding their corresponding records custodian showed
that only four (4) departments/divisions had responded to inquiries made on May and June
of 2008. Responding Departments and/or divisions included the Information Technology
Department (I.T.), the Mayor and Commission Office, Police, and the Office of Budget and
Performance Improvement (OBPI). No other responses were received.
Recommendation(s)
Identification of all departmental and/or divisional records custodial liaison is an imperative
step in order to improve communication between the City Clerk and the Departments with
respect to governing regulation and procedures to be followed with respect to the
management and disposition of City Records. In addition, it is an essential piece in
achieving additional efficiencies and cost reduction, as well as faster responses to public
records requests; therefore resulting in an increase customer satisfaction. In order to
achieve this, the City Clerk should issue communications to all Department and Division
Directors, as well as their corresponding Assistant City Managers (A.C.M.s) for faster
resolution. A reminder regarding the importance of keeping the contact information up to
date should be stressed, as well as any training requirements, to facilitate a more efficient
process and enhanced compliance.
Management's Response(s)
On or about May 2, 2012, the City entered into a Professional Services Agreement with
SML, Inc. to develop a comprehensive citywide records retention and management plan.
Work on this project commences on June 25, 2012. SML will identify and meet with all
departmental and/or division records custodians, to ensure that departments and divisions
are following the appropriate records retention schedule, and understand and adhere to the
comprehensive citywide records retention scheduled once developed.
During the week of June 25, 2012, SML will meet with the City Clerk, the IT Director and
senior management staff to give a brief overview of the project and to answer any
questions staff may have. After that initial meeting, SML will meet again with the City Clerk
Page 7 of 10
Internal Audit Report
City Clerk Operations-Public Requests, Record Retention, and Lobbyist Registration
July 9, 2012
and IT Director separately to obtain information that is more specific. Thereafter, meetings
will be scheduled with the various departments/division as time and opportunities present.
6. Finding -Efficiencies and initiatives should be considered that could lead to greater
efficiencies, faster responses, better services and lower costs regarding records
management and public records request processing.
Areas were identified in which some technological improvement could lead to greater
efficiencies, better resource allocations, and cost saving aver the long run. These areas or
initiatives are as follows:
a) Overall the City Clerk and City Departments and Divisions should consider moving
towards electronic storage of City records and documents instead of renting storage
space for boxes upon boxes of documents. Diligent steps should be taken in the
transition in order to ensure compliance to State records retention and regulations in
general. This initiative could result in cost reductions considering that not only cyber
capacity and storage memory is increasingly inexpensive, but records could be more
effectively managed without the need to pay retrieval and/or re-storage fees (handling
fees). During our audit period alone (October 1, 2009 through July 31, 2011) a total of
$175,885.50 was paid by the City to International Data Depository (IDD) for the storage
and management of stored City Records. As further reference, the following table helps
to illustrate amounts paid for storage during the last three Fiscal Years:
$77,738
b) The City Clerk should consider the implementation of a more sophisticated tracking
system. Currently, once a public records request is received, the request is forwarded
through e-mail to the appropriate department for resolution and response. Then the City
Clerk is subjected to a number of follow up e-mails and calls to verify whether the
request has been responded by the department and on what day and time. For
example, during our audit we learned that there are a total of thirty-three (33) pending
public records requests with one dating back to May 24, 2011, three (3) dating back to
June 14, 20 and 27 respectively, and the rest were more recent in July and August of
2011. Although most of these requests were assigned to be resolved by the appropriate
departments, no status on progress or whether the request should have been closed
was documented.
Instead, an effective tracking system could log in the request, and assign it as a task
through the same system to the identified department's and/or division's records
custodial liaison where progress could be tracked automatically through a percentage of
completion indicators. Status regarding progress or percentage complete would be the
responsibility of the individual (s) involved in the research or gathering of records for the
response. Once the request is fully processed and responded, no additional follow ups,
either by the City Clerk or Status call by the Department would be necessary. Currently
there are systems in the marked that could accomplish these tasks in a more effective
and efficient manner.
c) In order to facilitate access to public records, the Office of the City Clerk could consider
Page 8 of 10
Internal Audit Report
City Clerk Operations-Public Requests, Record Retention, and Lobbyist Registration
July 9, 2012
the implementation of Kiosk machines, as a data center for the general public on
premises, and at the same time strengthen the research capabilities and public records
access to the existing "City Archives-Weblink", available on the City Clerks website.
This way, individuals could access most public information and records by their own
more effectively and faster, while resources could be allocated to more complex and
larger requests. Applicable charges for number of copies etc. could be assessed prior
to processing a print request directly from the kiosk. Furthermore, additional promotional
and educational functions regarding these and existing sources of information on the
City's website should be considered. For example, customers could be directed to
available sources of information like the City's website or any other available resource
for smaller requests involving commission meeting minutes, or meeting schedules etc.
instead of expending research time locating the specific day or time, meeting, or topic.
Recommendation( s)
The City Clerk should research, consider, and/or implement the above suggestions in order
to improve current processes and efficiencies. Other feasible alternatives could also be
considered.
Management's Response(s)
On or about May 2, 2012, the City entered into a Professional Services Agreement with
SML, Inc. to develop a comprehensive citywide records retention and management plan.
Work on this project commences on June 25, 2012.
SML will provide recommendations as to the feasibility and savings, if any, in moving
towards electronic storage of City records and documents instead of renting storage space
for boxes of documents. It is uncertain at this time, if such an initiative could result in cost
reductions, as one of the impetus for retaining SML was to develop an automated method
of deleting electronic records, which comply with Florida's records retention schedule, as
electronic storage memory costs for the City continues to increase.
IT, in partnership with the City Clerk's Office, has development a more sophisticated web
based tracking system for public records request, which automates the tracking of pending
public records request. After logging the request, the new program assigns it as a task
through the same system to the identified department and/or division's records custodial
liaison where progress is tracked automatically. Once the request is fully processed and
responded, no additional follow-ups, either by the City Clerk or status call by the
department, will be necessary. The City Clerk's Office has recently commenced using the
new system, and is working with IT to correct problems that have been identified.
In order to facilitate access to public records, the Office of the City Clerk will consider the
implementation of terminals, as a data center for the public on premises, as part of the FY-
2013/2014 budget cycle. Furthermore, additional promotional and educational functions
regarding the existing sources of information on the City's website will be made during the
Employee and Leadership academies. Note that customers are currently directed to
available sources of information like the City's website or any other available resource for
smaller requests involving commission meeting minutes, or meeting schedules etc.
Page 9 of 10
Internal Audit Report
City Clerk Operations-Public Requests, Record Retention, and Lobbyist Registration
July 9, 2012
EXIT CONFERENCE
An initial exit meeting was held on January 6, 2012 to discuss the audit report and to solicit
management responses noted above. Attendees were Robert Parcher, Former City Clerk,
Maria Martinez, Assistant City Clerk, James Sutter, Internal Auditor and Fidel Miranda, Auditor.
Subsequent, a second meeting was held on May ?'h, 2012 to discuss the audit report with
Rafael, Granado, the new appointed City Clerk and solicit any input regarding Management
Responses and previous meeting discussions. Management responses were received shortly
thereafter. All were in agreement with the contents of this report.
Audit performed by Fidel Miranda, Auditor
F:\OBPII$AUD\INTERNAL AUDIT FILES\DOC1 0-11\REPORTS-FINALICITY CLERK OPERATIONS.doc
cc: Dolores M. Mejia, Special Projects Administrator
Rafael Granado, City Clerk
Maria Martinez, Assistant City Clerk
Page 10 of 10