You are on page 1of 82

Report No.

13116

STATE OF FLORIDA AUDITOR GENERAL

OPERATIONAL AUDIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1996, And Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1, 1993, Through June 30, 1995, and July 1, 1996 Through September 12, 1997 Dated: December 19, 1997

13116
STATE OF FLORIDA AUDITOR GENERAL

OPERATIONAL AUDIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1996, And Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1, 1993, Through June 30, 1995, and July 1, 1996 Through September 12, 1997 Dated: December 19, 1997

ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY Table of Contents LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL I AUDIT REPORT SUMMARY A. Scope/Objectives B. Methodology C. Findings REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL AND LEGAL COMPLIANCE BACKGROUND A. Authority B. Organizational Structure C. Expressway System D. Financing 1. Bonded Debt 2. Florida Department of Transportation Advances E. Revenues F. Consultant Contracting G. Intergovernmental Agreements H. Interlocal Agreements I. Related Audits FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Financial Condition B. Budgetary Controls C. Investments D. Tangible Personal Property

II III

IV

-iii-

ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY Table of Contents (Continued)

IV

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Continued) E. Documentation of Expenditures 1. Related Organizations 2. Other Organizations 3. Communication Expenditures 4. Travel Expenditures 5. Lobbying Services F. Right-of-Way Acquisitions 1. Appraisal Reviews 2. Purchase Agreements G. Motor Vehicle Assignment and Use H. Prior Audit Findings STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL AUDIT AUTHORITY EXHIBITS

V VI VII

-v-

Through June 30. and as part of the Legislature's oversight responsibility for operations of governmental entities. Lester Auditor General Audit supervised by: James G. I have directed that an operational audit be made of the STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30.STATE OF FLORIDA AUDITOR GENERAL TALLAHASSEE CHARLES L. Smith -vii- . Respectfully submitted. and July 1. 1993. Charles L. LESTER. Florida Statutes. CPA AUDITOR GENERAL December 19.45. and the Legislative Auditing Committee Pursuant to the provisions of Section 11. 1997 The President of the Senate. 1995. and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. 1996. Through September 12. the Speaker of the House of Representatives. 1996. 1997. Drake Audit made by: Ransom D. The results of the audit of the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority are presented herewith.

1996. Through September 12. 1997. SCOPE/OBJECTIVES Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority (Authority) management is responsible for administering expressway system-related programs. Through June 30. 1993. 13116. the proper administration of public funds requires that management establish and maintain a system of internal control to provide reasonable assurance that specific entity objectives will be achieved. administrative rules. -1- . functions. bond resolutions. as designed and placed in operation. as part of the Legislature's oversight responsibility for operations of governmental entities. 1995. and other guidelines. activities. objectives.OPERATIONAL AUDIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1996. 1997 AUDIT REPORT SUMMARY This audit report summary highlights the scope. and July 1. It is intended to present the findings of our report in a condensed fashion. dated December 19. methodology. The Auditor General. Additionally. promotes and encourages the achievement of management's control objectives. and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. makes operational audits to determine the extent to which Authority management has fulfilled those responsibilities and to determine the extent to which the system of internal control. and findings of audit report No. and classes of transactions in accordance with applicable laws. The entire audit report should be read for a comprehensive understanding of our audit findings.

paragraphs 40 through 44. and other contractual agreements for the fiscal year ended June 30. through June 30. and other issues. design and engineering contracts. This positive unreserved retained earnings amount reflects the efforts of Authority management and the Authority's certified public accountant to thoroughly review and update the application of certain generally accepted accounting principles. 1996.) (See -2- . in its previously issued audited financial statements. construction contracts. expenditures and disbursements. METHODOLOGY We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. FINDINGS Matters coming to our attention relating to noncompliance with various guidelines and those relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the system of internal control for those operations audited are as follows: Financial Condition The Authority. budgetary controls.The scope of this audit focused primarily on assets.723. these deficits were primarily attributable to the application of accounting principles relating to depreciation. reported unreserved retained earnings deficits for the fiscal years ending June 30. bond refunding. 1996.000 at June 30. 1997. revenues and cash collections. and Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. however. right-of-way acquisition. The Authority's 1996-97 audited financial statements reported unreserved retained earnings of $116. 1993. liabilities.

Budgetary Controls During the 1995-96 fiscal year, actual expenditures exceeded the legal level of budgetary control established of record by the Authority (object level) for numerous expenditure categories. (See paragraphs 45 through 50.) Investments The Authority invested moneys held in the Authority's Revenue Fund bank account in overnight repurchase agreements; however, because the Authority did not obtain the actual securities, trust receipts from a trustee, or third-party safekeeping receipts perfecting the Authority's secured interest in the securities pledged as collateral, such investments were subject to an increased risk of loss. (See paragraphs 51 through 55.) Tangible Personal Property The value of property shown on the Authority's listing of furniture and equipment ($771,040.30) had not been reconciled to the value of furniture and equipment recorded in the general ledger control account ($113,012.58). In addition, furniture and equipment purchases and Authority approved deletions had not been reconciled to changes to the property listing. paragraphs 56 through 60.) Related Organizations Our audit disclosed several Authority actions taken with respect to the OOCEA Foundation, Inc., a not-for-profit corporation created by the Authority, that did not appear to be authorized by applicable State law. (See paragraphs 65 through 68.) -3(See

The Authority contributed $35,000 to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) towards the MPO's operating budget. While the Authority's contribution to the MPO may be necessary to facilitate the Authority's active participation in the MPO, the Authority's records did not demonstrate how the Authority determined that the $35,000 contribution was appropriate. (See paragraphs 69 through 73.) Other Organizations The Authority made payments totaling $56,000 to the Minority/Women Business Enterprise Alliance, Inc. (Alliance) to provide funding for the operations of the Alliance and to fund a surety and risk assistance program. We are unaware of any statutory authority for the Authority to provide funding to not-for-profit organizations. (See paragraphs 74 through 77.) The Authority incurred expenses totaling $561.80 for food and alcoholic beverages relating to a reception for the Florida Transportation Commission. We are unaware of any specific legal authority for the Authority to expend funds for this purpose. (See paragraphs 78 and 79.) Communication Expenditures Telephone logs or similar records identifying the parties called and/or the purposes of telephone calls were not maintained by Authority staff for either long-distance or cellular telephone calls. In the absence of documentation evidencing the public purpose served by such calls, Authority personnel could not be assured that the calls made served an authorized public purpose. (See paragraphs 80 through 83.) -4-

Travel Expenditures The Authority's travel policies were not consistent with Section 112.061, Florida Statutes. (See paragraphs 86 through 89.) The Authority's records relating to travel expenses were not always adequate to demonstrate the authorized public purpose served and/or compliance with State law. (See paragraphs 90 through 92.) Lobbying Services The Authority contracted with and made payments during the 1995-96 fiscal year to two consultants to provide lobbying services. Although the Authority concluded that the consulting services were necessary to the conduct of the Authority's statutory responsibilities, the Attorney General has opined that public funds may not be expended by statutory entities for lobbying purposes unless expressly and specifically authorized by State law. (See paragraphs 93 through 96.) Appraisal Reviews The Authority's Right-of-Way Acquisition Procedures Manual requires that appraisal reports be reviewed by qualified review appraisers to ensure the appraisal reports are mathematically correct, complete, reasonable, and in conformance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice. For three of the six parcel acquisitions we reviewed, the review appraiser noted deficiencies in the appraisal report; however, Authority records did not evidence that these appraisal report deficiencies,

-5-

several of which were major deficiencies, had been corrected. (See paragraphs 106 through 108.) Purchase Agreements Our review disclosed three instances in which the Authority reached agreement on the purchase price for a parcel identified for right-of-way acquisition before the Authority's appraisal report was completed, reviewed, and accepted. Purchase prices for two of these parcels were 49.37 and 111.04 percent greater than the appraised values. In the absence of an independent appraisal for these parcels at the date of the purchase contract, it is not apparent how the Authority made an informed purchase offer on the parcels. (See paragraphs 109 through 114.) For four of the six parcel acquisitions we reviewed, the purchase agreement included a provision that required that the property owner be paid the agreed-upon purchase price or the appraised value, whichever is higher, and obligated the Authority to pay the agreed-upon purchase price even if the appraised value was determined to be less than the purchase price. This provision appears to be contrary to the Authority's Right-of-Way Acquisition Manual which requires that negotiations attempt to reach a fair settlement and protect the interest of both the property owner and the Authority. (See paragraphs 115 through 117.) Motor Vehicle Assignment and Use Authority-owned and/or leased vehicles were assigned to four employees on a full-time basis. The Authority had not established adequate written policies governing the assignment and use of -6-

Vehicle usage records were not maintained and/or adequate to identify and report the amount of taxable fringe benefits attributable to the personal use of the vehicles. contrary to applicable United States Treasury Regulations. the Authority had not included the value of the personal use of employer-provided vehicles in reporting earnings for the employees. 13116 is presented as Exhibit C.Authority vehicles. (See paragraphs 118 through 121. -7- .) The Executive Director's written response to the audit findings and recommendations included in audit report No. Also.

-8- .THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

construct. created and established a body politic and corporate. Florida Statutes. activities. administrative rules. The Auditor General. to be known as the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority (Authority). operate. and classes of transactions in accordance with governing provisions of laws. as part of the Legislature's oversight responsibility for operations of governmental entities. and avenues of access for said expressway or expressways. but not limited to. roads. 1997 Par.754(1)(a). REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL AND LEGAL COMPLIANCE (1) Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority management is responsible for administering expressway system-related programs.OPERATIONAL AUDIT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. Florida Statutes. 1996. 1993. No. own. Additionally. provides that the Authority was created for the purpose of and shall have the power to acquire. Through June 30. and other guidelines. hold. maintain. 1996. Section 348. bond resolutions. and lease the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System. makes operational audits to determine the extent to which Authority management has fulfilled those responsibilities. including. and July 1. -9- . Through September 12. 1995. (2) Section 348. an agency of the State. bridges. functions.753(1). the proper administration of public funds requires that management establish and maintain a system of internal control to provide reasonable assurance that specific entity objectives will be achieved. defines the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System as any and all expressways and appurtenant facilities thereto. all approaches.752(13). Section 348. Florida Statutes. and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. improve.

signalization. 1988. utilities. • Completion of a computerized toll collection and traffic management system. (5) The nature and diversity of the Authority's operations preclude an examination of all programs. -10During the audit period. and landscaping. 1993. July 1. and October 27. • Construction of the East-West Expressway (State Road 408) interchange with John Young Parkway (State Road 423). • State Road 528 (Bee Line Expressway) rehabilitation consisting of shoulder and median work. and January 20. from Parramore Street to Holland East main toll plaza. dated June 18. the Authority's activities were primarily concerned with the . activities. the Authority entered into a lease-purchase agreement dated December 23. functions. with the Florida Department of Transportation. roadway lighting. and storm drainage improvements for 16.757(1). and from Chickasaw Trail to the eastern terminus (State Road 50). No. including the construction of roadways. Parts A and C. pavement markings. drainage. 1985. signing and pavement marking. fencing. and supplemental lease-purchase agreements dated November 25. These agreements. placed the responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System with the Authority. milling and resurfacing. signing. Accordingly. (3) following: • Purchase of right-of-way and preliminary design and engineering on the Western Beltway. 1993. and classes of transactions during each audit. 1986. • State Road 408 (East-West Expressway) pavement striping from western terminus (State Road 50) to Kirkman Road. as amended. Florida Statutes. asphaltic concrete pavement. (4) As permitted by Section 348. roadway lighting.Par. 1995. commonly known as E-Pass. as well as interagency agreements.4 miles along State Road 528.

evidence supporting transactions (as well as events and conditions) which occurred. and Government Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. and other contractual agreements. -11- . on a test basis. As a part of our audit. the scope of this audit focused primarily on assets. performed analytical procedures. and other guidelines. and reviewed management's administrative constructions of law. the reliability of financial records and reports. expenditures and disbursements. Our objective was to evaluate management's compliance with significant provisions of laws. administrative rules. bond resolutions. 1996. bond resolutions. (7) Authority management is responsible for compliance with applicable laws. bond resolutions. and classes of transactions within the scope of audit. activities. No. (6) We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. our audit included examinations of various transactions (as well as events and conditions) during the fiscal year ended June 30. functions. For each of these areas. administrative rules. revenues and cash collections. the economic and efficient operation of the Authority. promotes and encourages the achievement of management's objectives in the categories of compliance with controlling laws. and other guidelines governing those programs. activities. and selected relevant controls. we examined. administrative rules. administrative rules. and other guidelines. and other guidelines. construction contracts. and classes of transactions within the scope of audit were: • To evaluate the Authority's performance in administering its assigned responsibilities in accordance with applicable laws. and the safeguarding of assets. budgetary controls.Par. • To determine the extent to which the Authority's system of internal control. • To determine whether the Authority has corrected. Our audit objectives for the programs. design and engineering contracts. all deficiencies disclosed in the prior audit (report No. right-of-way acquisition. 12255). or is in the process of correcting. liabilities. bond resolutions. However. functions.

Matters coming to our attention relating to noncompliance with various guidelines for those operations audited are noted in the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS section of this report. we obtained an understanding of the components of internal control sufficient to understand the design of controls relevant to those programs. (10) In planning and performing our audit. and other guidelines governing those programs. estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of controls. the objective of our audit was not to provide an opinion on overall compliance with such provisions. the reliability of financial records and reports. The objectives of internal control are to provide management with reasonable. assurance of compliance with applicable laws. (9) Authority management is responsible for establishing and maintaining a system of internal control. However. projection of any evaluation of internal control to future periods is subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation of controls may deteriorate. our purpose -12- . the economic and efficient operation of the Authority. determine whether they have been placed in operation.Par. but not absolute. functions. and extent of substantive audit tests and procedures necessary to the accomplishment of our audit objectives. Our purpose in obtaining an understanding of internal control and assessing the level of control risk was to determine the nature. In fulfilling this responsibility. or irregularities may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also. activities. No. functions. we obtained an understanding of the system of internal control established by Authority management. noncompliance. the Authority had generally complied with the significant provisions of laws. with respect to the items tested. activities. bond resolutions. administrative rules. bond resolutions. and classes of transactions within the scope of audit. timing. (8) The results of our tests of compliance indicated that. administrative rules. and other guidelines. and classes of transactions within the scope of audit. and assess control risk. With respect to internal control. errors. Because of inherent limitations in any system of internal control. and the safeguarding of assets.

and its distribution is not limited. (12) A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the components of internal control does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that errors or irregularities in amounts that would be material in relation to the financial records and resources of the programs. and applicable management. was not to provide an opinion on internal control. members of the Florida Senate and the Florida House of Representatives. activities. bond resolutions. (14) This report is intended for the information of the Legislative Auditing Committee.45(7). and classes of transactions being audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by Authority employees in the normal course of performing their assigned functions. Those matters coming to our attention for the programs. administrative rules. would not necessarily disclose all reportable conditions that are also considered to be material weaknesses as defined above. accordingly.Par. we do not express such an opinion. No. we believe none of the reportable conditions described in the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS section of this report is a material weakness. Copies of this report are available pursuant to Section 11. (11) We noted certain matters involving the design and operation of the Authority's system of internal control that we consider to be reportable conditions under generally accepted government auditing standards. the reliability of financial records and reports. Florida Statutes. could adversely affect Authority management's assurance of compliance with applicable laws. (13) Our consideration of internal control would not necessarily disclose all matters in the system of internal control that might be reportable conditions and. in our judgment. and classes of transactions within the scope of audit are noted in the FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS section of this report. functions. the economic and efficient operation of the Authority. and the safeguarding of assets. Reportable conditions involve matters coming to our attention relating to significant deficiencies in the design or operation of the system of internal control that. functions. However. -13- . activities. and other guidelines. accordingly.

or until all bonds secured by a pledge thereunder. or improvements to the Expressway System or appurtenant facilities. The Authority is a corporate body and an agency of the State. or revisions as shall be deemed desirable and proper. one member being the Chair of the County Commissioners of Orange County. BACKGROUND Authority (15) The Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority was created by Chapter 63-573. The Authority consists of five members. in part.Par. lease. effective July 10. with such changes. Section 348. construct. hold. Florida Statutes. whichever is longer. -14- . necessary or desirable for carrying out the purposes of the Authority and to sell. are fully paid as to both principal and interest. Section 348.754. modifications. roads. Florida Statutes. Part V. purchase. lease. transfer. who shall serve as a member ex-officio. (16) Section 348. improve. No. Florida Statutes).753(4)(a). additions. who shall serve as a member ex-officio. Florida Statutes.754(1)(b). own. 1963. operate.757. or any interest therein. and one member being the District Secretary of the Florida Department of Transportation in the District that contains Orange County. and lease in the capacity of lessor. Laws of Florida (Chapter 348. grants the Authority the right to acquire. and use any franchise or property. the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System (Expressway System). and all refundings thereof. and dispose of any property or interest therein. including all necessary approaches. sets forth the powers of the Authority. Florida Statutes. for terms not exceeding 40 years. the power to: • Acquire. • Enter into lease-purchase agreements with the Florida Department of Transportation as provided in Section 348.754(1)(a). bridges. including. maintain. with three members being appointed by the Governor. Florida Statutes. hold. The executive officer of the Authority is the Executive Director employed by the Authority pursuant to Section 348. and avenues of access. authorizes the Authority to construct any extensions.

Such right and power may be assigned or delegated by the Authority to the Florida Department of Transportation. fees. any agency of the State. rentals. in order to carry out the powers granted to it. and enter into contracts. including all or any portion of the Orange County Gasoline Tax funds in the manner provided by Chapter 348. establish. rates. and other charges for the services and facilities of the Expressway System. Part V. provide for the security of the bonds and the rights and remedies of the bondholders. No. fees. and Do all acts and things necessary or convenient for the conduct of its business and the general welfare of the Authority. rates. refunding bonds. in general. • Secure the payment of bonds by a pledge of any or all of its revenues. and collect tolls. rentals. fees. the State. the County of Orange. and other evidences of indebtedness or obligations. and other charges shall always be sufficient to comply with any covenants made with the holders of any bonds issued pursuant to Chapter 348. rates. • Fix. • • Have the power of eminent domain. which tolls. • Borrow money and make and issue negotiable notes. alter. Organizational Structure (17) The Authority members and Executive Director serving during the 1995-96 fiscal year were as follows: -15- .Par. charge. the City of Orlando. or other charges. bonds. and. or any other public body of the State. Florida Statutes. or other transactions with any Federal agency. • Borrow money and accept gifts or grants from. • Make contracts of every name and nature and execute all instruments necessary or convenient for the carrying on of its business. Florida Statutes. rentals. Part V. leases.

Series 1970 (the 1970 East-West Expressway project). in the amount of $57. Houston.715. Financing Bonded Debt (20) Initial construction of the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System was financed through the issuance of $7. Authority Members A. Long. a lease-purchase agreement dated December 23. Expressway System (19) The Orlando-Orange County Expressway System is defined as meaning any and all expressways and appurtenant facilities thereto. 1985. The Authority issued Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Revenue Refunding Bonds.Florida Department of Transportation Executive Director Dr.000 Expressway Revenue Bonds. Exhibit B presents an organizational chart for the Authority in effect at June 30. Harold W. Chairman William A. all approaches.900. Series 1965 (the 1965 Bee Line Expressway project). $70.000 State of Florida Full Faith and Credit Expressway Bonds. but not limited to. was entered into between -16- .000. Series 1980 (the 1980 East-West Expressway project). $17. A map of the expressway system as of July 1996 is shown as Exhibit A of this report. Series 1985. bridges.000 to refund the outstanding expressway bonds. Worrall (18) 1996. Orange County Chairman Nancy M. Chapin. At the same time the Series 1985 bonds were issued. District V Secretary . Series 1970.000 State of Florida Full Faith and Credit Orlando-Orange County Expressway Bonds.000 State of Florida Full Faith and Credit Orlando-Orange County Expressway Bonds.Par. Secretary/Treasurer Linda W. Wayne Rich.000. Beckett. Vice-Chairman Inez J. roads. and Series 1980-A. Series 1965. including. Series 1980. Series 1980-A (the 1980 East-West Expressway project).500. No. and avenues of access for said expressway or expressways. and $4.

was entered into between the Authority. 1986.000. as lessor. Series 1986. a supplemental lease-purchase agreement dated November 25. No. This lease-purchase agreement is discussed in this report under the subheading Intergovernmental Agreements.000. As a result. and the Florida Department of Transportation. At the same time the bonds were issued. as lessor. as lessee. This lease-purchase agreement is discussed in this report under the subheading Intergovernmental Agreements.600. originally allocated to finance the central connector. was entered into between the Authority. to pay a portion of the costs of acquisition and construction of improvements to the Expressway System (known as the 1986 Project). to pay acquisition and construction costs of improvements to the Expressway System (known as the 1988 Project) consisting of a central connector from downtown Orlando to the Bee Line Expressway. and $153. -17- . as lessee. The remaining proceeds from the Series 1988 bonds were used in April 1993 to defease the remaining portion of the Series 1988 bonds which had previously ascended to senior lien status. At the same time the bonds were issued. no Series 1988 bonds remain outstanding. Series 1986.Par. as lessor.000 in Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Junior Lien Revenue Bonds.000 in Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Revenue Bonds. and the Florida Department of Transportation. the Authority. Series 1988. This lease-purchase agreement is discussed in this report under the subheading Intergovernmental Agreements. A portion of the proceeds from the Series 1988 bonds. were used in July 1992 to redeem the portion of the Series 1988 bonds which had yet to ascend to senior lien status. as lessee. which primarily consisted of the east and west extensions to the original East-West Expressway and the north and south sections of the Central Florida GreeneWay (formerly known as the north and south sections of the Eastern Beltway). 1988. (22) The Authority issued $140. (21) The Authority issued $280.000 in Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Junior Lien Revenue Bonds. The various extensions were opened to traffic between December 1988 and October 1990. and the Florida Department of Transportation. a supplemental lease-purchase agreement dated October 27.

inclusive. The 1990 Project consisted of the construction of the Southern Connector (part of the Central Florida GreeneWay). Florida Statutes. high-speed connection between Interstate Highway I-4 on the west and the Central Florida GreeneWay at the Bee Line Expressway on the east and also provides access to the Orlando International Airport from the south.000. and $70. 2019.725. and $202. The Series 1993 Senior Lien bonds were issued to refund the Series 1985 refunding bonds. The Series 1993 bonds were dated June 1. the Series 1986 bonds.280. 1993. with the exception of $14.Par. and the Series 1986 Junior Lien bonds which ascended to senior lien status. The Southern Connector. was opened to traffic in July 1993.000 in Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Junior Lien Revenue Refunding Bonds. and 2020.000 in Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Junior Lien Revenue Bonds. The Series 1993 Junior Lien bonds were issued to refund $61. 1993. Series 1993. and 1993A Series Junior Lien Revenue Refunding Bonds issued by the State of Florida placed the -18- . The remaining six-mile segment from State Road 536 to Interstate Highway I-4 has been designated a Turnpike project of the Florida Department of Transportation and was opened in June 1996. 2009. 1993 Series Senior Lien Revenue Refunding Bonds. to pay a portion of the costs of acquisition and construction of improvements to the Expressway System (known as the 1990 Project).000 of the Series 1990 Junior Lien bonds maturing in the years 2019 through 2021. inclusive.000. (24) Pursuant to Section 348.000 of the Series 1990 Junior Lien Bonds maturing in the years 2003. 1993. Series 1993A. The Series 1993A Junior Lien Bonds were issued to refund $175.000 in Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Senior Lien Revenue Refunding Bonds.575. No.755(1)(b).000 of the Senior Lien Bonds which were issued as Auction Rate Certificates and Leveraged Reverse Rate Securities dated June 23.840. Series 1993. (23) The Authority issued $385. 1993 Junior Lien Revenue Refunding Bonds.715. The Series 1993A Bonds were dated November 1. the Authority negotiated the sale of $493.000 in Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Junior Lien Revenue Refunding Bonds. (25) The bond resolutions for the 1990 Series Junior Lien Revenue Bonds. from the Bee Line Expressway to State Road 536 in southwest Orange County. Series 1990. which provides a direct.

1996. operation costs. Florida Statutes.377. also amended Section 338. repealing the requirement for local governments to pay interest to FDOT on advances received under this Section. responsibility for ensuring compliance with the provisions of the bond resolutions relating to pledged revenues and debt service payments with the Authority. and the lease-purchase agreements discussed in paragraph 34. Section 338. amended Sections 338.251(9).251(4) and (7). construction completion costs in excess of the bond proceeds and the routine operation costs and maintenance and repair costs of several components of the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System are to be paid from Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) funds. tolls will continue in effect until all debt defined in the lease-purchase agreements has been paid.Par. Florida Statutes. and maintenance and repair costs of applicable components of the Expressway System. including advances made prior to January 1.251(4). Florida Department of Transportation Advances (26) Pursuant to bond covenants. Florida Statutes. Chapter 94-237. and the FDOT has been reimbursed for those construction completion costs. Chapter 94-237.251. Section 338. However. stating that repayment of funds advanced. Laws of Florida. Effective May 24.000 of FDOT funds for the completion of construction and the routine operation costs and maintenance and repair costs of several components of the Expressway System. No. 1994. Pursuant to the lease-purchase agreements. 1994.251(9). shall not include interest. beginning no later than 7 years after the date of the advance provided repayment shall be completed no later than 12 years after the date of the advance. retained the requirement that interest accruing to local governmental entities from the investment of advances shall be paid to FDOT. Laws of Florida. Florida Statutes. -19- . created the Toll Facilities Revolving Trust Fund within the FDOT and authorized the FDOT to advance funds to local governmental entities for specified road projects. As of June 30. provided that each advance made pursuant to this Section shall require repayment out of the initial bond issue proceeds or at the discretion of the Authority. (27) Section 338. Florida Statutes. the Authority had received approximately $94.

leaving a balance due of $5. • An advance of $18. 1995.000. 1992. however. and Eastern and Western Extension East/West Expressway. The original agreements required that repayments include interest charged at the average compound rate earned by the Florida State Treasury in the year preceding that of the current payment due. an agreement was entered into by the Authority and the FDOT for -20- . 1987. the Authority has paid $7.564 on March 1.East/West Expressway. The schedule of repayment pursuant to this agreement stipulated an initial payment to the FDOT of $3. an agreement was entered into by the Authority and the FDOT for the repayment of this advance. (28) The Authority has received. The agreements provide that repayment of the advance shall be from the initial bond issue proceeds or at the discretion of the Authority.647. 1996. 1988.South Section. to reflect the changes to Section 338. applicable to these advances are as follows: • An advance of $12.231. and environmental studies for the Western Beltway . pursuant to various agreements with the FDOT. this provision was eliminated when the agreements were amended on August 19. corridor.North Section. On November 12.000.East/West Expressway. On November 12.251. 1994. advances from the FDOT's Toll Facilities Revolving Trust Fund to finance various Expressway System projects.466. a schedule of payments shall be submitted to and be acceptable to the FDOT.Par.North Section. 1992. Florida Statutes.000 was received pursuant to an agreement dated February 23. 1994. No. and Eastern Beltway . The agreements further stipulate that the election shall be made at the time of the initial bond issue. with the remaining balance plus interest earned to be paid over a five-year period with the next payment being due March 2. within seven years after the date of the advance. Unpaid balances at June 30.000 was received pursuant to an agreement dated February 5. 1996.096. discussed in paragraph 27. for preliminary engineering. final design on the Eastern and Western Beltway North Section. alignment. for right-of-way purchases for the Eastern Extension . As of June 30. General Engineering Consultant services and appraisals for the Eastern Beltway .294 to the FDOT which includes interest earned on this advance.North and South Sections. Eastern and Western Extension . and for right-of-way purchases for the Eastern Beltway . If repayment is to be made during the seven-year period.

No.000 11. when the responsibility for collecting tolls was reassigned to the Authority.000 $104. Authority personnel collect payments for photocopy and blueprint charges.754(2)(f). rentals.037. Revenues (29) Section 348. 1995. fees.794.000 492.075. establish. right-of-way reservation maps. the Authority has paid $6. the repayment of this advance. establishes the Authority's power to fix. rates. interest income.734 to the FDOT which includes interest earned on this advance. The schedule of repayment pursuant to this agreement stipulated six equal payments of $3. 1996.000 10.468. the responsibility for collecting tolls was assigned to the Florida Department of Transportation until January 20. As of June 30. the Authority contracted with Florida Toll Services to operate the Expressway System. and other miscellaneous charges. and grant revenue.000 -21- .757.867 including interest earned to be paid over a six year period beginning February 17. (30) The majority of the Authority's revenue is from toll collections. and other charges for the services and facilities of the Expressway System.935.057. and collect. Florida Statutes. The Authority is responsible for the assessment of tolls and the subsequent application of the toll revenues in accordance with the bond resolutions related to the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System. leaving a balance due of $12.310. Pursuant to the three lease-purchase agreements with the Florida Department of Transportation (discussed in paragraph 34) and as permitted by Section 348. alter. 1995.Par. On February 28. Florida Statutes. The Authority's revenues as shown on its audited financial statements by an independent certified public accounting firm for the 1995-96 fiscal year are summarized in the following tabulation: Description of Revenue Sources Toll Revenues Investment Income Grant Revenue Miscellaneous Sources Total Amount $ 82. In addition.018. 1995. charge.

-22- . project management. competitive selection. and right-of-way acquisition. coordination. The Authority utilizes a Consultant Recommendation Committee which consists of the Executive Director. The Consultant Recommendation Committee evaluates proposals for firm qualifications and competency based on the criteria listed in the Guidelines and submits recommendations to the Authority for final approval. a representative from the City or the County. No. Communications. and an engineering consulting firm to perform a traffic and revenue study. and two Authority staff members appropriate to the project. determine the qualifications and fix the compensation of such persons. Florida Statutes. Consultant Contracting (31) Section 348. firms. permanent or temporary. and competitive negotiation. financial. As of June 30. landscape architect. and employ a fiscal agent or agents. The Authority adopted written procedures entitled GUIDELINE FOR CONTRACTS FOR CERTAIN PROFESSIONAL SERVICES (Guidelines) which includes provisions for public announcement and qualification procedures. 1996. its own counsel and legal staff. Director of Construction/Maintenance. provides that the Authority may employ an executive secretary. and a Director of Business Development. and such employees. or registered land surveyor in connection with his/her professional employment or practice.055. as it may require. Deputy Executive Director/Director of Engineering. Firms retained by the Authority included an architectural.753(4)(a). engineering. governs the awarding of contracts for services performed by an architect. Florida Statutes. professional engineer. the Authority employed 32 people to perform the duties of the Authority including an Executive Director. and Marketing.Par. an executive director. (33) Section 287. the Authority chose to perform most of its activities (as described in paragraph 16) pursuant to consulting contracts. such engineers. or corporations. and administration. Chief Financial Officer. among other services. Other consultants under contract to the Authority during the audit period included consultants in the areas of legal. and planning consultant to provide. technical experts. (32) During the audit period. Director of Operations.

the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System (1965. the Authority assumed the responsibility for supervision of maintenance activities for the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System. 1993. to the extent practicable. In an agreement dated January 20. and the 1980 Projects. be deposited daily into a special trust fund account maintained in a bank in Orange County to be designated by the Authority. and 1988 Projects as discussed in this report under the subheading Financing) was leased to the FDOT. between the Authority and the FDOT. Intergovernmental Agreements (34) Pursuant to the lease-purchase agreement dated December 23. the Authority assumed the responsibility for operating the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System for the purpose of contracting the operation of the System to a third party. • The Florida Department of Transportation must pay or cause to be paid from sources other than Expressway System revenues. including the 1990 Project. 1988. The tolls will be applied by the Authority as prescribed in the appropriate bond resolutions. 1986. 1995. No. the 1970. 1970. -23- . to operate the System. the costs of maintenance of the 1965. 1995. between the Authority and the FDOT. that: • All tolls will be collected by the Florida Toll Services and. 1985. the Department agreed to provide management and operational services for the toll collection facilities associated with the 1990 Project. 1980. between the Authority and the FDOT. The agreements noted above between the Authority and FDOT provided. The Authority executed a contract with Florida Toll Services on February 28. and supplemental lease-purchase agreements dated November 25. • The Authority must pay from Expressway System revenues the costs of operation of the 1965 Project and the costs of operation and costs of maintenance of the 1986 and the 1990 Projects. and October 27. 1993. In an agreement dated July 1. In an agreement dated June 18. 1986. among other things. between the Authority and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). and the costs of operation of the 1970 and 1980 Projects.Par.

Refer to paragraph 26 for the amount advanced by the Department for costs of completion. that 80 percent of the gasoline taxes accruing to Orange County pursuant to Article XII. Such rentals shall continue until: (1) provision has been made for payment or redemption of all outstanding bonds.Par. and costs of maintenance of the Expressway System. Bee Line Expressway 1970. Series 1993. is shown in the following table: System Component 1965. • The application by the Authority of net revenues in accordance with the bond resolutions of the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Senior Lien Revenue Refunding Bonds. Bee Line Expressway 1986. 1985. Airport Interchange and Bee Line Improvements 1980-A. have agreed in an Interlocal Agreement dated August 20. and all interest thereon. 1996. operation. costs of operation. and as amended by County resolution on March 16. as amended and restated as of September 26. 1990. Southern Connector Operation Authority Department Department Department Authority Authority Maintenance Department Department Department Department Authority Authority Interlocal Agreements (36) The Authority and Orange County. and October 12. are available for debt service on Authority bond issues in the event of -24- . including any refunding thereof. Section 9(c). No. Florida. East-West Expressway Extensions and Central Florida GreenWay 1990. will constitute the rentals and purchase payments for the Expressway System by the Florida Department of Transportation. and maintenance of the Expressway System. (35) A summary of the financial responsibilities of the Authority and the Florida Department of Transportation for the operation and maintenance of the Expressway System as of June 30. and the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority Junior Lien Revenue Refunding Bonds. East-West Expressway 1980. Toll Facility. 1993. and (2) the Department has been fully reimbursed all amounts to which it is entitled for costs of completion. Constitution of the State of Florida. 1993. as amended. Series 1993.

were the subject of an audit of the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority conducted by a firm of certified public accountants and the audit report is on file in the Authority's office. No.Par. The Authority's financial statements as of and for the fiscal year ended June 30. -25- . Related Audits (37) Our audit did not extend to an examination of the Authority's financial statements as of and for the fiscal year ended June 30. 1996. a deficiency in the Revenue Fund. 1996. No such deficiencies in the Revenue Fund occurred during the audit period.

bond resolutions. Our review of these activities indicated that the Authority generally complied with governing provisions of laws. and other guidelines. improve. grants the Authority power to acquire. maintain. administrative rules. Our detailed findings and recommendations concerning some instances of noncompliance with governing provisions of laws. through June 30. hold. parts A and C. bond resolutions. and other guidelines. Florida Statutes. reported unreserved retained earnings deficits for the fiscal years ending June 30. bond refunding. operate.000 at June 30. Financial Condition (40) The Authority. (4) East-West Expressway (State Road 408) interchange with John Young Parkway (State Road 423). (39) As discussed in paragraph 3.Par. 1997. and (5) the computerized toll collection and traffic management system. Part V. Florida Statutes. construct. as well as those detailed findings and recommendations concerning deficiencies in the design or operation of the internal controls for those operations audited. however. No. administrative rules. the Authority's activities during the audit period were related to the: (1) Western Beltway. in its previously issued audited financial statements.723. (2) State Road 528 (Bee Line Expressway) rehabilitation. commonly known as E-Pass. Section 348. and other issues.754. This positive unreserved retained earnings amount reflects the efforts of Authority management and the Authority's certified public accountant to thoroughly review and update the application of certain generally accepted accounting principles. these deficits were primarily attributable to the application of accounting principles relating to depreciation. own. The Authority's 1996-97 audited financial statements reported unreserved retained earnings of $116. 1996. 1993. -26- . (3) State Road 408 (East-West Expressway) pavement striping. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS (38) Section 348. are presented under appropriate subheadings below. created and established a body politic and corporate. an agency of the State. Florida Statutes (see paragraph 16). and lease the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System as authorized by Chapter 348. to be known as the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority (Authority).753(1).

723. Rules of the Auditor General for Local Governmental Entity Audits. (43) Subsequently. Florida Statutes. the Authority's audited financial statements for the 1996-97 fiscal year reported positive unreserved retained earnings of $116.503(1)(d). (41) Section 218. Further. and 1996. made sufficient increases in revenues or reductions in expenditures (expenses) to prevent the occurrence of the deficit. bond refundings. (42) As shown on the Authority's previously issued audited financial statements for the fiscal years ended June 30. defined a budget deficit as an unreserved or total fund balance or retained earnings deficit for which sufficient resources of the local governmental entity are not available to cover the deficit and for which the local governmental entity has not.000. the fiscal year in which bonded indebtedness currently outstanding will be repaid. as applicable to the 1995-96 fiscal year.554(1)(b).000. our analysis of Authority financial records indicated that these previously reported deficits were primarily attributable to the application of accounting principles relating to depreciation. As a result. bond refundings. provides that a local governmental entity shall be in a state of financial emergency when one or more of certain specified conditions occur. This positive unreserved retained earnings balance was the result of the retroactive application of certain accounting principles related to depreciation of fixed assets.826.000. through its budget process. our analysis of the Authority's projected cash inflows and outflows for the fiscal years ending June 30. Section 10. Section 218.000. Authority management and the Authority's certified public accountant thoroughly reviewed and updated the application of certain generally accepted accounting principles. and $45. disclosed that the Authority was not facing a financial crisis in terms of its ability to pay current or future obligations. No.Par. defined one of the conditions for determination of financial emergency as budget deficits for two successive years. 2023. However. 1997. 1997.634. respectively. 1995. Because the Authority's audited financial statements did not describe the specific resources available to cover these unreserved retained earnings deficits.000 as of June 30. Florida Statutes (1995). through June 30. 1994. -27- . and other issues. 1993. we could not conclusively determine from our desk review of the audit reports whether the Authority had met the statutory definition of a state of financial emergency. the Authority reported unreserved retained earnings deficits of $16.861.680.503(1). $27. $47.

Par. and examination of pertinent supporting documentation. we recommend that the Authority obtain written clarification from the Governmental Accounting Standards Board as to whether the preservation method of accounting for infrastructure is acceptable under GAAP.34(1). we were able to determine that the accounting changes and corrections reflected in the Authority's 1996-97 fiscal year audited financial statements were in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Florida Statutes (1995). the preservation method. appears to be a reasonable method for accounting for the use of infrastructure assets and is used by other governmental entities within the transportation industry. at the level of detail that it deems necessary in accordance with applicable provisions of State law and contractual agreements. Consequently.. it is incumbent on the Authority to make appropriations. actual expenditures exceeded the legal level of budgetary control established of record by the Authority (object level) for numerous expenditure categories.000. roads and bridges).474. and from the correction of an error in reporting a capital grant. except for the Authority's change to the preservation method of accounting for infrastructure assets (i.e. which is an alternative to the depreciation method of accounting for infrastructure assets. Existing authoritative literature does not conclusively indicate that the preservation method is acceptable under current GAAP. requires the governing body of each special district to make appropriations but does not establish the level of detail at which the appropriations are to be made. which increased beginning retained earnings for the 1995-96 fiscal year by $95. Based on the Authority's 1996-97 fiscal year audited financial statements. and adopt a budget. Budgetary Controls (45) During the 1995-96 fiscal year. No. However. Given the significant impact of this accounting change. capitalized interest. (46) Section 218. the Authority does not meet the statutory definition of a state of financial emergency. Once the legal level of -28- . and bond discount/issue costs. (44) Through discussion with the Authority's certified public accountant.

057. indicated that the Authority had established a policy that individual line items may be exceeded during the fiscal year provided that the total fiscal year budget is not exceeded. the only documented legal level of budgetary control established by the Authority for the 1995-96 fiscal year is the object level. Accordingly. the only basis for determining the level of control for the appropriated budget is the budget document approved by the Authority. The Authority Chairman. expenditures by object (e. salaries and wages. 1995. -29- . The budget document approved by the Authority and transmitted to the FDOT presented. 1996. and 46 expenditure categories totaling $5. Section 4. Since the lease-purchase agreement does not establish the level of budgetary control.998.Par. and approved by the Florida Department of Transportation on February 27. we were not provided with documentation evidencing that the Authority intended to apply this policy to future budgets. During the 1995-96 fiscal year.g. etc. These budgets were subsequently approved by the Florida Department of Transportation on August 17. for each fund. requires that the Authority annually adopt a budget which is subject to approval of the Department.007. 1997. (48) The Authority adopted the Administrative Fund. Operations Fund. legal fees. expenditures must be limited accordingly.04 of the original lease-purchase agreement described above provides that the Authority may at any time adopt an amended or supplemental budget which must be approved by the Department. budgetary control has been established by the Authority. which included 36 expenditure categories totaling $2. between the Authority and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). respectively. and Maintenance Fund budgets for the 1995-96 fiscal year on June 28. While we were provided with documentation evidencing that the Authority amended the 1992-93 fiscal year budget to allow individual line items to be exceeded. 1985.943. 50 expenditure categories totaling $18. 1995.855.). amended Administrative Fund and Operations Fund budgets were adopted by the Authority on January 24.. (47) Section 4. 1996. No. in a letter dated July 10.02 of the original lease-purchase agreement dated December 23. These budgeted expenditures by object were integrated into the Authority's accounting system.854.

No.001.11 in the Maintenance Fund. meeting. We will review the Authority's procedures for adhering to budgets adopted pursuant to Section 218. This Section further allows the Authority to receive bank trust receipts in return for investment of surplus funds in securities -30- . and for 13 expenditure categories totaling $372. although none of the funds budgeted were exceeded in total.04 in the Administrative Fund to $281. (49) Section 218. Since the Authority established the legal level of control at the object level as noted above. Authority expenditures must be limited to the amounts budgeted by object as presented in the approved budget. 1996. As similarly noted in audit report No. 12255. Florida Statutes. trust receipts from a trustee. however.21 in the Administrative Fund. Florida Statutes (1995).345. actual expenditures exceeded the approved budget for 7 expenditure categories totaling $10. Investments (51) The Authority invested moneys held in the Authority's Revenue Fund bank account in overnight repurchase agreements. Overexpenditures in individual categories ranged from $510. such investments were subject to an increased risk of loss. paragraphs 38 through 41. authorizes the Authority to invest surplus public funds in various United States Government obligations and stipulates that such securities shall be properly earmarked and immediately placed in safekeeping in a safe-deposit box in a bank or institution carrying adequate safe-deposit box insurance. to be exceeded during the fiscal year provided that the total fiscal year budget is not exceeded. because the Authority did not obtain the actual securities.34(1). during our next audit of the Authority.71 in the Operations Fund. 1997. the Authority adopted a budget policy which allows for individual line items. our current review disclosed that.727. as of June 30.90 in the Operations Fund.507. other than salary line items.427. (50) Subsequent to the audit period at its August 27. provides that it is unlawful for any officer of a special district to draw money from the treasury except in pursuance of appropriation made by law.Par. for 13 expenditure categories totaling $439.34(1). Florida Statutes. or third-party safekeeping receipts perfecting the Authority's secured interest in the securities pledged as collateral. (52) Section 218.

We did not suggest that the Authority refrain from investing its moneys. there was nothing of record to indicate how the Authority would establish its preferential claim against such securities in the event the bank was unable to honor its agreement with the Authority. Although the Executive Director has indicat ed that the Authority obtains receipts for the securities identifying the securities held as collateral for the moneys invested.225.841. we believe the investm ents in repurchase agreements should be secured by obtaining the actual securities or third-party safekeeping receipts. however. a trust receipt from a trustee. in his written response to paragraphs 51 through 54. those -31- .930.330. however. (54) In the absence of trust receipts." Similar findings were also noted in audit report No.Par. and other miscellaneous sources. or a third-party safekeeping receipt perfecting the Authority's secured interest in the securities described in the "Repurchase Agreement Confirmation. (55) The Executive Director. While our tests disclosed that the funds invested in repurchase agreements were returned to the Authority as agreed. stated that if the Authority did not invest its funds in an overnight repurchase agreement they would be negligent in their duties. these investments ranged from $1. No. (53) The Authority's Revenue Fund account includes moneys from toll collections. paragraph 34. The Authority's investment in repurchase agreements was evidenced by a daily "Repurchase Agreement Confirmation" provided by the bank which described the securities pledged as collateral. and provides the actual securities on which the trust receipts are issued may be held by any bank depository chartered to operate as such by the United States Government or the State of Florida or their designated agents. we recommend that the Authority take appropriate steps to minimize the risk of loss through such investments either by obtaining and safeguarding the actual underlying securities or by requiring the bank to provide trust receipts evidencing the Authority's ownership of the securities purchased on its behalf. interest earned. 12255.04. During the 1995-96 fiscal year. Moneys held in the Authority's Revenue Fund bank account were invested overnight in repurchase agreements pursuant to an agreement between the Authority and its bank.94 to $13. the Authority did not obtain the actual securities.

in opinion No. requires that a custodian-wide control account showing the total investment in property be maintained. Control account totals should not be established by periodically summarizing the values recorded on the individual property records. Accordingly.02. requires each custodian to maintain an adequate record of property in his custody.012. Rather. or authorities within the executive branch of State government. entries to the control account should be derived from the documents -32- .350(6). Control accounts accumulate the total investment in property and.340(1). provide evidence of the change in that investment over periods of time as well as the total investment at any point in time. and Chapter 10. In addition.01(1). the Authority is subject to the requirements of Chapter 273. Florida Statutes. Florida Statutes. Rules of the Auditor General. but rather it applies to any State board. furniture and equipment purchases and Authority approved deletions had not been reconciled to changes to the property listing. No. defines control accounts as summary accounts designed to control accountability for the individual property records.30) had not been reconciled to the value of furniture and equipment recorded in the general ledger control account ($113. the Attorney General opined that the term custodian was not limited to boards. receipts serve only to identify the securities and do not provide assurance that the securities are pledged solely to secure the investment of Authority moneys and are held by an independent third party. Section 273. Tangible Personal Property (56) The value of property shown on the Authority's listing of furniture and equipment ($771. Rules of the Auditor General. Additionally. and dispositions. through entries to the control accounts documenting acquisitions. commission.Par. (58) Section 10. includes any "authority" within the meaning of custodian. or authority regardless of which of the several branches of government such State board or authority may belong or be assigned to. 83-20. commission. Rules of the Auditor General for State-Owned Tangible Personal Property. Section 10.040. Florida Statutes. transfers.58).300. (57) Section 273.

Because of the fiduciary -33- .30. According to Authority personnel. to furniture and equipment as shown on the Authority's listing of inventory by property number at a value of $771. 1995. the discretionary authority to expend the public moneys for accomplishment of the Authority's purposes is not unlimited.Par. the difference between the value of the property listed and the general ledger control account balance resulted because the general ledger control account did not include property purchased prior to July 1. and that the control account be adjusted to reflect the correct amount of furniture and equipment. evidencing transactions and should be posted contemporaneously with entries to the individual property records. (60) Although we were able to locate those property items included in our tests and verify that the difference between the general ledger and subsidiary records was primarily attributable to the reasons cited above. in order to carry out the powers granted to it by this part or any other law. with a reported value of $113. Such procedures should also provide for a comparison of furniture and equipment purchases and Authority-approved deletions with changes in the property records to ensure that all items are properly recorded and reported. 1996." However. (59) Authority staff. states that the Authority is empowered "to do all acts and things necessary or convenient for the conduct of its business and welfare of the authority.012. effective control procedures require that policies and procedures be designed to provide reasonable assurance that recorded accountability of assets is established. Authority staff did not compare furniture and equipment purchases and Authority-approved deletions with changes to the property listing. Part V. had not reconciled the general ledger control account for furniture and equipment. We recommend that the Authority implement procedures to provide for a reconciliation of the control accounts and individual property records at reasonable intervals with appropriate action taken with respect to any differences. as of June 30. In addition.040. No.58. Documentation of Expenditures (61) The Authority's power to expend public moneys is set forth in Chapter 348. Section 348. Florida Statutes.754(2)(1). Florida Statutes.

demonstrate that expenditures were: (1) authorized by Chapter 348. it possesses only such powers as are expressly or by necessary implication authorized or granted by statute. public officials have a duty to demonstrate the basis for their actions in the public records of the governmental unit they represent. The documentation of an expenditure in sufficient detail to establish the authorized public purposes served. which governs per diem and travel expenses of public officers. While Chapter 348. certain constraints are imposed on all governmental entities in this State. rather than a private. and authorized persons). additional legal compliance requirements to which the Authority is subject are found in various sections of the Florida Statutes (e. Part V. and how that particular expenditure serves to further the identified public purposes. No. as to a particular transaction. (62) No public official may take actions which are not authorized by law. the request for payment should be denied. (2) reasonable in the circumstances and necessary or convenient to the accomplishment of the authorized purposes of the Authority. As the Authority is a special district.. as a general condition. Section 112. purpose. or other applicable guidelines. its officials must.061. will depend on the nature of the transaction. Florida Statutes. the more extensive will be the need for detailed documentation establishing its propriety. either specifically or by necessary implication. contains several such constraints. the more unusual the transaction or the less apparent the authorized public purpose served by the proposed expenditure. (63) In the absence of documentation establishing the foregoing purposes served by an expenditure. -34- . However. Unless such documentation is present. and (3) in pursuit of a public. To establish that official actions are proper. Florida Statutes. should be present at that point in time when the voucher is presented to the official empowered to make the payment of funds. the basis in law for making such payments has not been established. responsibilities associated with the handling of public funds and the accomplishment of purposes set forth in law.g. as a matter of record. Part V. The nature and extent of the documentation required to demonstrate the foregoing.Par. In respect to the expenditure of public moneys of the Authority. employees. Florida Statutes.

(66) On May 27.99 relating to the creation of the Foundation. that did not appear to be authorized by applicable State law. the Authority had donated approximately $59. a not-for-profit corporation created by the Authority." The initial Foundation Board of Directors consisted of the Chairman and Secretary/Treasurer of the Authority. Related Organizations (65) Our audit disclosed several Authority actions taken with respect to the OOCEA Foundation. These expenditures are discussed in detail under the appropriate subheadings below. Our audit disclosed the following Authority actions regarding the Foundation: • The Authority incurred legal expenses totaling $8. was incorporated at the direction of the Authority. Florida Statutes. Inc. Florida Statutes. Subsequent to our inquiries regarding these expenses. The purpose of the Foundation. a not-for-profit corporation. the Foundation. Inc. As of December 31. established pursuant to Chapter 617. (64) Our audit disclosed several expenditures for which the authorized public purpose of the expenditure and/or the necessity of the expenditure in accomplishing the authorized purposes of the Authority had not been established of record. 1996. as noted in the Articles of Incorporation. 1994. on -35- .. was "to receive contributions and make distributions in support of organizations that qualify as exempt organizations under Section 501(c)(3) of the Code and exempt from taxation under Section 501(a) of the Code within the Central Florida area. Donations also include surplus property donated by the Authority pursuant to Section 273. including moneys generated from fund-raising events. and an attorney employed by one of the Authority's law firms who also acted as the Foundation's incorporator.660 of surplus property (based on historical cost) to the Foundation since its inception in May 1994.05. (67) The Foundation's revenue sources consist of donations.762. the Authority's Executive Director. (Foundation).Par. Surplus property received by the Foundation is subsequently auctioned off and the proceeds retained by the Foundation. No. the OOCEA Foundation.

1997.000 contribution was appropriate. Florida Statutes. (69) The Authority contributed $35.000 to the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) towards the MPO's operating budget.99 for legal fees paid by the Authority on the Foundation's behalf. -36- . the Authority's records did not demonstrate how the Authority determined that the $35. • The Foundation's accounting records were maintained by Authority personnel. provides that each MPO shall be created and operated under the provisions of this section pursuant to an interlocal agreement. Although requested. provides for the creation of a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for each urbanized area of the State.Par. Florida Statutes. We were informed by the Authority's Chief Financial Officer that the amount of time and effort spent by Authority staff to provide administration and accounting services to the Foundation is very minimal. The signatories to the interlocal agreement shall be the department and the governmental entities designated by the Governor for membership on the MPO. we are not aware of any legal authority that empowers expressway authorities to create. in cooperation with the State. regarding the donation of surplus property. (68) With the exception of Section 273. While the Authority's contribution to the MPO may be necessary to facilitate the Authority's active participation in the MPO. Section 339. June 10. transportation plans and programs for metropolitan areas.175(1)(b). reimbursed the Authority $8. We recommend that the Authority seek clarification as to the legality of the creation of the Foundation and the above-noted Authority actions pertaining to the Foundation. to develop.05.762.175. or utilize resources on behalf of. No. Authority staff did not provide documentation evidencing how much time was spent by Authority employees for Foundation-related activities. (70) Section 339. not-for-profit corporations. Florida Statutes.

absent a provision in the MPO's budget and in the interlocal agreement addressing each member's share of the MPO's funding needs. the Authority contributed $35. and comprehensive transportation planning process that results in coordinated plans and programs consistent with the comprehensively planned development of the affected urbanized area in cooperation with the Florida Department of Transportation. According to the minutes for the Authority's June 26. Our review of the MPO's 1996-97 fiscal year proposed budget disclosed that it did not specifically indicate that the MPO's funding sources were to include contributions from the Authority. 1996.000 towards the operating budget of the MPO. that the Authority's contribution to the MPO is necessary to facilitate the Authority's active participation in the MPO. it appears that the Authority's participation is necessary for the conduct of its business and.000 contribution was in the appropriate amount. and to implement and ensure a continuing. which states that the purpose of the agreement was to assure eligibility for the receipt of Federal capital and operating assistance pursuant to various Federal laws..Par. meeting. 1993. (73) We recommend the Authority obtain a copy of the MPO's operating budget and determine whether the $35. -37- . assistance. the agreement does not contain any provisions requiring the Authority to provide funding to the MPO nor does the agreement specify how each member's share of the MPO's funding needs would be determined. the Authority is a member of the MPO by virtue of statute but had not previously contributed financially. cooperative. the 1996-97 fiscal year). and Federal resources.000 contribution was appropriate. We also recommend that the Authority take appropriate action to amend the interlocal agreement so that it addresses MPO funding by its members. and the $35. state. as such. it is not apparent how the Authority determined that the $35. grants. However. gifts or bequests from local. As the Authority's active participation in the MPO is mandated by Florida law. (71) The Authority entered into an interlocal agreement dated March 16. 1996.000 contribution represented one eighteenth of the MPO's operating budget for the upcoming fiscal year (i. The agreement also provides that the MPO may accept funds. including how the Authority's share of the MPO's funding needs is to be determined. No.e. However. (72) On September 27.

Florida Statutes. 1995. 288. appurtenant.000 to the Minority/Women Business Enterprise Alliance. (Alliance). (75) On October 31.Par. Evidence of Authority approval for the $6. Inc.707. No. however.000 to the Alliance for the purpose of providing surety and risk assistance to minority and women-owned small businesses.707. convenient. training. and 348. (76) In response to our audit inquiry requesting specific legal authority for this contribution. Inc. "illustrate the point that the Authority's powers certainly include the power to expand the ability for women and minority-owned businesses to compete for Authority contracts. We are unaware of any statutory authority for the Authority to provide funding to not-for-profit organizations. and technical assistance programs to the contractors and subcontractors needed for road construction projects. such minutes do not indicate why this disbursement was necessary to accomplish the purpose for which the Authority was established. the Authority's Chief Financial Officer cited Sections 255. which was made on October 24. 1995. meeting. Florida Statutes.000 to the Minority/Women Business Enterprise Alliance. Although the minutes for the Authority's October 25.000 disbursement. and concluded that the Authority's broad statutory powers to do anything necessary. to provide funding for the operations of the Alliance.101(2). the Authority entered into a grant agreement to provide funding in the amount of $6. The Alliance is the vehicle the Authority has -38- . as a not-for-profit corporation pursuant to Chapter 617.101(2) and 288. to direct existing resources currently committed by public and private sources into a unified minority business assistance effort. Florida Statutes. which address utilization of minority-owned businesses. 1996. or incidental to effectuate its powers and purposes can reasonably be deemed to include financial assistance to provide education. 1996. they do not indicate the necessary public purpose served by the disbursement. 1994. the Authority disbursed $50. He further stated that Sections 255. The Alliance was established on November 24. (Alliance) to provide funding for the operations of the Alliance and to fund a surety and risk assistance program. meeting evidence Authority approval for this disbursement. 1996.754(2). is included in the minutes for the Authority's August 28. Other Organizations (74) The Authority made payments totaling $56. On September 18.

45 for hors d'oeuvres. the Authority should discontinue making payments for this purpose. We recommend that the Authority request an opinion from the Attorney General to clarify its authority to expend moneys for the purposes noted above. (79) On December 11. it does not appear to be a purpose for which the Authority was established. sodas. (78) The Authority incurred expenses totaling $561. In the absence of documentation evidencing the public purpose served by such -39- .80 to the Authority. The expenses were originally paid by the MPO which was subsequently reimbursed $561. The Authority should continue its efforts to recover this amount. No.80 on January 21. 1996. the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). and alcoholic beverages for 45 persons in attendance. We are unaware of any specific legal authority for the Authority to expend funds for this purpose. Communication Expenditures (80) Telephone logs or similar records identifying the parties called and/or the purposes of telephone calls were not maintained by Authority staff for either long-distance or cellular telephone calls.80 for food and alcoholic beverages relating to a reception for the Florida Transportation Commission. 1997. we are unaware of any specific legal authority authorizing the Authority to expend funds for this purpose. (77) While expansion of opportunities for minority and women-owned businesses to compete for contracts is a commendable societal goal.685. In the absence of an affirmative clarification from the Attorney General. We are unaware of any specific legal authority for the Authority to expend funds for these purposes. the Authority requested that the MPO return the $561. subsequent to our audit inquiry.Par. the Authority. 1997. chosen to assist in meeting this statutory directive. On June 12." Notwithstanding the Chief Financial Officer's response. by the Authority for its share of these expenses. and the Efficient Transportation Commission of Central Florida co-sponsored a reception for the Florida Transportation Commission at Church Street Station and incurred expenses totaling $1.

In addition. political subdivisions.582.05 and cellular telephone charges totaling $8. For the long-distance and cellular telephone billings reviewed. long-distance. Florida Statutes. Thirteen cellular telephones were assigned to employees. Director of Operations. the Authority. at a minimum.155. and Marketing. and a representative of the Authority's maintenance contractor. calls. Construction/Maintenance. that the person placing the call. could not provide documentation indicating the public purpose of the calls. municipalities.Par. appropriate Authority personnel should use this documentation in performing the preaudit of telephone billings and seek reimbursement from any individuals making calls that do not serve an authorized public purpose of the Authority. Authority personnel could not be assured that the calls made served an authorized public purpose.55 for communication expenditures. Also. Authority personnel could not be assured that the calls made served an authorized public purpose. the party called. No.376. (82) Our review of the Authority's communication expenditures for the 1995-96 fiscal year included an analysis of non-SUNCOM long-distance charges totaling $4. Communications. the Authority utilized independent vendors to provide local. although requested. -40- . and nonprofit organizations.103. and cellular telephone services. and the purpose of the call be documented for all long-distance toll calls and cellular telephone service calls made by Authority personnel. various Authority During the 1995-96 fiscal year. Director of $152.89. In the absence of documentation evidencing the public purpose served. the Authority recorded including the Executive Director. pursuant to Section 282. (81) The Authority's communications system included participation in the SUNCOM Network which was established to provide communication services to State agencies. (83) We recommend that the Authority develop procedures which will require.

the Attorney General Opinion No.061. agency.O. are provisions establishing uniform rates (including the amounts of reimbursement that travelers may claim) and specific documentation requirements for the payment or reimbursement of travel expenses incurred by public officers. subdivision. defined as any office. division. but only to the extent of the conflict. and authorized persons whose travel expenses are paid by a public agency. authority. we are not aware of any such laws affecting the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority. Florida Statutes. city. bureau. The results of our examination of these expenses are discussed below. town. which applies to all public officers.061. shall prevail over any conflicting provisions in Section 112. or any other separate unit of government created pursuant to law. This law further states that the provisions of any special or local law. municipality.Par. county." However. Florida Statutes. present or future. Among the requirements of Section 112. employees.372. Florida Statutes. of the Manual refers to Attorney General Opinion No. 73-32 does not address the provisions of Section 112. (86) Statutes. Our audit included an examination of all Authority travel-related expenses during the 1995-96 fiscal year to determine whether such expenses were authorized in accordance with the above-noted State law and Authority guidelines. village. body politic. Travel policy Section III.061 does not apply. which governs per diem and travel expenses of public agencies. board. commission. travel policies. No. and authorized persons in connection with official agency business.061. however.061. (87) The Authority adopted a Personnel Policy Manual (Manual) which addressed. among other personnel matters.061. district.48 for travel-related expenses during the 1995-96 fiscal year. employees. Florida . 73-32 and states that "it has been determined that the employees of the Expressway Authority are not state employees and as such Section 112. department. public body. Travel Expenditures (84) Authority travel expenses are subject to Section 112. political subdivision. -41Section The Authority's travel policies were not consistent with Section 112. (85) The Authority incurred $45. Florida Statutes.

The Manual's travel policy Section III.061. and $12 for dinner) and does not allow payment for actual meals.1.061(3)(b). Florida Statutes. not to exceed $5 per day.8.061. No. Florida Statutes. indicated that telephone calls necessitated by considerations personal to the traveler are not reimbursable as a communication expense of the traveler.a. Florida Statutes.061(2)(d). Section 112. Florida Statutes. Authority employee travel expenses are limited to those expenses necessarily incurred by them in the performance of a public purpose authorized by law to be performed by the Authority and must be within the limitations prescribed by that Section. includes any individual who is filling a regular or full-time authorized position and is responsible to an agency head within the definition of employee. The Authority should amend its travel policy to be consistent with the provisions of Section 112. $6 for lunch. (91) Pursuant to Section 112. provides that the Authority will reimburse employees for actual meal expenses if substantiated by receipts. The Manual's travel policy Section III. 75-7. Florida Statutes. the employees of the Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority are clearly subject to the provisions of Section 112.Par. Florida Statutes. (89) The inconsistencies between the Authority's travel policy and Section 112. in Opinion No. Florida Statutes. Section 112.O.061(2)(a). when an employee is out of town for business reasons. provides that travelers shall be allowed up to $21 per day for meals ($3 for breakfast. contains no provisions for the reimbursement of personal long-distance telephone charges while traveling on official business. Section 112. (90) The Authority's records relating to travel expenses were not always adequate to demonstrate the authorized public purpose served and/or compliance with State law. Our detailed examination of Authority travel-related -42- .061(6)(b). the Attorney General. Florida Statutes. were not consistent with Section 112. (88) Our review disclosed two instances in which the Authority's travel policies. includes any "authority" created pursuant to law within the definition of public agency.061. In addition. Accordingly.O.061. Florida Statutes. as prescribed in the Manual. 112.061. contributed to the instances of noncompliance with State law as discussed in paragraphs 90 through 92. provides that the Authority will pay charges for one personal telephone per day.

the Authority reimburse members/employees only for those expenses authorized by Section 112. expenses during the 1995-96 fiscal year (56 transactions) disclosed that some of these expenses were not in accordance with State law as follows: • Sections 112. We recommend that. We also recommend that Authority personnel review the remaining $366. Adequate documentation for travel expenses should include explanations evidencing the necessary and authorized public purpose served by the expenditures. amounts paid to travelers for meals were in excess of amounts allowed by Section 112.42 were reimbursed to Authority employees as travel expenses.45. in seven instances totaling $69.061. Florida Statutes. however. No.80 was reimbursed to an employee for hotel room expenses. adequate preaudit for travel and business expenses should include a review of the per diem meals allowed based on travel time and meals included in registration fees paid by the Authority to ensure that reimbursements were made in accordance with applicable laws.061(6)(b). personal telephone calls totaling $191. (92) Pursuant to law and Authority policies. The employee reimbursed the Authority for the cost of the hotel room on February 25. In seven instances totaling $154. Florida Statutes. and at the meal allowances rates authorized by that Section. • In one instance. the Authority recovered $48 of the $69 from the travelers. 1997 (15 months after the overpayment occurred). establish guidelines for the payment of per diem and subsistence allowances to travelers while on official business.87 of questioned travel expenses disclosed by our audit ($468.Par. the employee was not entitled to such reimbursement since the hotel room had already been paid for with an Authority-issued credit card.061(5) and (6). Florida Statutes. travelers were paid for meals for which they were not entitled to reimbursement based on times traveled or because the meals were included in conference/seminar registration fees. in the future. In addition. Subsequent to our inquiries regarding these expenses. • In 17 instances.67 -43- . $53. It was not apparent from the Authority's records how these expenditures were incurred in the performance of a public purpose.

80 already recovered). 1994.90 for reimbursable expenses.Par. Payments to this consultant totaled $33. (94) below: • The Authority entered into a contract with one of the consultants dated January 7. 1994. legislative representation with respect to matters involving State governmental or regulatory bodies. details of which were provided to Authority personnel. and January 24. to two consultants for services rendered during the 1995-96 fiscal year as noted . 1997.338.338. 1995. the provision of specialized assistance in guiding the Authority's proposals through the Legislature. the Attorney General has opined that public funds may not be expended by statutory entities for lobbying purposes unless expressly and specifically authorized by State law. The services to be provided by this consultant in accordance with the contract and subsequent extensions consisted of. Although the Authority concluded that the consulting services were necessary to the conduct of the Authority's statutory responsibilities. • The Authority entered into a contract on March 22. that covered the period January 7. assistance in the preparation of requests for funding for various transportation projects to the United States Department -44The Authority paid a total of $86. among other matters. and other similar assignments as directed by the Authority.061. including $4. through January 6. with the second consultant which stated that services to be provided consisted of legislative representation including: reviewing and reporting on all pertinent pending transportation legislation and appropriations affecting Central Florida and the Authority. 1994. Lobbying Services (93) The Authority contracted with and made payments during the 1995-96 fiscal year to two consultants to provide lobbying services. 1996. No. and recover amounts which were not authorized by Section 112.90. and executed contract extensions dated December 21. Florida Statutes. of questioned travel expenses less $101.000 for services rendered during the 1995-96 fiscal year.

Fla.754(2)).598. convenient or incidental to carry out the foregoing purposes (348. Florida Statutes. and other appropriate governmental agencies. 1996.51.39.000 plus expenses to the County for the purpose of funding the consultant contract. Stat." Notwithstanding the Chief Financial Officer's response we were not provided any specific statutory authorization for the Authority to contract and make payments for lobbying services. 1996. for the period January 1. The Authority's share of the cost of the consultant contract totaled $21. Payments relating to the Authority's share of the cost of the consultant contract totaled $31. construction. the Authority entered into an interlocal agreement with Orange County. of Transportation. The Authority is further granted all powers necessary. which provided that the County would act as contract administrator for the consulting contract with the same consultant. The consultant's contract with the County contained similar provisions to the contract noted above.754. While the contract was between the Authority and the consultant. 1995. -45- . through December 31. 1996. powers and purposes of the Authority do not prohibit the expenditure of Authority funds for legislative consulting services. maintenance and operation of the Orlando-Orange County Expressway System (as defined in Section 348. The statutory sections governing the authority. (95) In response to our inquiry as to the specific legal authority relied upon in entering into a contract and making payments for lobbying services. including $598. These purposes include acquisition. 1995. several other local governmental entities participated in the cost of the services rendered by the consultant and received the same benefits from such services as did the Authority. the Federal Highway Administration.39 in reimbursable expenses. the Authority's Chief Financial Officer cited Section 348.51 in reimbursable expenses. and concluded: "Section 348.740. and provision of specialized assistance in expediting and processing applications submitted to Federal regulatory bodies.) and appurtenant facilities. Effective January 1. through June 30. No. for services rendered for the period July 1. The agreement provided that the Authority would provide annual funding in the amount of $42.752(13). appurtenant. including $3. the United States Congress.754 of the Florida Statutes sets forth the Authority's general powers and purposes.Par.740. improvement.

purchase. repair. the Attorney General has opined that public funds may not be expended by statutory entities for lobbying purposes unless expressly and specifically authorized by State law (see Attorney General Opinions Nos. those other factors should be fully identified in the public record of the participating governmental unit to document management conclusions followed in expending public moneys. and 87-39). by the courts of the State. Additionally. if factors other than the appraised value of the property acquired affect the determination of price. property. We recommend that the Authority request an opinion from the Attorney General to clarify its authority to expend moneys for services such as those described in the above-noted contract. 77-8. No. maintenance. public moneys should be expended for the acquisition of property only in amounts commensurate with the property's market value and. or any interest therein. Part V. provides that the Authority may acquire private or public property and property rights by gift. hold. Right-of-Way Acquisitions (97) Section 348. real. The primary factor affecting the Authority's decision to acquire properties is whether those properties are necessary to the construction. (98) As a matter of general legislative policy and as interpreted. from time-to-time. grants the Authority the power to acquire. devise. Florida Statutes. purchase. 85-4. personal or mixed. improvement. the Authority should discontinue making payments for lobbying services. Section 348. extension. In the absence of an affirmative clarification from the Attorney General. and use any franchise. tangible or intangible. and operation of the Expressway System authorized by Chapter 348.Par. necessary or desirable for carrying out the purposes of the Authority. (96) The Attorney General has expressed in numerous opinions the general principle that public funds may not be expended by a statutory entity unless there is a specific statutory provision authorizing such expenditure. or condemnation by eminent domain proceedings. More specifically. the Authority should establish a system of internal control for the acquisition of property which ensures that: -46- . lease as lessee.754(2)(c). (99) In exercising the powers granted by law.759(1). Florida Statutes. Florida Statutes.

No. whereby the Authority files a petition in the Circuit Court of the county in which the property is located requesting that the property be condemned and taken for the use and purpose stated by the Authority. • Titles of and rights to properties purchased are properly and timely conveyed to the Authority. • The Authority obtains adequate and reliable information on which to base its decisions relative to the identification. • The negotiation process is property documented and the executed and approved contract to purchase is fair and equitable to the Authority and the property owners.754(2)(c) and 348. and good business practices. administrative rules. if the property owner is not satisfied with the Authority's offer and a direct negotiated settlement cannot be reached. and acquisition of property. selection. In this process. However. Florida Statutes. (100) Our review of the Authority's internal control system relating to the acquisition of property and its actions relating to selected properties acquired during the audit period pursuant to Sections 348.Par.759(1). a 12-member jury is impaneled to determine the amount of compensation to be paid to the property owner. there are other methods by which the Authority can acquire property including: • Eminent domain proceedings. disclosed deficiencies which indicated the need for improvement in established procedures to provide assurance that the Authority acquires property in accordance with applicable laws. • Decisions of the Authority are implemented in accordance with applicable laws and administrative rules and in an economic and efficient manner. (101) The Authority initially attempts to acquire properties through direct negotiation with the property owner whereby the Authority and the property owner are able to agree on a purchase price. -47- .

938.013. including 13 parcels totaling $11. (102) The Authority obtains real estate appraisals to provide a basis for its decisions regarding the acquisition costs of the Expressway System right-of-way. etc. Settlements. This information is determined through the appraisal process. We selected 6 of the parcels acquired through negotiation for review. the tabulated fair market value of all fee takings. After the project is designed and title information is obtained. eminent domain proceedings may begin. easement. Those 6 parcels. (103) The Authority's Right-of-Way Acquisition Procedures Manual. The Manual requires that negotiations with the property owner begin only after an offer letter has been prepared which includes. and a fair market breakdown (land value. or condemnation. If unsuccessful.).300 acquired through negotiated right-of-way agreements and 8 parcels totaling $3. whether by direct negotiation. 1992. whereby an independent third party hears the arguments of both the Authority and the property owner and reviews documentation supporting claims made by either party. among other things. were as follows: -48- . damages.Par. mediation. regardless of the method used to acquire the property. cost-to-cure estimates. the transaction is closed. are greatly influenced by the credence placed on the facts presented in appraisal reports. describes the right-of-way acquisition process to be used. with their appraised values and purchase prices.879 acquired through condemnation by eminent domain proceedings. Consequently. and access rights (if applicable). If negotiations are successful. dated May 27. (104) The Authority acquired 21 parcels of property during the 1995-96 fiscal year. • Court-ordered (sometimes referred to as private) mediation. the adequacy (completeness and documentation) of appraisal reports is critical to the acquisition process. the Authority contracts with independent appraisers for appraisal and appraisal review services. No.

and in conformance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice.026.300 1.800.821.000 924.200.685.050.300 Appraised Value $1. several of which were major deficiencies.030.Par. Authority records did not evidence that these appraisal report deficiencies.825.000 1.000 108. in several instances. The Executive Director.000 1.000 1.000 1.37% 1. For three of the six parcel acquisitions we reviewed. the review appraiser noted deficiencies in the appraisal report.000 1. did not concur with our findings. he did not provide additional documentation or information not previously considered by us during the course of the audit and used in developing our conclusions and recommendations.40% (105) The Executive Director. reasonable.821.895.000 661.700) 1.000 $7.000 1.000.94% 6. Appraisal Reviews (106) The Authority's Right-of-Way Acquisition Procedures Manual requires that appraisal reports be reviewed by qualified review appraisers to ensure the appraisal reports are mathematically correct. had been corrected.82% 24.339.000 Difference $ (3.04% 9. We continue to believe that our statements and conclusions regarding the Manual and the Authority's right-of-way acquisition procedures appropriately address matters that should be resolved by the Authority and its management. questioned the accuracy of statements included in our findings and/or indicated that we did not have a proper understanding of the Authority's Right-of-Way Acquisition Procedures Manual (Manual). No.926.000 2.092.000 $1.000 115.20)% 111.000 $9.300 Percentage Difference (.000 1. Parcel Number 61-123 61-129 61-147 61-149 61-153 220-100 Purchase Price $1.89% 49.950. however. complete. in his written response to our findings and recommendations regarding the Authority's right-of-way acquisition process.000 20. However. -49- .

Due to the nature of our review. the appraisal reports conformed with USPAP and were reported in a summary report format option. However. The review for parcel 61-149 noted only minor deficiencies. (108) The Right-of-Way Acquisition Procedures Manual requires that appraisal reports be reviewed by a qualified review appraiser for conformance with the USPAP. We recommend that the Authority implement procedures to ensure that documentation evidencing compliance with USPAP standards including correction of deficiencies noted by the review appraiser be retained in the Authority's files.Par. No. the reviews for parcels 61-123 and 61-147 noted several major deficiencies. We reviewed the appraisal reports for each of the above parcels. Review Appraisal and Reporting. except for some problems which were noted by the Authority's review appraisers (see discussion below). we did not determine whether additional market data may have been available for consideration by the appraisers and review appraisers in the appraisals that we reviewed. The reports were technically accurate. we were not provided with documentation evidencing that these deficiencies had been corrected. Generally. (107) The Right-of-Way Acquisition Procedures Manual stated that appraisals must comply with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) as promulgated by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation. and reasonableness of the appraiser's conclusions. with the exception of some mathematical errors that were corrected regarding parcel 61-147. However. The Manual also provides that appraisal reviews must conform with USPAP Standard 3. and that the appraisal review include a thorough check of all mathematical calculations and a review of the completeness of the appraisal. We reviewed the Authority's appraisal reviews of the six parcels and noted three instances in which the review appraiser noted deficiencies in the appraisal report. The review appraiser cited instances in both reports in which the appraiser did not provide adequate support for value conclusions and did not comply with applicable provisions for reporting appraisal conclusions under USPAP. Purchase Agreements (109) Our review disclosed three instances in which the Authority reached agreement on the purchase price for a parcel identified for right-of-way acquisition before the Authority's -50- .

and accepted by the Authority as noted below: • The purchase agreement for parcel 61-123 was signed by the property owner on March 6. reviewed. 1996. it is not apparent how the Authority made an informed purchase offer on the parcels. a closing is scheduled. 1996. reviewed. The appraisal report was dated April 2. the Authority for approval. Upon completion of the appraisal review and acceptance of the appraisal by the Authority. Upon approval by the Authority. 1996. After the appraisal report is completed it is reviewed by an appraisal reviewer and revised as necessary.Par. 1996. a purchase agreement is signed by the owner and is presented to . 1996.37 and 111. The Authority entered into a purchase agreement with the property owner 21 days prior to the appraisal report and 45 days prior to the appraisal review report. The appraisal review report was dated April 12. and by the Authority Chairman on March 25. The Authority entered into a purchase agreement with the property owner 8 days prior to the appraisal report and 18 days prior to the appraisal review report. (110) The Right-of-Way Acquisition Procedures Manual outlines steps to be taken in the right-of-way acquisition process. No. 1996. and by the Authority Chairman on March 25.04 percent greater than the appraised values. In the absence of an independent appraisal for these parcels at the date of the purchase contract. with a valuation date of March 27. an offer to purchase (price) should be established based on the appraised market value and any other valuation studies conducted. appraisal report was completed. The appraisal report was dated April 15. 1996. Purchase prices for two of these parcels were 49. 1996. -51If the negotiations are successful. The appraisal review report was dated May 9. with a valuation date of March 20. • The purchase agreement for parcel 61-129 was signed by the property owner on March 4. 1996. An offer to purchase is made to and negotiations are conducted with the property owner. 1996. (111) Our review disclosed three instances in which the Authority entered into a purchase agreement for a parcel identified for right-of-way acquisition before the Authority's appraisal report was completed. and accepted.

1996. the Authority is not bound until final acceptance. 1996. although we are aware that these parcels involved inverse condemnation suits exposing the Authority to damage claims. However. The Authority entered into a purchase agreement with the property owner 21 days prior to the appraisal report and 45 days prior to the appraisal review report. it was not apparent from the Authority's records why the Authority could not wait for the appraisal reports before entering into these purchase agreements. the appraisal review reports for parcels 61-129 and 61-149 were dated 45 days after the purchase agreement date (see paragraph 111). As such. The appraisal report was dated April 15. the purchase prices for parcels 61-129 and 61-149 were 111. The appraisal review report was dated May 9. respectively. • The purchase agreement for parcel 61-149 was signed by the property owner on March 11.37 percent. However. 1996. greater than the appraised value. We acknowledge that these purchase agreements contained a conditional acceptance provision whereby the Authority had 45 days to accept or reject the agreement and that the Authority did not reject any of these agreements. and by the Authority Chairman on March 25.Par. 1996. a contract is executed by the seller and "conditionally accepted" by the Authority. and the above-noted purchase agreements did not receive final Authority approval prior to the Authority having received a review certification of the appraisal. The response also stated that the Authority was exposed to very significant damage claims in connection with these parcels and that the Authority was able to have these lawsuits dismissed and receive general releases from the sellers in connection with the contract sales.20 percent) under the appraised value. the Authority's right-of-way attorneys indicated that parcels 61-129 and 61-149 were subject to pending inverse condemnation actions at the time the Authority contracted to purchase them. In response to our inquiry as to why the Authority entered into these purchase agreements without benefit of an appraisal report certified by the review appraiser. 1996. it is not apparent how the Authority could have given adequate -52- . While the purchase price for parcel 61-123 was slightly (. (112) For two of the three acquisitions noted above the purchase price significantly exceeded the Authority's subsequent appraised value. with a valuation date of March 20. No. (113) The attorneys' response further stated that after a general agreement is reached with a seller.04 and 49.

This provision appears to be contrary to the Authority's Right-of-Way Acquisition Manual which requires that negotiations attempt to reach a fair settlement and protect the interest of both the property owner and the Authority. the -53- . pay the Purchase Price set forth in Paragraph 3. consideration to the appraisal report within the 45-day period. above the subsequent appraised market value. which has been subjected to an appraisal review. contained contract provisions that stated. then the Authority shall nevertheless. With an independent appraisal available. whichever is higher. the purchase agreements included a provision assuring that the property owner would receive at least the agreed-upon compensation regardless of the appraised value (see paragraph 116)." Once a purchase agreement with this provision is signed and approved by the Authority. although the appraised values for parcels 61-129 and 61-149 were subsequently determined to be lower than the purchase offers. (116) Four of the six purchase agreements we reviewed. (115) For four of the six parcel acquisitions we reviewed. No. the Authority may have been able to negotiate a purchase price that was closer to the appraised market value of the parcels. We recommend that the Authority follow the procedures outlined in its right-of-way acquisition procedures manual by first obtaining an acceptable appraisal report. "In the event the appraised value of the Property as set forth in the Appraisal (the "Appraised Value") is greater than the Purchase Price set forth herein. including parcels 61-129 and 61-149 for which the Authority paid 111. and obligated the Authority to pay the agreed-upon purchase price even if the appraised value was determined to be less than the purchase price.Par. Therefore. prior to making a purchase offer. respectively. the Appraised Value. then the Authority shall pay as the Purchase Price. In the event the Appraised Value is less than the Purchase Price set forth herein. (114) In the absence of an independent appraisal for the above-noted parcels at the date of the purchase contract.04 percent and 49. the purchase agreement included a provision that required that the property owner be paid the agreed-upon purchase price or the appraised value. it appears that the Authority was precluded from rejecting the agreements on that basis. Furthermore. it is not apparent how the Authority made an informed purchase offer on the parcels.37 percent.

An employer-provided automobile and fuel -54- . Director of Operations. (119) During the 1995-96 fiscal year. property owner is assured of receiving the agreed upon compensation. Conversely. Also. regardless of the appraised market value. Authority-owned and/or leased vehicles were assigned to four employees (the Executive Director. the Authority is obligated to pay the higher compensation.Par. United States Treasury Regulation Section 1. (117) The Right-of-Way Acquisition Procedures Manual requires that negotiations with property owners be conducted in good faith at all times with an honest and sincere effort to reach a fair settlement for the acquisition. While the property owner's interests are of importance. We recommend that the Authority discontinue the use of purchase agreements with the noted provision.61-21(a) provides that gross income includes compensation for services. the above-noted provision does not appear to be consistent with the Manual in that it could result in a settlement that is not in the Authority's best interest. the Authority had not included the value of the personal use of employer-provided vehicles in reporting earnings for the employees. Vehicle usage records were not maintained and/or adequate to identify and report the amount of taxable fringe benefits attributable to the personal use of the vehicles. Communications and Marketing. which includes the fair market value of any fringe benefits not specifically excluded from gross income by another provision of the Internal Revenue Service Code. Motor Vehicle Assignment and Use (118) Authority-owned and/or leased vehicles were assigned to four employees on a full-time basis. The Authority had not established adequate written policies governing the assignment and use of Authority vehicles. and Manager of Maintenance Administration) on a full-time (24-hour) basis. regardless of the appraised market value established by the Authority's appraisal. The Manual further states that care should be exercised at all times by the negotiator to completely and honestly protect the interest of the affected property owner and the Authority. contrary to applicable United States Treasury Regulations. Director of Construction and Maintenance. No.

No. (121) We recommend that the Authority seek clarification from its legal counsel as to reporting the value of personal use of employer-provided vehicles for Federal reporting purposes and take whatever corrective action is necessary to comply with Federal tax regulations. the Authority's vehicle use and maintenance policy did not require that vehicle usage records include the time of departure and return and a certification that the mileage was expended in connection with the traveler's duties with the Authority. although records were available for the remaining vehicle assigned on a 24-hour basis. Given the lack of adequate vehicle usage records. unless otherwise excluded. functions. The policy did require usage records to show the purpose and destination. -55- . such records did not provide sufficiently detailed information regarding the purpose and destination. We also recommend that the Authority amend its written policies governing the assignment and use of Authority vehicles so that the extent of personal use of vehicles assigned on a 24-hour basis can be determined. except as noted in the preceding paragraphs of this report. and classes of transactions within the scope of this audit. For example. activities. it was not practical for us to determine the extent to which vehicles assigned on a 24-hour basis had been used for personal use. However. vehicle usage records were not available for three of the vehicles assigned on a 24-hour basis and. 12255. We also noted that Authority personnel had not taken steps to identify and report the amount of taxable fringe benefits attributable to the personal use of the vehicles. must be included in the employee's gross income as compensation for services. (120) Audit inquiry disclosed that the Authority had not established adequate written policies governing the assignment and use of Authority vehicles.Par. are fringe benefits that. the Authority has substantially corrected the deficiencies noted in audit report No. Prior Audit Findings (122) For those programs.

000.744. paragraphs 219 and 47. 1996.Par. 11736 and 12255. No. Our review during the current audit period disclosed that the Authority had substantially corrected this deficiency and had documented the cost for approximately 87 percent of the $302. -56- .000.000 reported as right-of-way (land) acquisitions as of June 30. We recommend that the Authority continue its efforts to document the cost of right-of-way acquisitions. we noted that Authority personnel were unable to provide us with a detailed listing showing the cost (or estimated fair market value at the date of acquisition for donated land) for each parcel of land acquired to date for right-of-way acquisitions totaling approximately $279. (123) In audit reports No. respectively.

Florida Statutes. be prepared to present the results of the operational audit of the State of Florida. Charles L. Florida Statutes. AUDIT AUTHORITY (125) Pursuant to the provisions of Section 11. Lester. I have directed that this audit report.Par. Respectfully submitted. Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority. including all Exhibits thereto. CPA Auditor General -57- . STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL (124) In accordance with the provisions of Section 11. No. a list of audit findings and recommendations was submitted to the State of Florida.45(7).45(7)(d). Orlando-Orange County Expressway Authority. The Executive Director's written responses to the audit findings and recommendations included in this report are shown as Exhibit C.

-58- .B EXHIBIT .C Map of Expressway System. Organizational Chart. Statement from Audited Official.EXHIBITS The following Exhibits are attached to and form an integral part of this report: EXHIBIT .A EXHIBIT .

STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY MAP OF EXPRESSWAY SYSTEM EXHIBIT .A -59- .

and Marketing Director of Business Development Director of Construction/Maintenance Deputy Executive Director/ Director of Engineering PROJECT MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY BOARD Florida Department of Transportation Staff Legal Counsel General Engineering Consultant Traffic and Earnings Consultant Toll Facility Operations and Management Services Contractor Planning and Design Consultants Maintenance Management Counsultant Construction Engineering and Inspection Consultants Maintenance Contractors -60- .EXHIBIT . 1996 ORGANIZATION AUTHORITY BOARD Executive Director Chief Financial Officer Director of Operations. Communications.B STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY ORGANIZATION CHART As of June 30.

1993. 1996. 1997 EXHIBIT .C -61- . Through June 30. and July 1. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. Through September 12. 1995.STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30.

Through September 12. 1997 -62- . and July 1.EXHIBIT . 1995. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. Through June 30.C (Continued) STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1993. 1996.

and July 1. Managements' Response (40-44) -63- . 1996. 1995. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1.C (Continued) Audit Report Par No. Through June 30.STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1993. 1997 EXHIBIT . Through September 12.

and July 1.EXHIBIT . Managements' Response (45-50) (51-55) -64- . Through June 30.C (Continued) STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1997 Audit Report Par No. 1993. 1995. Through September 12. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. 1996.

Through September 12. 1993. Through June 30. and July 1. 1996.C (Continued) Managements' Response (51-55) (56-60) -65- .STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1995. EXHIBIT . 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. 1997 Audit Report Par No.

and July 1. 1996. Through September 12. Managements' Response (56-60) (65-68) -66- . 1995.C (Continued) STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. 1997 Audit Report Par No. Through June 30.EXHIBIT . 1993.

1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. Through September 12.STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1996.C (Continued) Managements' Response (69-73) (74-77) -67- . 1993. 1997 Audit Report Par No. and July 1. EXHIBIT . 1995. Through June 30.

Through September 12.C (Continued) STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1993. Managements' Response (74-77) (78-79) -68- . 1995. 1997 Audit Report Par No. and July 1. 1996. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. Through June 30.EXHIBIT .

C (Continued) Managements' Response (80-83) (86-89) -69- . 1997 Audit Report Par No.STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. Through September 12. EXHIBIT . 1996. 1993. 1995. Through June 30. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. and July 1.

1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. 1997 Audit Report Par No. 1993.EXHIBIT . Through June 30. 1996. 1995.C (Continued) STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. and July 1. Managements' Response (86-89) (90-92) (93-96) -70- . Through September 12.

1996. 1993. 1995. Through September 12. and July 1.STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30.C (Continued) Managements' Response (93-96) -71- . 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. 1997 Audit Report Par No. EXHIBIT . Through June 30.

1995.EXHIBIT .C (Continued) STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1993. Through June 30. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. Managements' Response (97-105) -72- . 1997 Audit Report Par No. 1996. Through September 12. and July 1.

1996. 1995.STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1997 Audit Report Par No. EXHIBIT .C (Continued) Managements' Response (106-108) (109-114) -73- . Through September 12. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. 1993. and July 1. Through June 30.

Through June 30. 1996.EXHIBIT . Managements' Response (109-114) -74- . and July 1. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. 1995. 1997 Audit Report Par No.C (Continued) STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. Through September 12. 1993.

1997 Audit Report Par No. 1995. and July 1.C (Continued) Managements' Response (109-114) (115-117) -75- . EXHIBIT . Through June 30.STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. 1993. 1996. Through September 12. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1.

Through June 30. Through September 12. 1997 Audit Report Par No.C (Continued) STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30.EXHIBIT . 1993. 1995. 1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. 1996. Managements' Response (115-117) (118-121) -76- . and July 1.

1996 and Selected Authority Actions Taken During the Periods July 1. 1996.C (Continued) Managements' Response (118-121) (122-123) -77- . EXHIBIT . 1997 Audit Report Par No. Through June 30. Through September 12. 1993. 1995.STATE OF FLORIDA ORLANDO-ORANGE COUNTY EXPRESSWAY AUTHORITY STATEMENT FROM AUDITED OFFICIAL For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30. and July 1.