Audit: Sound Transit misspent thousands on security contract
SEATTLE -- Sound Transit squandered nearly $318,000 on late fees and inappropriate payments related to security and policing, the state Auditor's Office announced Monday.
According to an Auditor's Office report, problems with internal controls at the regional transit provider resulted in thousands of dollars in lost money during the past 4 ½ years. Auditors also found Sound Transit failed to properly review millions of dollars in payments to the King County Sheriff's Office.
Responding to the allegations, Sound Transit management told the Auditor's Office would implement suggested changes immediately while contending it already has "strong contract management in place to ensure the security services are received consistent with the contract obligations."
Auditors found Sound Transit paid $126,000 in late fees to Securitas -- a private security company contracted to provide station guards and other services -- after failing to pay its bills on time. According to the report, Sound Transit's chief of security told auditors he had been budgeting for the late fees.
The late fees stemmed from overly burdensome bill tracking procedures that slowed payments excessively, Sound Transit managers said in their response to the Auditor's Office report. Sound Transit asserts those problems have since been fixed.
According to the report, Sound Transit also overpaid Securitas during holidays, when it paid staff at time and a half even though the contract did not require that Sound Transit do so. In the agency's response, Sound Transit managers admitted the contract was "incorrectly interpreted" with regard to holiday pay. The agency hopes to recoup some of $190,000 paid in holiday time.
Sound Transit also failed to adequately review invoices submitted for security services, auditors found. The transit agency paid out $17 million to the King County Sherriff's Office during the time period in question, and auditors found Sound Transit didn't require the Sherriff's Office to report what the money was actually spent on.
Auditors noted Sound Transit staff in charge of handling the invoices was not properly trained for the task.
With regard to the unsupported payments to the King County Sheriff's Office and its security contractor, Sound Transit claims to have resolved the shortcomings noted by state auditors.
While thanking the Auditor's Office for its work, Sound Transit continued to assert its contract management system is adequate.
"While invoice review should be strengthened as recommended by the audit, it is important to acknowledge that Sound Transit has strong contract management in place to ensure the security services are received consistent with the contract obligations," Sound Transit staff said in the agency's response. "Sound Transit and the public have received high level security services through these contracts."
The total amount of Sound Transit's contract with the King County Sheriff's Office is $33.3 million. That contract runs from July 2008 through December 2013. The agency's contract with its security provider amounts to $5.6 million annually.
According to an Auditor's Office report, problems with internal controls at the regional transit provider resulted in thousands of dollars in lost money during the past 4 ½ years. Auditors also found Sound Transit failed to properly review millions of dollars in payments to the King County Sheriff's Office.
Responding to the allegations, Sound Transit management told the Auditor's Office would implement suggested changes immediately while contending it already has "strong contract management in place to ensure the security services are received consistent with the contract obligations."
Auditors found Sound Transit paid $126,000 in late fees to Securitas -- a private security company contracted to provide station guards and other services -- after failing to pay its bills on time. According to the report, Sound Transit's chief of security told auditors he had been budgeting for the late fees.
The late fees stemmed from overly burdensome bill tracking procedures that slowed payments excessively, Sound Transit managers said in their response to the Auditor's Office report. Sound Transit asserts those problems have since been fixed.
According to the report, Sound Transit also overpaid Securitas during holidays, when it paid staff at time and a half even though the contract did not require that Sound Transit do so. In the agency's response, Sound Transit managers admitted the contract was "incorrectly interpreted" with regard to holiday pay. The agency hopes to recoup some of $190,000 paid in holiday time.
Sound Transit also failed to adequately review invoices submitted for security services, auditors found. The transit agency paid out $17 million to the King County Sherriff's Office during the time period in question, and auditors found Sound Transit didn't require the Sherriff's Office to report what the money was actually spent on.
Auditors noted Sound Transit staff in charge of handling the invoices was not properly trained for the task.
With regard to the unsupported payments to the King County Sheriff's Office and its security contractor, Sound Transit claims to have resolved the shortcomings noted by state auditors.
While thanking the Auditor's Office for its work, Sound Transit continued to assert its contract management system is adequate.
"While invoice review should be strengthened as recommended by the audit, it is important to acknowledge that Sound Transit has strong contract management in place to ensure the security services are received consistent with the contract obligations," Sound Transit staff said in the agency's response. "Sound Transit and the public have received high level security services through these contracts."
The total amount of Sound Transit's contract with the King County Sheriff's Office is $33.3 million. That contract runs from July 2008 through December 2013. The agency's contract with its security provider amounts to $5.6 million annually.
It's actually really smart to budget for late fees. When depending on humans to do something within a cetain timeframe there is always the chance it will not get done on time. (Look at the ferry cancelations). If the fees are not used then it's under budget, if they are it's on budget, if it's not budgeted then it's over budget. It's more of a cushion I guess. Unfortunately I don't think this is the case with this one. They planned for it knowing they would use it because they know how they operate.
More sensationalism. Do the math on it and it's paultry. During that period Sound Transit paid out $33.3 million to the Sheriff's office, and another $5.6 million on private security, and wasted $318,000. That's what? 0.08%.
Â
@ Citizen#3457899654: getting adults to do math is apparently a big challenge here.
After 30 years of the same ole crap that voters seem bent on; why is this a supprise?
Â
Â
Processes and internal controls will make or break an organization. Getting adults to do something consistently in an efficient way with checks and balances is apparently a big challenge in a lot of fields.Â
By law Sound Transit can't have a police department. They are not a municipality and have no authority to form a police department. So they contract with the Sheriff and call themselves the Sound Transit Police Department anyway. Metro Transit Police does the same thing. And why do we have two transit police agencies? Answer: Because Sound Transit and Metro adminitrations don't like each other and don't work well together. Seems like a huge waste of taxpayer money to fund two police agencies that don't play well together. I know this because I used to work there.
sound, metro - they can all go suck eggs. when the fares paid can come close to actually paying for the "service" they provide, then talk to me.
 @SwampThing Let's apply that same misplaced logic to everything else - our military, the post office, fire departments, schools. Maybe that's why America is failing. We want everyone to operate like a private business and can't understand why our social infrastructure is disappearing.
Nobody ever gets ffffiiiiiiire, fffiiiiiiiire, Canned
Most government activities are inept. There was no economic justifical for Unsound transite to start with only to bribe the unions into voting for legislators. Now it is evident that the system can't be managed by these same folks. There are very few purposes for which government is created - most should be done by people themselves. If it doesn't pencil out in the private sector, it will not for sure with the government.
@contraryjim You don't seem to realize that "the government" is "the people." The private sector is only for itself, for its profits, not for the benefit of "the people." There are many things government does better than the private sector alone, since not everything we the people need for our daily lives are profitable. Large infrastructure projects are among those, which is why virtually every country in the world has its highways, bridges, dams, and commuter transportation systems built and managed under government auspices. Not that I expect you to understand that, since you dislike using government-provided services...such as roads, bridges, dams, etc.
It is only 2% of the entire 1.1 billion budget, seems like alot, but no one gets fired for 2%. Â Love how the budget for late fees though?
This is just the tip of the iceberg. The infighting between Sound Transit, Seattle Port Authority and King County is costing the taxpayers MILLIONS! I know. I installed a lot of the communications system. We wasted hundreds of man-hours getting permission from each entity as they each had different rules for access and the left hand had no idea what the right hand was doing.
Â
The reason you don't have cell coverage in Westlake Station is because the Three Stooges refused to allow the carriers to ride on the radio system without paying substantial fees for the privilege. Verizon, T-Mobil, Sprint, et al gave a collective "Eff You" to the Stooges when they demanded the fees, and now the populace is denied cell coverage.
Â
Oh, the stories I could tell...
Â
Sound Transit squandered money?!?
Â
Say it isn't so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Add this story to the pile of incompetent government stories already reported.  Can someone introduce an initiative to allow public officials to be arrested for fraud waste and abuse promptly?
@Pegasus They're not even terminated. Amazing.
 @Klondiko  @Pegasus Start with the gov, the county exec and the mayor- where else should the buck stop? at the top
"Sound Transit's chief of security told auditors he had been budgeting for the late fees."
Is that sort of like budgeting for traffic tickets or bail - or for fines due to long-standing safety violations?
OK extra Sound transit taxes, gas taxes, property taxes. All be used or rather mis-used by Sound transit. Two dollars to a donut hole they try to raise transit taxes in the next year.
PITIFULL.
 So many people abuse the light rail, I meant easily u could hop on the train without paying, I'm sure there is a lot of people out there done this, the fare enforcement  may help but not a whole lot!
You stole my avatar!
That is so uncool....
 @oceanfrizz Keep riding for free until you get on when the fare enforcement guys on there. You'll get a 135$? fee and they run a background check so they end up picking up alot of folks with warrants.
 @quidproquo  @oceanfrizz Way I see it, you ride for free and get caught, you should be made to pick up trash, polishing rails, sweeping, mopping, etc. at the station @ minimum wage until you have paid the fine.
Â
@oceanfrizz --- Like anything, fare enforcement only keeps honest riders in check. Those who ride for "free" don't care about laws, rules or policies.Â
 @Bianca  @oceanfrizz Rider revenue does not support ANY public transit in the USA - riders transportation is subsidized by taxpayers.
@contraryjim @Bianca @oceanfrizz Which is exactly why the public transit systems are subsidized by the government -- they cannot pay for themselves by ridership alone.
Just raise taxes and this problem will be solved.
Why am I not surprised?Â
Anybody up for another Sound Transit tax hike?
This comment has been deleted
 @robmo "Any of these transit seem to run their budget the same as the government." THEY are the government - missed the civics class?
I will have to agree with Alex Clayton that no body will get into trouble. Hard to swallow when they ask for more money in new taxes or bonds. They can f*** off. May bee that money could have been used to fix the mud slides on the North track. Sorry stupid thinking.
@Thepriest --- What is your solution to fix that hillside? It's easy to say they should fix the mud slides, but then have no solution. Plus, like NWMonster said, the tracks/property belong to BNSF (I don't think Amtrak owns the property), so it's BNSF's problem to fix NOT Sound Transit's.
 @Bianca  @Thepriest Did I say I have no solution? No I didn't. Read what I wrote again. How about a large retaining wall or some type of vegetation that has deep roots, even ivy or something. I bet this isn't the only place that has had problems like this in the world. So I take it the people on the north line should just not count on the commuter train service. I take it then that nobody should do anything to fix the problem. Ok sounds great.
 @Thepriest  @Bianca If the folk that you contract with for service (BNSF track for UnSound T) don't use or pay for the service. Evidently the BNSF market plan allows for outages rather than the expenditures to maintain the R of W. How much is Unsound to receive from BNSF for loss of service?
@Thepriest It may be that other places have the same problems...perhaps they have the same procedures in place to deal with them, too (or ones that are even less safe for riders). Your tone seems to indicate other places have solved the problem, which isn't necessarily so.
 @Thepriest The tracks are BNSF/Amtrak property, not Sound Transit.Â
Why was any money spent on security? What a waste of tax payers money
 @Blindman Remember the girl getting beaten up on the west lake platform by 4 other girls and getting shoved onto the tracks? Yeah, most other folks don't either.
@quidproquo @Blindman You mean the girl who got beat up by 4 other girls, who in turn robbed some other girl/woman a week previously or later? And If I remember correctly she robbed some other woman in Edmonds
 @Blindman Cause people got scared after some muggings and I think a stabbing or beating.  But when you look into this the security officers all they are there for is a presence and to report crime not to stop it.  Then if I remember right that's all they did and people got made they didn't stop a crime or assault.  Security officers have no more power that a normal citizens often less cause the company they work for don't allow them to carry any weapon or self defense tool.
Bla bla, yammer yammer, and who the hell cares. No one will be fired, it's only tax money, someone will say they are sorry. Then they will get a big raise and all have a big laugh about it while they are sitting in some bar while they are supposed to be working.
Like taking candy from baby...