Reform the MSD

Cincinnati City Councilman Charlie Winburn and Hamilton County Commissioner Chris Monzel have taken opposite sides of a non-issue.The Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD) watchdog group never had any chance of providing over site or insights into the MSD. The State of Ohio audit and the city's own internal audit prove the city and county allow the MSD to operate to standards completely unacceptable in modern government or business. Both audits blast the MSD for millions of dollars unaccounted for or characterized as mismanaged. If the auditors cannot tell you where the money has gone the watchdog group had no chance either...time for these gentlemen to role up their sleeves, work together, and accomplish meaningful reform.

Where did money go in the MSD?

Details for spending in the Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD) of Cincinnati are sometimes difficult to find. An excerpt from the supporting documentation for the 2016 internal audit of the MSD by city hall raises several questions regarding what MSD rates paid for :

...Actual cost detail for the SIA program from 2007 — 2009 could not be located. Final cost summaries for 2010 through 2015 also could not be located, but documents collected for 2010 through 2015 including budgets and budget narratives, the Student Intern Academy Annual Report dated December 31, 2012, and various other invoices, contracts and reports reflect estimated annual SIA costs as follows:

2010         $ 112,125 (1)

2011         $ 471,839 (2)

2012         $ 645,706 (2)

2013         $ 705,502 (2) (3)

2014         $ 950,216 (2) (3)

2015      $1,130,099 (2) (3)

      (1)    excludes the direct salaries and costs for MSD employee time spent on SIA

     (2)    includes the direct salaries and costs for MSD employee time spent on SIA

   (3)    the Project Rebuild Workforce Collaborative Foundation reimbursed MSD a total of $36,475 for SIA expenses over the course of 2013 — 2015

The 2015 budget included $356,000 for intern salaries and benefits, $256,250 for consultants contracted for the program and approximately $500,000 for time spent by MSD employees on the program.

2.       The cost of the program grew exponentially and was funded almost exclusively by MSD ratepayers. Contract signature authority given to the MSD Director and the use of MSA's to hire consultants diminished visibility of the program's cost.

3.       The MSD workforce appears to have not looked favorably on the program given the requirement to manage high school students in the workplace for 8 weeks while under the stresses of Consent Decree deadlines and the merging of MSD and Water Works.

4.       Questions have been raised as to the appropriateness of spending ratepayer funds on a high school student internship program.

5.       No tracking methodology was put in place to follow graduates of the SIA to determine if the program has been successful in attracting graduates to the MSD workplace....

Why didn't internal auditors and internal controllers raise a flag on this?.