Loading...
(a) Under California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 2610.5, the Board of Supervisors authorizes the Tax Collector to establish specific procedures for the consideration of delinquent property tax penalty cancellations.
(b) The procedures established under Section 10.5(a) shall require the Tax Collector to cancel delinquent property tax penalties if the assessee or fee owner demonstrates to the Tax Collector that the delinquency was due to the City’s failure to send a notice of taxes to the owner of property acquired after the lien date on the secured roll, provided payment of the amount of taxes due, minus any penalties and costs, is made no later than June 30 of the fiscal year in which the property owner is named as the assessee for taxes coming due.
(Added by Ord. 192-22, File No. 220541, App. 9/16/2022, Eff. 10/17/2022)
(Former Sec. 10.5 added by Resolution No. 2141(C.S.); repealed by Ord. 313-00, File No. 001908, App. 12/28/2000)
The Controller shall audit the accounts, operations, and activities of all boards, commissions, officers, and departments of the City and County charged in any manner with the custody, collection, or disbursement of funds, as provided by Section 3.105 of the Charter. The Controller shall monitor the level and effectiveness of services rendered by the City and County as provided in the Charter and shall also make all investigations and reports provided for by ordinance.
(Bill No. 424, Ord. No. 9.0621(C.S) Sec. 1; amended by Ord. 55-24, File No. 230973, App. 3/22/2024, Eff. 4/22/2024)
(a) By November 1, 2024, the Controller shall adopt Citywide standards that departments must comply with when contracting with nonprofit organizations. The standards shall include requirements that contracts with nonprofit organizations include performance measures; guidance for how departments should engage contractors in the development and monitoring of such measures; regular financial and performance reporting requirements applicable to nonprofits; standard reporting timeframes and expected elements for ongoing departmental monitoring of nonprofits; a process departments must follow when entering into and managing their contracts with nonprofits and reporting monitoring results to the Controller; and recommendations for departments with the goal of making it easier for nonprofits to do business with the City. The Controller shall have discretion to revise these standards as the Controller deems necessary to achieve the goals of standardizing and ensuring adequate Citywide programmatic and performance monitoring of nonprofit organizations and clarifying departments’ obligation to appropriately monitor their contracts with nonprofits.
(b) The Controller shall be responsible for administering a Citywide nonprofit contractor corrective action policy to ensure compliance with City funding requirements, accountability, and reliable service delivery. By November 1, 2024, the Controller shall engage with City departments and nonprofit contractors in a review of current standards for corrective action and issue a Citywide policy that establishes clear procedures for identifying areas of concern or poor performance by nonprofit contractors. The policy may include, among other things, specific procedures for identifying nonprofit contractors in need of technical assistance, multi-departmental coordination, and/or escalation protocols including but not limited to audits of nonprofit performance or financial practices.
(c) By November 1, 2024, the Controller shall complete a review of the publicly available information the City has about its nonprofit contracted services, including spending, performance, and types of services provided. At the conclusion of the review, the Controller shall issue a report to the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors recommending any policy changes that the Controller concludes would improve public access to this information in the future. Concurrent with the November 1, 2024 report, the Controller shall publish a directory webpage documenting where and how to access existing public information about nonprofit contracted services. The Controller shall maintain and update this directory webpage as additional public information is made transparent through the recommendations in the report, including information gathered by the Controller through the annual review required in subsection (d) below.
(d) Each fiscal year, beginning with Fiscal Year 2025-2026, the Controller shall conduct a review of department compliance with the Controller’s established contract monitoring standards and shall submit a report summarizing the review to the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors. The Controller may limit the annual review to specific departments, service areas, or contracts as the Controller deems appropriate to achieve the goal of ensuring adequate Citywide programmatic and performance monitoring of nonprofit organizations.
(e) Starting with Fiscal Year 2024-2025, nonprofit organizations that received a total of at least $750,000 in funding from the City in a fiscal year must submit to the City an audited balance sheet and the related statement of income and cash flows for that fiscal year within six months after the end of the fiscal year, certified by an independent accounting firm as accurately presenting the financial position of the organization. The Controller shall establish procedures and deadlines for submission of such audit materials to the City and distribution of such audit materials to City departments, provided that March 31, 2026 shall be the deadline for the submission of the audit materials for Fiscal Year 2024-2025. This subsection (e) does not limit the authority of the City, through the Controller or any other part of City government, as otherwise authorized by law, to conduct a fiscal review or require alternate documents demonstrating sound financial controls in the absence of an audit, including for nonprofit organizations receiving less than a total of $750,000 from the City within a fiscal year.
(f) The Controller shall publicly issue on its website a draft version of any proposed policy, standard, or guidance required in subsections (a), (b), and (e) of this Section 10.6-1, and shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to review and provide written comments about the draft for at least 15 days prior to final adoption. In the public review process, the Controller shall make good-faith efforts to ensure community involvement and racial equity in its outreach efforts. Outreach and engagement for public review shall include engaging organizations, regardless of size, with a focus on fostering the growth of new, smaller institutions reflecting the experiences of historically underserved communities, including but not limited to African American communities, Asian American communities, disabled communities, Latinx communities, LGBTQIA+ communities, Native American communities, Pacific Islander communities, and women.
(Added by Ord. 55-24, File No. 230973, App. 3/22/2024, Eff. 4/22/2024)
(Former Sec. 10.6-1 added by Ord. 175-71, App. 7/8/71; repealed by Ord. 313-00, File No. 001908, App. 12/28/2000)
The department, board, or commission that has management and control of, or jurisdiction over, any leased property is responsible for ensuring that all tenants are paying the correct rent to the City. The Controller is hereby authorized to audit departments to ensure that they are adequately managing their leases. The cost of such audits shall be borne by the respective department, board, or commission.
Pursuant to Section 3.105 of the Charter, the Controller is authorized and directed to conduct audits, at regular intervals, of all leases of city-owned real property where rent of $500,000 or more a year is to be paid to the City. Any department board, or commission may elect to have audits conducted or contracted to be conducted by the Controller. The cost of each such audit shall be borne by the department, board or commission that has management and control of, or jurisdiction over, the leased real property. Within 30 days after the completion of each such audit, the Controller shall file reports of the audit with the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors and shall deliver a copy of the report to the department, board or commission that has management and control of, or jurisdiction over, the leased real property. The department, board or commission shall take corrective action to comply with the audit recommendations and shall report to the Controller on the action taken within 45 days of the receipt of the audit report and at the end of each six months thereafter until the matters disclosed by the audit have been resolved.
(Added by Ord. 323-86, App. 8/8/86; amended by Ord. 313-00, File No. 001908, App. 12/28/2000; Ord. 166-13, File No. 130541, App. 8/2/2013, Eff. 9/1/2013)
Under authority of Charter Section 3.303 and Sections 26920, 26921 and 26923 of the Government Code of the State of California, the Board of Supervisors, by a four-fifths vote, hereby directs that the Controller of the City and County of San Francisco shall perform an audit of all accounts of money coming into the hands of the Treasurer and express an opinion attesting to the accuracy of the treasury records relative to the amount and type of assets in the treasury at least once each quarter, or more frequently at the Controller's discretion.
(Added by Ord. 6-90, App. 1/5/90)
The Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco finds and determines that:
(a) As an essential element of the local agency home rule guaranteed by the California Constitution, property taxes collected in a county have always been intended for use in that county.
(b) Proposition 13, as adopted in June of 1978 and amended thereafter, allows the Legislature to specify how the property taxes collected in a county are to be apportioned among the county and the cities and districts therein, but did not contemplate that property taxes would be taken for State purposes or would be apportioned in a manner inconsistent with the home rule provisions of the Constitution of California.
(c) Proposition 98, as adopted in November of 1988 and amended by Proposition 111 in June of 1990, provides that a County's portion of school funding is the amount of property taxes provided to the schools in the county for fiscal 1987-88, adjusted annually for cost of living increases. Pursuant to Proposition 98, the State's portion of school funding is the amount that, when added to the counties' portion, will bring total school funding up to the level specified in the Proposition.
(d) The Legislature of California has expressed its intent to take approximately $2,600,000,000 of the property taxes collected in California counties in fiscal 1993-94 and use those funds to pay a substantial part of the State's portion of school funding or to pay other States expenses, in clear violation of the letter and intent of Proposition 98 and of Articles XIIIA and XIIIB of the California Constitution.
(e) For fiscal 1992-93, available revenues have fallen far short of the expenditures necessary to meet the critical needs of the City and County of San Francisco, requiring that essential City and County services be cut substantially.
(f) If the gap between available revenues and necessary expenditures increases to any significant extent for fiscal 1993-94, the City and County will not be able to fund State mandates and provide for the essential health, safety and general welfare of its citizens that is requisite to meaningful home rule.
(g) If the Legislature acts upon its expressed intent to take approximately $2,600,000,000 of the property taxes collected in California counties in fiscal 1993-94 and use those funds to pay a substantial part of the State's portion of school funding or to pay other State expenses, this City and County would lose a very significant part of the funding now used to provide critical City and County services, would be prevented from providing for the essential health, safety and general welfare of its citizens, and would be deprived of meaningful home rule in contravention of the Constitution of California.
(h) The City and County of San Francisco Board of Supervisors hereby finds that the aforesaid intended State action would constitute an illegal confiscation of the property taxes of this City and County, in that such action would prevent the City and County from providing for the essential health, safety and general welfare of its citizens, would prevent the meaningful home rule guaranteed by the constitution of California, would violate the schools funding scheme of Proposition 98 by requiring this City and County to pay a substantial part of the State portion of school funding, would violate Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the State Constitution by mandating increased local agency funding of schools without State reimbursement, and would be in excess of the power given to the Legislature in Section 1(a) of Article XIIIA of the State Constitution lawfully to apportion property taxes among the City and County therein.
(j) The City and County of San Francisco therefore, determines, that it is necessary to take action to prevent the intended State confiscation of the property taxes to be collected in the City and County of San Francisco for fiscal 1993-94 and to insure the preservation of the constitutionally guaranteed powers of home rule, including the power to provide for the essential health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the City and County. This ordinance, therefor, provides for the lawful apportionment among the City and County therein of the property taxes collected in this City and County in fiscal 1993-94.
(Added by Ord. 156-93, App. 5/28/93)
Notwithstanding any provisions of State law to the contrary, the apportionment of property taxes among the City and County, school districts (including community college district) and other districts therein shall be in the manner such apportionment was made for fiscal 1992-93 pursuant to Chapter 6 of Part 0.5 of Division 1 of the Revenue and Taxation Code of California.
(Added by Ord. 156-93, App. 5/28/93)
Loading...