School funds misused in U.S. state of California

apple634

California Controller John Chiang criticized redevelopment agencies on Monday for shortchanging schools in this U.S. state by at least 40 million dollars last year.
The misuse of funds forced the state to make up the shortage [link widoczny dla zalogowanych], Chiang alleged.
The city of Palm Desert, for example, spent public money meant for improving slums and blight on a luxury golf course, according to the controller.
"The lack of accountability and transparency is a breeding ground for waste [link widoczny dla zalogowanych], abuse, and impropriety," Chiang said in a statement. "In whatever form local redevelopment takes in the future, the level of oversight and openness must be consistent with the amount of public dollars entrusted to their care."
Chiang said his review also found that the agencies' outside auditors often did a poor job and that the agencies had used affordable housing money in improper ways.
Chiang dispatched auditors around the state in January on a mission designed to provide "factual, empirical information" about how these agencies perform and what they bring to the communities they serve, according to a report by The Los Angeles Times.
None of the 18 agencies met all filing requirements for financial reports, with some filing reports in pieces and others failing to file at all, the review found.
"The review of redevelopment agencies comes as the Legislature is poised to vote on Governor Jerry Brown's proposal to eliminate municipal redevelopment agencies as part of his budget plan," the paper said in a report on its website.
Brown wants to send the money to schools and counties instead, and take 1.7 billion dollars this year to balance the budget.
Many redevelopment advocates fear that the Legislature is leaning toward abolishing the agencies, which run on five billion a year in property taxes, according to the paper.
Proponents of the redevelopment agencies [link widoczny dla zalogowanych], including the mayors of many California cities, are outraged, arguing that the program generates jobs and builds thousands of homes for poor and working people, the paper said.
But critics say the money could be better used for other services, adding that it is often misspent.