|
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
NEED TO IMPROVE UPON THE TIMELINESS FOR HEARING APPEALS
The Board did
not allow for the speedy hearing of all appeals.
The Board’s
mission is to provide for the speedy hearing of contested appeals and resolve
appeals in a timely fashion by impartial decisions based upon equity and the
weight of the evidence as set forth in the Board’s findings, to establish
clear, concise, accurate, and timely communications with the public, and to
maintain a workforce that demonstrates the highest standards of integrity,
efficiency, and performance.
We tested 25
cases and noted the following:
·
5 of 25 (20%) cases were closed during the
examination period; however, it took between 149 and 399 days for the Board
to process the appeals.
·
17 of 25 (68%) cases were pending as of June 30,
2006. These cases had been received
by the Board between 101 to 483 days earlier. Four of these cases were pending for more than one year.
Total appeals pending at year end were:
-
June 30,
2004 - 33,335
-
June 30,
2005 - 33,864
-
June 30,
2006 - 39,426
Based on the
amount of cases processed during fiscal year 2006, it would require
approximately two years to process the current pending cases at June 30,
2006.
Board
management stated that the shortage of staff, loss of senior hearing
officers, and evidence filing extensions requested on appeals, contributed to
the Board’s inability to allow for speedy hearings. (Finding 1, pages 10-11)
We recommended that the Board review its policies and
procedures pertaining to evidence filing extensions and allocate the
necessary resources to adequately address its responsibilities for the timely
processing of all appeals.
Board management accepted our recommendation and stated that
they would continue to review procedures and staffing needs in an effort to
become more efficient and reduce processing time.
EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATIONS NOT PERFORMED TIMELY
The Property Tax
Appeal Board (Board) did not conduct employee performance evaluations in
accordance with Illinois Administrative Code and Agency policies.
During the testing of
personnel files, we noted 9 of 21 (42.9%) employee personnel files did not
contain a current performance evaluation or their performance evaluation was
not performed timely. We noted the
following exceptions:
·
The last
evaluations performed for 7 of the 9 (77.8%) employees that did not have
current evaluations had covered a period of greater than one year.
·
One
individual’s last evaluation was performed through June 2002 and one
individual’s last evaluation was performed through September 1999.
Board management stated that, as the Human resources section
is not staffed, no system was in place to notify supervisors when evaluations
were due. (Finding 2, page 12)
We recommended that the Board allocate the resources
necessary to conduct employee performance evaluations at least annually to
comply with the Illinois Administrative Code and internal policies.
Board management accepted our recommendation and stated that
they have implemented a system to notify supervisors in October 2006.
____________________________________
WILLIAM
G. HOLLAND, Auditor General
WGH:JAF:pp
SPECIAL ASSISTANT AUDITORS
De Raimo Hillger & Ripp were our special assistant
auditors for this State compliance examination.
|
