13.07.2015 Views

Audit - City and County of Denver

Audit - City and County of Denver

Audit - City and County of Denver

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

• We noted that a check in the amount <strong>of</strong> $750, dated November 2012, was keptin a file attached to an MMC application completed by an applicant. The filecontained no explanation with regard to the reason for keeping this check in thefile.• Only nine <strong>of</strong> the forty-one files (22 percent) were placed in order inside the filefolders <strong>and</strong> secured with clamps. The rest <strong>of</strong> the applications <strong>and</strong> supportingdocuments reviewed were loosely inserted in their file folders. Thirteen <strong>of</strong> theapplications <strong>and</strong> supporting documents (32 percent) were not in any designatedfolders.Issues with the Department’s file management practices was also a finding in the report<strong>of</strong> the previous performance audit <strong>of</strong> the Department, issued in August 2010. TheDepartment should take immediate action to organize all MM-related files <strong>and</strong> maintainthem in a secure manner.Medical Marijuana Licensing Process• Application ProcessDuring the MM licensing process, the <strong>City</strong>takes a number <strong>of</strong> measures, which are • Licensing Processintended to ensure that applicants areprepared to operate according to <strong>City</strong> rules• Renewal Processgoverning MM businesses. These stepsinclude a review <strong>of</strong> application packets,inspections <strong>of</strong> the business premises, <strong>and</strong>coordination with the state licensing authority before licenses will be delivered to theapplicant. The steps <strong>of</strong> the licensing process are laid out in greater detail in Appendix A.The Department’s lack <strong>of</strong> an internal control framework has reduced the effectiveness <strong>of</strong>the established steps integrated into the licensing process. Specifically, the QC processlacks sufficient documentation <strong>and</strong> oversight. Further, the <strong>City</strong>’s inspections <strong>of</strong> MMbusiness premises take an unreasonable amount <strong>of</strong> time <strong>and</strong> may contribute to theoperation <strong>of</strong> unlicensed MM businesses in the <strong>City</strong> without any action taken by theDepartment. Finally, the tool that is currently being used by the state <strong>and</strong> the <strong>City</strong> tocoordinate dual MM licensure is ineffective <strong>and</strong> may allow some MM businesses tooperate with only a <strong>City</strong> or state license, but not both.Quality Control Process Lacks Guidelines, Documentation, <strong>and</strong> Review – The Departmenthas established a QC step in the MM licensing process, performed upon theDepartment’s receipt <strong>of</strong> the complete application package <strong>and</strong> payment <strong>of</strong> associatedfees. The purpose <strong>of</strong> the QC step is to ensure that each section <strong>of</strong> the application hasbeen completely filled out <strong>and</strong> that the required supporting documents are valid <strong>and</strong>sufficient, such as by verifying that required permits are valid.<strong>City</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>County</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Denver</strong>P a g e 20

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!