Hiring Practices Audit – August 2026 (Widespread Documentation Failures and Stafffing Issues)
Budget Challenges Table Final 4.3.26 annotated
On August 11, 2026, the Internal Audit Manager issued a “Hiring Practices Audit” report.
The Hiring Practices Audit looked at documentation for 59 hires and found widespread documentation failures. According to the report, 54% (32 of 59) files were missing documentation and 31% (18 of 59) of files for newly hired employees lacked “essential documents.”
The table below, found on page 5 of the audit report, identifies those problems. The I-9 Form is federally required to verify that the applicant is legally present in the U.S. and even eligible for employment. The EHS documents concern drug testing. The number of missing background checks and I-9 Forms should be “zero” – anything less than 100% compliant should be unacceptable.
The report also adds to a growing body of evidence that inadequate staffing is degrading the city’s ability to deliver basic services and carryout basic operations. In the case of the hiring practices audit, the HR management responded to 3 recommendations that they did not have sufficient staff to implement the recommendations.
Meanwhile, the City Manager decided to save $8.5 million in this year’s budget by not filling vacancies. Just to provide context, that $8.5 million could conservatively pay for 75-100 employees.
Also, it is not clear whether that $8.5M involves vacancies in the sworn officers but nonetheless, numerous departments cited staffing issues during the FY2027 budget process. We reported about that in April 2026.
Bottom line: it is increasingly evident that the city’s administrative and operational capacity has not kept pace with the demands placed upon it.
And recall, the City Manager herself documented the serious staffing shortages, which were included in the Department’s FY27Budget requests. We reported on that in April 2026.
One area I am hoping to deliver on in the near future is an examination of the extent to which demands by our “uber-activist” city council are overloading the city workforce, especially the professional staff in the City Manager’s Office, and the Law Department.
It seems that at an inordinate number of meetings, the City Council will ask for reports from the administration. Not for oversight purposes but based on an idea for a new program, or “necessary” use of taxpayer dollars. Feasibility studies for “pilot projects” and things like that. The City Council has no way of knowing how much those “reports” cost in staff time, and I am not sure they care. I’d like to see what the data says about that.
Another aspect of that examination will hopefully include whether funding programs and operations that are well-beyond basic city services is degrading the performance of the city’s government.
