2025 City Auditor’s Fraud Hotline Summary Chart of Cases Closed

# Days Open Allegation Summary Category Action Taken Result Corrective Actions
1 >90 Allegation that a City employee unlawfully distributed alcohol. Violations or Abuse of City Policy Not Actionable N/A* –
2 >90 Allegation that a City employee is charging the City for hours not worked. City Timecard Fraud Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
3 >90 Complaint that a City employee was appointed a City position without the required qualifications. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
4 >90 Allegation that a City employee used a City purchasing card for an ineligible City expense. Misuse of City Property or Information Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Founded 3
5 30-90 Complaint that a resident was being harassed by their neighbor. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
6 >90 Allegation that a non-profit organization contracted by the City is not properly registered with the state. City Contract or Vendor Fraud Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
7 >90 Complaint that an individual was tampering with a City traffic light. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
8 30-90 Complaint of late refuse collection. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
9 >90 Allegation that a non-profit organization contracted by the City is failing to meet their contractual obligations. City Contract or Vendor Fraud Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
10 <30 Complaint of improper vehicle title transfer following a purchase. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to an Outside Agency Not in Purview of Hotline –
11 <30 Complaint that a City vehicle was blocking a street lane. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
12 >90 Allegation that an unauthorized occupant was living in a residential unit that is part of the City’s Section 8 program. Violations or Abuse of City Policy Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
13 <30 Allegation that the City did not verify the license status of a non-City engineer before approving a residential building permit. Violations or Abuse of City Policy Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
14 >90 Allegation that City employees are charging the City for hours not worked. City Timecard Fraud Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
15 <30 Complaint that a resident is receiving food stamp benefits with unreported income. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to an Outside Agency Not in Purview of Hotline –
16 30-90 Allegation that a City department is not enforcing parking rules. Violations or Abuse of City Policy Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
17 >90 Complaint that public housing funds for a non-City program were not deposited to a resident’s account. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to an Outside Agency Not in Purview of Hotline –
18 <30 Complaint that a business is not remitting county sales tax. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to an Outside Agency Not in Purview of Hotline –
19 <30 Complaint that the response phone line on a City issued letter was unavailable. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to an Outside Agency Not in Purview of Hotline –
20 <30 Complainant began to file a report about a letter, but terminated the call prior to intake. Not in Purview of Hotline Not Actionable N/A* –
21 >90 Allegation that a City employee awarded City funds to their own non-profit organization. Conflict of Interest Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
22 30-90 Complaint that improper lobbying activities occurred at a City sponsored event. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
23 <30 Complaint that a City official is not doing their job. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
24 <30 Complaint that an individual used false identification to enroll in public housing. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to an Outside Agency Not in Purview of Hotline –
25 >90 Allegation that a City employee did not properly report tickets from a City vendor. Violations or Abuse of City Policy Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Founded 2
26 <30 Complaint of false advertising of a smoke-free building for residents. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
27 <30 Complaint of illegal dumping of large furniture. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
28 30-90 Complaint that a HR Workers Compensation claim did not follow HR policy. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
29 30-90 (Administrative Entry / No Allegation Provided) Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
30 <30 Complaint that a mailbox key was given to an individual impersonating law enforcement. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
31 <30 Complaint of leaf blower usage in a private residential area. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to an Outside Agency Not in Purview of Hotline –
32 <30 Complaint of campaign-related issues involving a City official. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
33 <30 (Administrative Entry / No Allegation Provided) Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
34 <30 Complaint that an individual has been seriously harmed by two other individuals. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
35 30-90 Allegation that City employees are charging the City for hours not worked. City Timecard Fraud Not Actionable N/A* –
36 30-90 Allegation that a City official continues to hold their position without meeting requirements. Violations or Abuse of City Policy Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
37 30-90 Complaint that a City employee’s promotion was affected by their protected status. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
38 <30 Complaint that a City department’s training system is unfair to certain candidates. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
39 >90 Complaint that a City employee is inappropriately using their non-City position. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to an Outside Agency Not in Purview of Hotline –
40 <30 Complaint of a suspicious vehicle parked in front of residential units. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
41 30-90 Allegation that a City vendor improperly took a resident’s recycling cart. Violations or Abuse of City Policy Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
42 30-90 Allegation that showers at a City facility were unavailable for public use. Violations or Abuse of City Policy Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
43 <30 Complaint that a lawsuit filed against the City is based on incorrect information. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
44 <30 Allegation that a City department is not correctly enforcing Call Center procedures. Violations or Abuse of City Policy Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
45 <30 Complaint of an illegitimate non-profit organization receiving money from individuals. Not in Purview of Hotline Referred to City Department Not in Purview of Hotline –
46 30-90 Allegation that a low-income apartment complex was not adhering to rent requirements. Violations or Abuse of City Policy Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Unfounded –
47 <30 Allegation that a City department incorrectly issued a parking citation. Violations or Abuse of City Policy Conducted an Investigation Allegation – Founded 1

*Not Applicable (N/A) is used for cases where the allegations lacked sufficient information to be investigated and the Office could not obtain additional information.