EL MONTE >> El Monte Union school district has spent millions of dollars in bond funds without any independent oversight for the past two years, which experts say is a violation of the law and raises several red flags.

When asked for records of expenditures paid with funds under a $148 million construction bond – including supporting invoices, contracts and board approval of payments – the El Monte Union High School District was unable to provide any documents from January 2014 to the present.

When voters approve a school bond measure in California, Proposition 39 requires school districts to establish bond-oversight committees charged with reviewing expenditures and financial reports and ensuring the projects promised to voters are done on budget and on time. El Monte’s committee has not met since January 2014, and as of June 2015, documents show the committee was disbanded.

Attorney Kelly Aviles of the watchdog group Californians Aware called the revelation “troubling.”

“We are talking about millions of dollars here, and they are not following any of the procedures,” she said. “It’s basically impossible for them to not have records. Either they’ve illegally deleted things or they are not properly responding to our records request and withholding responsive records.”

El Monte voters approved Measure D in 2008, authorizing $148 million in bonds to ensure safe high school campuses; better prepare local students for college; upgrade classrooms, sites and facilities and other projects.

Taxpayers are on the hook for the money until at least 2041.

The California League of Bond Oversight Committees, a volunteer organization of current and past bond-oversight committee members, has laid out a set of guidelines for school districts based on California law. The El Monte district appears to not be in compliance with a number of them.

The district website has no public information about bond oversight for Measure D. It does not have any documents on the website, including meeting agendas, minutes and financial and performance audits, among others, all required within the education code.

The district did create an oversight committee after the bond passed in 2008.

Gil Aguirre, an open-government advocate, originally filed the records request for the documents. The district responded that it “did not have documents responsive to this request.” The district has yet to respond to a similar records request made June 16 by this news organization.

Aguirre said accountability with public money is paramount.

“The bond programs play an important part of improving our communities,” he said, “but they are also ripe for fraud. The state understands that and has said ‘We have got to have independent oversight to make sure these abuses can’t and don’t take place,’ and this district is just ignoring that mandate.”

Numerous requests for comment made to the offices of district Superintendent Edward Zuniga, as well as the district’s chief business officer, Cynthia Shieh, were not returned.

Former board member Salvador Ramirez, who left the district in November, said it is the chief business officer’s responsibility to manage oversight. Due to turnover in the department, he said, there was some confusion over who was handling it.

But to say there was no oversight is inaccurate, he said. After January 2014, he said, he didn’t think there was much “movement” in terms of approving and implementing new projects under the bond measure.

However, in May 2015 the school board unanimously approved $2.8 million in bond funds for a new snack bar at South El Monte High, which he said he recalled voting on.

Aviles, who has sued the district in the past for its refusal to turn over public documents and its “systemic” lack of oversight for the bond program, pointed to a 2014-15 financial audit that had some “unusual” findings.

The audit, by Christy White & Associates, showed several deficiencies in the district’s management of its bond.

The audit said the district lacked sufficient internal controls, was noncompliant with California law regarding bond oversight and had issued nearly $500,000 in payments without formal approval from the chief business officer.

The audit also found the district budgeted $6.9 million for projects, including a new gym at Fernando R. Ledesma High School which was not on the list of projects approved under the measure.

The accounting firm found payments of $14,006 to projects at Ledesma in 2015 and ordered the district to return the funds and consult with an oversight committee before authorizing further expenditures under Measure D.

In a November 2013 audit, the firm raised similar concerns over a lack of internal controls and oversight. The district’s response was the same both times: The district is working on it.

Aviles said this pattern of conduct shows something more than a lapse in judgment.

“All of these things indicate it is not just an individual instance where they just messed something up and have gone back and fixed it,” she said. “It shows a pattern of conduct that, at best, is negligent of the law, and at worst, it seems the district is clearly hiding something.”

This is not the first time the district has faced scrutiny over its management of bond funds.

Allegations of misuse of public funds emerged in 2011 after a comprehensive audit of the bond program.

Information revealed by that audit led the district to sever its contract with its former construction-management firm, Alsaleh Project Management (APM). Then-superintendent Nick Salerno dismissed APM in a scathing letter accusing the firm and its principal, Atta Alsaleh, of falsely billing the district for more than $230,000, violating conflict-of-interest laws through another company owned by Alsaleh and his wife, and violating other laws.

APM responded by accusing the district of libel and defamation. To avoid litigation, El Monte Union entered a settlement agreement with APM in October 2011, and Salerno retracted the allegations, according to district officials and documents.

In a staff report last week, the district acknowledged its lack of oversight for the bond program, attributing it to a “shift in the business office” in 2015, preventing the district from creating a committee or tracking its spending.

Norma Macias, director of facilities, maintenance, operation and transportation for the district, said she believes a meeting was not held during that time because a quorum could not be reached.

However, the district suddenly took action regarding the lack of oversight last week, when a new committee to oversee the bond was quickly put together.

The new committee comprises eight people, including the city treasurer, a local income tax preparer, a school board member on the El Monte City School District, four parents and a representative from a “senior citizens’ organization.”

Aguirre said he is concerned about a school board member being on the new committee, but, he said, “any committee is better than no committee.”

Macias said the committee is expected to meet at 5 p.m. Monday. Macias, also an El Monte city councilwoman, declined to comment further on the bond program, saying she has only been in charge of her department for one year.