WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 3249

STATE FINANCE ACT-AUDIT FUND

104th Regular Session Introduced by Elgie Sims

Establishes a dedicated Audit Fund under the State Finance Act to provide stable, legislatively appropriated resources for state audits and related activities.

0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 3249

Overview

SB 3249 (Session: 104th, Illinois) titled “State Finance Act-Audit Fund” appears to address the creation, funding, and administration of an audit-related fund within the state fiscal framework. The bill includes a co-sponsor designation for Elgie Sims. The summary below captures the most likely substantive elements based on the title and typical structure of related legislation; for precise text, please refer to the official bill document.

Purpose and intent

  • Establish or modify a dedicated fund within the State Finance Act dedicated to audits. This may involve funding for state government audits, performance audits, financial audits, or internal controls.
  • Provide a stable, legislatively appropriated source of funds to support audit activities, potentially reducing reliance on general revenue fluctuations.
  • Improve accountability, transparency, and efficiency in state programs by ensuring adequate resources for audit work.

Key provisions and changes (typical elements likely to appear in such bills)

  • Creation or reestablishment of an Audit Fund under the State Finance Act.
  • Specification of fund sources, which may include:
    • Transfers or allocations from the state general fund.
    • Fees, assessments, or recapture mechanisms tied to audit activities.
    • Reversion of previously unencumbered funds or dedicated revenue streams.
  • Authorized uses of the Fund, such as:
    • Financing central audit office operations and personnel.
    • Funding performance audits, compliance audits, and financial audits of state agencies.
    • Support for information systems, data analytics, and risk assessment infrastructure used in audits.
  • Governance and administration:
    • Responsibility for the Fund’s administration by a designated state entity (e.g., Office of the Auditor General, Department of Central Services, or a similar financial oversight body).
    • Reporting requirements to the General Assembly on Fund balance, expenditures, and audit results.
  • Budget and appropriations process:
    • How money in the Fund can be appropriated in annual or supplemental budgets.
    • Any caps, limits, or sunset provisions affecting the Fund.
  • Accountability and transparency:
    • Required annual or periodic reporting on audit findings funded by the;
    • Requirements for audits of the Fund itself to ensure proper use of resources.

Who would be affected

  • State agencies and programs subject to audits funded by the new or restructured Audit Fund.
  • The Office or entity responsible for conducting state audits (e.g., Auditor General or related office) that would administer Fund resources.
  • Legislators and state policymakers who rely on audit findings to inform oversight and budget decisions.
  • Potential taxpayers and residents who benefit from improved government efficiency and reduced waste.

Procedural and timeline aspects

  • Enactment timeline: The bill would specify effective dates for creation or changes to the Fund, with potential phased implementation.
  • Appropriation timing: Annual or supplemental budget cycles would determine when funds are allocated and available.
  • Reporting schedule: Regular reporting intervals (e.g., annual reports within a fiscal year) to the General Assembly on Fund status and audit activities.
  • Potential sunset or review provisions: Some audit-related funds include sunset dates or mandatory review to assess effectiveness and continued need.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Financial stability for audit operations: A dedicated Fund could provide more predictable funding for audits.
  • Strengthened accountability: Increased ability to conduct thorough audits may lead to better program performance and reduced waste or inefficiency.
  • Administrative burden: Establishing and managing a new fund introduces reporting and oversight requirements that agencies must implement.
  • Flexibility vs. control: Depending on provisions, the Fund’s flexibility to reallocate resources may be balanced with legislative controls.

For a precise understanding, please consult the official text of SB 3249 (104th Illinois General Assembly) to confirm the exact fund structure, authorized uses, governance, and any specific fiscal notes or amendments.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.