YELLOW SHEET Office of the State Auditor of Missouri Claire McCaskill

March 23, 2001

Report No. 2001-24

IMPORTANT:  The Missouri State Auditor is required by Missouri law to conduct audits only once every four years in counties, like Bates, which do not have a county auditor.  However, to assist such counties in meeting federal audit requirements, the State Auditor will also perform a financial and compliance audit of various county operating funds every two years.  This voluntary service to Missouri counties can only be provided when state auditing resources are available and does not interfere with the State Auditor’s constitutional responsibility of auditing state government. 

Once every four years, the State Auditor’s statutory audit will cover additional areas of county operations, as well as the elected county officials,  as required by Missouri’s Constitution.  

This audit of Bates County included additional areas of county operations, as well as the elected county officials.  The following concerns were noted as part of the audit. 

• Several similar concerns were noted in the Prosecuting Attorney’s records which had been reported in prior audits.  The Prosecuting Attorney collects a deferred prosecution fee of $50 on criminal cases which are not prosecuted, with the understanding that charges will not be filed unless the defendant has other violations during the subsequent two years.  These fees are used to fund a petty cash fund in the Prosecuting Attorney’s office.  

• The Prosecuting Attorney could provide no legal authority for the collection of the deferred prosecution fee.

• Due to inadequate record keeping and lack of supporting documentation of these monies, the total amount received from deferred prosecution fees during 1998 and 1999 was unable to be determined.  While the Prosecuting Attorney estimated these fees totaled approximately $500 during 1998 and 1999, the amount actually received could have been significantly more.

• Deferred prosecution fees received are not deposited nor remitted to the county treasury as accountable fees; rather, they are used to purchase soda, coffee and snacks for office employees.

Collecting unauthorized fees from defendants should be discontinued.  Any authorized fee should be properly accounted for. 

• State law allows the Prosecuting Attorney to charge an administrative handling fee for the collection of bad check restitutions and for the fees to be deposited by the County Treasurer into a separate interest-bearing fund to be expended based on warrants issued by the Prosecuting Attorney.  

§         Contrary to state law, the Prosecuting Attorney has custody of the Prosecuting Attorney Bad Check Fund.

§         In December 1999 and 1998, the Prosecuting Attorney authorized payments from the fund totaling $625 and $450, respectively, to his employees as bonuses.  These payments were not included in the county payroll records, were not subject to the proper withholdings, and were not reported on the employees’ W-2 forms.  Additionally, the Prosecuting Attorney paid premiums of $1,160 for a professional liability policy and was reimbursed travel expenses in excess of the county’s policy.

• Other concerns noted in the Prosecuting Attorney’s records included not reconciling his restitution account bank balance to liabilities, paying out restitution monies to individuals other than those upon whose behalf the money was collected, and maintaining custody of a forfeiture account contrary to an Attorney General’s Opinion.

• Formal budgets were not prepared for some county funds and budgets were not obtained from other county officials for some county funds held outside the county treasury for the years ended December 31, 1999, and 1998.  Additionally, the annual published financial statements of the county did not include the financial activity of some county funds as required by state law.

• The Sheriff has not established a written policy to govern the operation of the prisoner work release program.  This policy should require the prisoner to sign an application for work release, which establishes the terms and conditions for the program.  The terms and conditions should include, at a minimum, who the employer is, work schedule, work site location, who receives the prisoner’s paycheck, who is to maintain the funds while the prisoner is incarcerated, and allowable expenditures of these funds.  The application should also include a requirement to ensure prisoners do not owe back child support, court costs, or taxes to the county prior to the release of these funds to the prisoner.

• The Associate Circuit Division does not reconcile monthly open items listings to cash records for all cash accounts.  The listings of liabilities for the current criminal and civil accounts contained numerous old cases which should be disposed of in accordance with state law.  The listing prepared at December 31, 1999 for the current criminal account indicated a significant difference when compared to the reconciled bank balance for this account.  

• The audit also includes recommendations to the Health Center concerning segregating duties, handling of receipts and improving property records.

Complete Audit Report