YELLOW SHEET Office of the State Auditor of Missouri Claire McCaskill

December 31, 2002

Report No. 2002-122

IMPORTANT:� The Missouri State Auditor is required by Missouri law to conduct audits only once every four years in counties, like Miller, which do not have a county auditor.� However, to assist such counties in meeting federal audit requirements, the State Auditor will also provide 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 it 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 Miller County included additional areas of county operations, as well as the elected county officials.� The following concerns were noted as part of the audit:

• Budgets prepared by the County Clerk contained errors, which caused various funds to show incorrect totals, or prevented the detail in the budget from agreeing to the total presented.� In addition, some budgeted and actual amounts in the budget documents were not properly classified by type of receipt or disbursement. Also, formal budgets were not prepared for some county funds and disbursements were made in excess of approved budgets for various funds.
  
  
• A state law, Section 50.333.13, RSMo, enacted in 1997, allowed salary commissions meeting in 1997 to provide mid-term salary increases for associate county commissioners elected in 1996 due to the fact that their terms were increased from two years to four.� Based on this law, in 1999 Miller County's Associate County Commissioners' salaries were each increased approximately $7,390 yearly.

On May 15, 2001, the Missouri Supreme Court handed down an opinion that holds that all raises given pursuant to this statute section are unconstitutional.� Based on the Supreme Court decision, the raises given to each of the Associate County Commissioners, totaling approximately $14,780 for the two years ended December 31, 2000, should be repaid.� In addition, in light of the ruling, any other raises given to other officials within their term of office should be re-evaluated for propriety.

• Numerous concerns were noted with the county's payroll procedures.� Time sheets were not always turned in to the County Commission in a timely manner, some time sheets did not contain a supervisor's signature, and time sheets contained errors in the leave balance calculations.� It does not appear the county is following procedures as stated in the county's personnel policy when determining overtime/compensatory time.� In addition, several employees had large compensatory balances and one employee had a negative compensatory time balance.� Also, some employees were allowed to carry over more vacation leave than allowed by the county's personnel policy without any documentation of the reasons.
  
  
• Several weaknesses were noted with the Miller County Health Center's records and procedures.� Receipts, disbursements, and year-end cash balances reported on the Health Center's annual budget did not agree to the Health Center's accounting records.� Monies received are not deposited timely and intact, and are not always recorded on receipt slips immediately upon receipt.� Checks are not restrictively endorsed immediately upon receipt.� In addition, amounts expended on Comprehensive Family Planning services were not adequately monitored.
  
  
• Several weaknesses were noted in the Prosecuting Attorney's office.� Prenumbered receipt slips are not issued for all monies received, receipts are not deposited or remitted timely, checks are not restrictively endorsed immediately upon receipt, and a log is not maintained to account for all bad check complaints filed.�� The monthly reconciliation between the official bank account and the records of restitution received but not yet distributed does not indicate accurate records of outstanding checks or restitution held in the account.
  
  
• The current Sheriff has made some changes that improved the controls, procedures, and records of the Sheriff's office.� However, weaknesses were still noted regarding the segregation of duties, the disbursing of accountable fees, the handling of petty cash and K-9 funds, the reconciliation of inmate account balances, and the control of bond forms and bond receipts.

The audit also included some matters related to published financial statements, general fixed assets, and the County Clerk's account book.

Complete Audit Report