YELLOW SHEET
Office of the State Auditor of Missouri
Claire McCaskill
|
YELLOW SHEET Office of the State Auditor of Missouri |
April 1, 2004
Report No. 2004-26
IMPORTANT: The Missouri State Auditor is required by
Missouri law to conduct audits only once every four years in counties, like
Butler County, 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 Butler 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 were not prepared for some county funds, and expenditures were not adequately monitored causing actual expenditures to exceed budgeted amounts for several county funds. In addition, the county's annual published financial statements are not complete. Prior audits have also addressed the county's budgetary practices and published financial statements, and while county officials concurred with our prior recommendations, no corrective action has been taken.
Bids were not always
solicited nor was bid documentation always retained by the
county for various purchases. While the county provided some explanations,
documentation of the contacts and sole source procurement was not maintained or
recorded in the County Commission minutes.
Additionally, the county made payments totaling $20,000 and $20,200
during 2002 and 2001, respectively for economic development without requiring
supporting documentation of the services provided.
In November 2001, the
County Commission obtained a three-year loan for $216,017 with an interest
rate of 4.625 percent to purchase some road and bridge equipment. This loan may constitute long-term debt
and the County Commission has no legal authority to enter into such an
agreement.
Centralized records are not maintained of time sheets, annual leave, sick leave, and compensatory time earned, taken and accumulated for all county employees.
As a result, some payroll expenditures were processed
without adequate supporting documentation.
Additionally, some employees are allowed to use county vehicles to
commute to and from work, and some amounts were not reported on W-2 forms.
The Board for the Care
of the Handicapped received approximately $535,000 in property taxes during 2002 and 2001,
but only met annually to approve and monitor the distribution of these funds
to various not-for-profit organizations.
Payments to these organizations are made by the County Commission based
on the schedules established by the annual budget. In addition, there was no documentation
that the Board received financial and service information as required by
each organization's contract to enable the Board to monitor the monies
provided. The Board responded that
they have felt an increased confidence in the management of the
organizations, and have not seen the need for as many board meetings. However, given the concerns noted, it is
questionable whether the Board meeting only one time per year is enough to
fulfill the fiduciary duties they have been appointed to perform.
Cash receipt
procedures for the County Collector need improvement. Partial payments totaling $6,132 are
held in cash, cash receipts are used to cash personal checks for county
employees, and some refunds were made in cash. In addition, the County Collector's
annual settlements did not reflect drainage district tax collections
totaling $366,705 and $343,693 for the years ended February 28, 2003 and
2002, respectively.
The Sheriff does not
have a formal policy for follow-up collection efforts on unpaid
incarceration costs billed to other political subdivisions. In addition, the total of the prisoners'
monies in the Sheriff's commissary checking account is not reconciled to
the total of the individual prisoner balances. Further, documentation was not always
adequate to support $20,400 in mileage paid to the sheriff during 2002 and
2001 for patrolling, and procedures surrounding civil mileage need to be
improved.
Also included in the audit are recommendations related to the county's schedule of federal awards, officials' salaries, collateral securities, property tax and computer controls, and general fixed asset records. The audit also suggests improvements in the procedures of the County Treasurer, Prosecuting Attorney, Circuit Clerk, Probate, Public Administrator, and Senior Citizen's Service Board.