YELLOW SHEET Office of the State Auditor of Missouri Claire McCaskill

Report No. 2000-91
September 15, 2000

IMPORTANT:  The Missouri State Auditor is required by Missouri law to conduct audits only once every four years in counties, like Chariton, 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 Chariton County included additional areas of county operations, as well as the elected county officials.  The following concerns were noted as part of the audit: 

• As noted in two prior audit reports, the County Commission does not maintain adequate minutes of its meetings.  The County Clerk has not typed the minutes into the official record book or submitted them to the County Commissioners for their approval since September 18, 1995.  The only record of commission meetings available to the public is some unofficial notes.  State statutes require that each public governmental body shall make available for inspection and copying by the public of that body’s public records.  The County Clerk is to maintain an accurate record of orders, rulings, and proceedings of the County Commission.  Maintaining an accurate record of commission proceedings helps demonstrate compliance with statutory provisions related to issues such as budget approval, the Sunshine Law, bidding, and purchasing decisions.  

• As similarly discussed in several prior audit reports, formal procedures have not been established to ensure all accrued costs (court costs, incarceration costs, court-ordered restitution, and fines) pertaining to criminal cases are adequately identified and pursued.  A listing of accrued costs owed to the court is not maintained by the Circuit Clerk and monitoring procedures related to accrued costs are not adequate.  As a result, more than $3,500 was never billed to the state, more than $1,500 of over and under billings were noted and thousands of dollars in unpaid restitution are not being pursued. 

• As Proposition  C adjustments for school property tax collections were not considered when determining assessment withholdings, the General Revenue Fund has funded a larger portion of assessment costs than was necessary.  For the months of December 1999 and 1998, amounts not withheld from school tax collections totaled approximately $4,500.  

• As similarly noted in two prior audit reports, bids were not always solicited nor was sufficient bid documentation always retained for some significant purchases made by the county.  Additionally, the county needs to improve and better document its process for handling drainage district improvements.  

• The county’s personnel policies manual has not been updated since 1989.  Some of the policies contained in the manual are unclear and/or outdated and are not being followed consistently among the various county departments.  

• While several prior audit reports addressed the inadequacy of the county’s general fixed assets records and procedures,  it was again determined that the various required inventories and inspections have not been performed and no reports have been filed with the County Clerk.  Property tags are not affixed to county property.  

Also, included in the audit are recommendations to improve the accounting controls and procedures for the Sheriff and Circuit Clerk .

Complete Audit Report