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