YELLOW SHEET Office of the State Auditor of Missouri |
September 27, 2001
Report No. 2001-102
IMPORTANT:� The Missouri State Auditor is required by
Missouri law to conduct audits only once every four years in counties, like
Ray, 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 Ray County was a financial and compliance audit
of various county operating funds.
�
Child Support Enforcement (Title IV-D) reimbursements
claimed by the Prosecuting Attorney were inaccurate and unreasonable.� Operating costs claimed for reimbursement in
July and August 1999 exceeded actual payments by approximately $4,300 and
$4,350 for telephone service and utilities, respectively� during those months.� In addition, the percentages of time spent
on IV-D activities were overstated, causing reimbursements for operating costs
to be higher than allowed.� For March
and May 2000, the Prosecuting Attorney reported spending only six hours
performing non IV-D duties. These hours appear low in comparison to time
reported as spent on IV-D activities.�
As a result of these various concerns, total questioned costs related to
the Title IV-D program were $10,023.
� The budget documents prepared by the County Clerk for years ended December 31, 2001, 2000, and 1999, contained numerous inaccuracies and misclassifications, resulting in unreliable information about the county�s finances.�
�
The County Commission authorized expenditures totaling
$71,200 from the Special Road and Bridge Fund for the purchase of sheriff
patrol cars.� State law provides that
Special Road and Bridge funds are restricted for �road and bridge purposes and
for no other purpose whatever.�
�
The county does not have a procedure in place to track
federal assistance for preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal
Awards.� For the years ended December
31, 2000 and 1999, the county�s schedule did not include expenditures related
to the majority of its federal grants.
�
The county incurred engineering costs of $59,015
related to the county bridge project and $36,600 related to two Federal
Emergency Management Agency projects without considering other engineering
firms.� In addition, the county claimed
and received $2,920 in reimbursement for engineering costs which was not
disbursed.
�
Planning and Zoning permit fees were not transmitted to
the County Treasurer from October 2000 through April 2001. A cash count found
almost $13,000 was on hand with checks totaling over $4,000 having been kept at
the home of the Planning and Zoning Clerk.�
Two permit fees, totaling $180 were not shown on a transmittal report as
ever being sent to the County Treasurer.
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 $14,000 for the two years ended December
31, 2000, should be repaid.
The audit also includes some matters related to budgeting, bidding, county travel policies, subrecipient monitoring, closed meeting minutes, property records, and restricted funds control, upon which the county should consider and take appropriate corrective action.�