|
YELLOW SHEET
Office of the State Auditor of Missouri
Claire McCaskill
|
Report No. 2005-99
December 2005
IMPORTANT: The Missouri State
Auditor is required by state law to conduct audits once every 4 years in
counties, like Scotland County, that do not have a county auditor. In addition
to a financial and compliance audit of various county operating funds, the State
Auditor's statutory audit covers additional areas of county operations, as well
as the elected county officials, as required by Missouri's Constitution.
This audit of Scotland County included
additional areas of county operations, as well as the elected county officials.
The following concerns were noted as part of the audit:
-
Several of the recommendations in this report are repeated from
prior audits including findings related to the county�s bidding procedures,
property tax records, computer controls, commission minutes, and property
records. In prior reports county officials indicated they would implement
many of the recommendations; however, no significant improvements were noted
in some of these areas.
-
The county incurred engineering costs of
$99,600 for various federal bridge projects from 2001 to June 2005. There was
no documentation that the county considered other engineering firms as
required by state law when procuring these services.
-
The county�s General Revenue Fund and Special
Road and Bridge Fund have been experiencing declining financial conditions
since 2002. During the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004, disbursements
of the General Revenue Fund exceeded receipts and it appears that receipts
will continue to lag behind typical disbursement levels. Significant
increases were experienced in several expenditure categories of the Special
Road and Bridge Fund during 2004, and overall road rock costs have been
increasing.
-
County procedures to monitor budget and actual disbursements were
not effective, and as a result, actual disbursements exceeded the budgeted
amounts in various funds. For costs shared by multiple funds, the County
Commission has not been consistent in designating which costs will be paid
from certain funds. In addition, support for some transfers between funds was
not always adequate and amounts were not always repaid as appropriate.
-
The county did not always solicit bids and/or retain adequate bid
documentation for various purchases.
-
A formal road and bridge maintenance plan has not been prepared.
The county made a $104,000 prepayment for road rock and did not enter into a
written agreement with the quarry. In addition, the county�s procedures
related to the review of road rock invoices and the sale of some materials to
the public were not adequate.
-
The County Clerk
does not prepare or verify the current and back tax books or maintain an
account book with the County Collector. Neither the County Clerk nor the
County Commission verify the County Collector�s annual settlements or
adequately review property tax additions and abatements. In
addition, computer password and backup procedures need improvement.
-
The county has not established a written policy
related to general capital assets. Procedures to account for county property
are not sufficient and the records are not complete. In addition, some
officials have not filed inventory reports with the County Clerk and physical
inventories have not been performed for several years.
-
Discrepancies were noted in the County
Assessor�s office between receipts and amounts transmitted to the County
Treasurer. Receipts slips were not always issued and transmitted amounts were
not supported by the receipt records. No cash was transmitted to the County
Treasurer during 2002, 2003, and 2004; however, various records of the
Assessor�s office provided information that indicated cash had been received.
The audit also included recommendations
concerning the lack of documentation for some county official salaries, county
commission minutes, county phone usage and various trusts handled by county.
Complete Audit Report
Missouri State Auditor's Office
moaudit@auditor.mo.gov