Image of Susan Montee's Name Image of Name of document Yellow Sheet

Report No. 2007-52
September 2007

Complete Audit Report

IMPORTANT: The Missouri State Auditor is required by state law to conduct audits once every four years in counties, such as Ray, that do not have a county auditor. In addition to a financial 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 the Missouri Constitution.

Many of the concerns addressed in this report have been similarly discussed in one or more previous audits reports.


Payroll disbursements were approximately $2.7 million during 2005 and $3.1 million during 2006. Numerous problems were noted with the county’s payroll procedures. Sufficient controls and oversight do not exist within the payroll process and it appears there was insufficient effort on the part of the various county officials to address problems, make changes to the payroll process, or review records for possible errors after concerns were brought to their attention. Some 2005 and 2006 salary overpayments have yet to be rectified and the county has lost some revenue due to a failure to review transactions carefully and request reimbursement timely. A thorough review of procedures needs to be performed, proper monitoring procedures implemented, documentation standards improved, and inconsistencies and errors resolved.


The county does not have adequate procedures in place to track federal awards for the preparation of the Schedule of Expenditures of Federal Awards (SEFA). As result, the county's SEFA contained several errors and omissions, and expenditures were understated by approximately $381,000 and $85,000 for 2006 and 2005, respectively. Additionally, federal program expenditures shown on the county’s SEFA for 2003 indicated an audit may have been required by federal regulations.


Due to a lack of documentation, it is unclear whether the county followed statutory requirements when obtaining engineering services for federally funded bridge projects. As a result, we question the total engineering costs paid during 2005 and 2006 for these projects.


Significant expenditures to special road districts were made without benefit of written contracts and an independent appraisal was not obtained prior to purchasing the county jail.


Property tax system controls and procedures are not sufficient. The County Clerk does not prepare or verify the back tax books or maintain an account book with the County Collector. Neither the County Clerk nor the County Commission perform sufficient reviews of additions and abatements or verify the County Collector’s annual settlements. Contracts to collect city property taxes need clarification regarding fees and penalties assessed. Due to a commissions distribution error by the County Collector, $46,830 is due from the county’s General Revenue Fund to a school district.


Controls over county vehicles need improvement. The county has no formal written policy on the proper use of county vehicles and does not maintain sufficient vehicle usage logs. Some personnel are allowed to use county vehicles for commuting purposes, but records do not distinguish between county and commuting use and there is no reporting of personal commuting mileage to the Internal Revenue Service. In addition, procedures for comparing fuel purchases to billings and monitoring bulk fuel tank inventories are lacking.


Accounting duties are not adequately segregated and the County Clerk does not provide adequate supervision or reviews of records. Facsimile signature stamps are used by the office employees without proper documentation and review. Transmittals are not always timely. Records related to various election-related monies and bank accounts need improvement, and transferring custody of these accounts to the County Treasurer should be considered.


Accounting duties are not adequately segregated in the Sheriff’s department and independent reviews of various accounting functions are not performed. Reconciliation and recordkeeping procedures for the inmate and commissary accounts are not sufficient, and deposits of inmate monies are not timely. In addition, records of seized property are not up-to-date and physical inventories are not performed. Calendar advertising commissions are not accounted for by the Sheriff and some department employees are provided meals at no charge from the jail.


Accounting duties are not adequately segregated in the Prosecuting Attorney’s office. Bank reconciliations are not documented and a difference exists between the reconciled bank account balance and identified liabilities. Also, procedures have not been established to ensure all accrued costs are adequately identified and pursued.


The 911 Board’s receipting and depositing procedures need improvement. Also, procedures related to holding and documenting closed meetings need improvement to demonstrate compliance with state law.


The Senate Bill 40 Board’s expenditure documentation and payroll procedures need improvement. Also, procedures related to holding and documenting closed meetings need improvement to demonstrate compliance with state law.


The audit also includes recommendations to the county to improve records and procedures related to county property, plat book sales, budgets and published financial statements, and closed commission meetings documentation. Additionally, Circuit Court procedures related to accrued costs, open items, and interest income are in need of improvement, and in the Recorder of Deeds’ office, receipts are not deposited in a timely manner and bank reconciliations are not performed.


Complete Audit Report

Missouri State Auditor's Office