Report No. 2008-75
November 2008
Complete Audit Report
The following findings were included in our audit report on Mississippi County:
Detention Center personnel could not account for $2,860 collected from inmates between October 2006 and December 2006. Internal controls over receipts are in vast need of improvement and numerous problems with inmate account balances were found, including failure to reconcile inmate monies received to deposits and amounts posted to the inmate system, lack of reconciliations of open items to the balance in the inmate account, and not depositing intact. In addition, procedures for commissary profit calculations, various cost analyses, tracking of the transportation petty cash fund, and the changing of computer passwords are in need of improvement. Most of these conditions were noted in our prior audit report. The Sheriff responded in the prior report that the recommendations for these conditions had been implemented; however, little improvement was noted.
In addition, accounting duties are not properly segregated in the Sheriff's Department and internal controls over receipts and deposits are in need of improvement. The Sheriff improperly retained fees collected for partition sales and several unidentified old guns have been held by the Sheriff for at least four years.
The salary schedule established for elected officials does not appear to comply with state law. In 2005, the salary commission approved a salary schedule, based on the years of service, for all elected officials except the County Commission. The County Commissioners' salaries did not change. The new schedule establishes the base as the maximum amount of compensation allowed by statute. It then establishes a 4 percent increase for the second and third terms of office, a 3 percent increase for the fourth through seventh terms, and a 2 percent increase for the eighth term and each term thereafter. State law allows counties to set a base salary for officials and salary increases; however, it indicates that such percentage increases shall be equal for all officials. State law also allows for a cost of living adjustment that is the same percentage for all county officials. However, the increases approved by the Salary Commission, are not based on the cost of living and were not given to all officials.
In addition, the county is not complying with the Prosecuting Attorney's legal opinion on additional salary payments to the County Clerk. The County Clerk was paid an additional $10,189 in both 2007 and 2006 over amounts authorized by the Salary Commission. Additional compensation represents $998 per year for serving as secretary for the Johnson Grass Board, $3,992 per year for serving as secretary for the Road and Bridge Department, and $5,200 per year for serving as groundskeeper. The County Commission obtained a legal opinion from the Prosecuting Attorney in February 2005 which indicated that per state law, if the additional compensation is less than $1,500 ($5,000 as of August 2005) per year or if the compensation was made pursuant to an award on a contract made after public notice and competitive bidding, the additional compensation is allowable. However, bids were not solicited for the job of groundskeeper, for which compensation exceeded $5,000. In addition, the county did not have documentation to indicate why the road and bridge duties would not be considered normal duties of the county clerk.
Payroll duties are not adequately segregated and an adequate supervisory review of the county's payroll system is not performed. As a result, the County Clerk's office overpaid Sheriff's Department deputies $8,437 for overtime. Salaried employees in the Sheriff's Department do not prepare timesheets and the county did not document why they consider an employee exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
The Senate Bill 40 Board's budgetary practices are in need of improvement. The Senate Bill 40 Board has continued to accumulate a significant cash reserve without any documented specific plans for its use. The board had a cash balance of $1,260,859 and $1,203,891 at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The board consistently spends less than they receive in property taxes each year. In addition, bids were not solicited for a $28,000 sawdust trailer, approval of bills is not documented, and invoices are not always canceled upon payment. Also, meeting notices and agendas are not prepared for regularly scheduled board meetings and the minutes are not signed.
The County Collector does not refund tax overpayments from the partial payment account on a timely basis and does not have current written agreements with various cities for providing property tax collection services. Surtax and interest collections were improperly distributed for the year ended February 29, 2008, and the 2006 annual settlement was not filed with the County Commission until 2008. In addition, the County Collector does not reconcile the composition of receipts to the composition of the bank deposits.
Also included in the report are recommendations related to the county's budgetary practices, public records policy, capital asset records, computer controls, Juvenile Office procedures, and the Prosecuting Attorney's and Public Administrator's accounting controls and procedures.
Complete Audit Report
Missouri State Auditor's Office
moaudit@auditor.mo.gov
