Sayville UFSD auditors give clean opinions; single-audit compliance report to follow

Auditors from Meraki Smith told the Sayville Union Free School District audit committee that they issued unmodified opinions on the district’s financial statements and on the audit performed in accordance with government auditing standards, and found no material weaknesses or significant deficiencies.

"There were no audit adjustments to the financial statements as originally presented," said Robert, an auditor with Meraki Smith, who led the presentation. He said field work began the week of Aug. 18 and that audit cooperation from the business office was "excellent." He singled out Eleni and Rhonda for assistance during a staff transition.

The auditors highlighted several financial-statement totals: current assets of about $23.8 million and current liabilities of about $18.0 million, producing a working capital (current assets less current liabilities) of roughly $5.6 million and a current ratio of about 1.31. Capital assets, net of depreciation, totaled about $70.4 million after a net increase of about $4.2 million. Bonds payable were reported at about $29.3 million, reflecting current-year bond issuance of about $14.9 million and principal payments of about $2.6 million. The district’s total OPEB liability was reported at about $140.7 million after a current-year decrease of about $20.8 million and current-year payments of about $6.1 million.

The auditors said a change in GASB guidance (referred to in the presentation as GASB 101) affected the district’s prior-period balances by creating an additional liability related to accrued but usable time for some employee groups. Robert described the effect as "about $193,000" and said it is recorded as a prior-period adjustment in the notes.

On the fund-level results, the general fund year-end totals shown in the report were about $35.6 million in total assets, $11.8 million in total liabilities and deferred inflows, and an ending fund balance of about $23.8 million. Of that fund balance, about $4.0 million was unassigned (within New York State’s 4% statutory limit), about $4.3 million was assigned (including a $2.9 million appropriation for next year and about $1.4 million in encumbrances), $231,000 was nonspendable, and roughly $15.3 million was in restricted reserves.

The capital projects fund reflected nearly $15.0 million in bond proceeds used primarily to retire a bond anticipation note and about $7.0 million in capital outlays over the current and prior year. The school lunch fund was reported to have an excess fund balance above the federal three-month guideline; the auditors noted federal rules now call for formal reporting if the excess reaches a six-month level, adding the district is not at that six-month threshold.

For the federal single-audit work, the auditors reported an unmodified opinion and no current- or prior-year compliance findings or questioned costs for programs tested, including items in the special education cluster. However, Robert said the 2025 federal compliance supplement had not been finalized by the federal government; as a result, the single-audit compliance-reporting package will be issued separately once the supplement is finalized. He said the firm and the district have until March to complete that issuance.

The committee did not take final action to accept the audit at the meeting. Committee members agreed to receive the report for review and to place an audit acceptance resolution on the board agenda for the following week. Motions recorded during the meeting included committee procedural motions (to enter and to adjourn the audit committee meeting) and passage of action item 301 as noted by the committee chair. The auditors made themselves available for follow-up questions after members reviewed the report.

Several trustees asked clarifying questions during the discussion. One trustee asked for more detail about the GASB 101 change and whether it affected the district’s budget; the auditor said it is an accounting (government-wide) entry and does not affect the general fund or the current-year budget. Another trustee asked about timing for the single-audit issuance; the auditor replied the compliance supplement’s finalization determines that timing and said the firm would issue the single-audit compliance report separately when the federal guidance is complete.

The district’s audit presentation included references to the management’s discussion and analysis, notes to the financial statements (including a prior-period adjustment disclosure), and supplementary schedules such as OPEB and pension trend schedules. The auditors reported no disagreements with management or difficulties encountered during the audit, and affirmed their independence.

The committee’s formal acceptance of the audit and any accompanying resolutions were scheduled for the board meeting in the following week; minutes of the audit committee meeting were approved that same night.