Brian, an external auditor, told the Louisa County Board of Supervisors the county's annual financial report was completed in mid-December and issued without major surprises.

"The audit went really smooth," Brian said. "Probably the biggest thing is overall, there was a decrease of fund balance of about 850,000, and most of that coming out of local option sales tax fund." He said the local option sales tax fund started the year around $1,200,000 and ended near $600,000.

The nut graf: The auditors said most of the reduction in the local option sales tax fund reflected transfers to the general fund to pay capital projects, including several sheriff's office improvements. Auditors flagged routine internal-control findings and state compliance items but reported no instances of related-party transactions above the competitive-bid threshold.

In detail: Brian told supervisors the county did not require a single audit this year because federal awards were below the threshold (as reported to the board). He directed the board to page 18 of the report for accrual-basis financial statements and to page 44 for a budget-to-actual statement. Auditors recorded audit adjustments that increased recorded capital assets after discovering items that had not been recorded in the county's books.

On control matters, auditors repeated longstanding observations about segregation of duties affecting the sheriff's office and the treasurer's office. Under state compliance testing, auditors noted one budget function (county environment and education) had been exceeded by about $19,000 (reported by auditors and referenced in the report pages).

Auditors also disclosed related-party transactions as required; they said there were no related-party transactions over $6,000 that lacked competitive bids. The auditor identified one outstanding loan of $150,000 that appears in the fund balances section of the report.

A procedural notice: auditors reported that among several capital projects carried out over the past three years, documentation for one sheriff's office upgrade did not include required public hearing or publication steps. Brian recommended the county follow up to determine whether all required notices and publications were completed for that 2024 sheriff project.

What happens next: Board members said they will review the detailed pages auditors flagged, follow up on the sheriff project notice issue and contact the auditors with follow-up questions as they digest the report. Brian offered to be available by email for supervisors with questions.

Ending: Supervisors were encouraged to pay particular attention to the last third of the auditors' report, where exceptions and compliance items are summarized.