Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Treasurer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Treasurer reports $1.4 billion reconciliation target, moves toward new banking services and separation‑of‑duties staffing
Summary
Coconino County Treasurer Sarah Benatar updated supervisors on the treasurer’s role, balances under management and planned operational changes during budget hearings May 15, highlighting a bank change with enhanced fraud protections and a staff realignment to meet separation‑of‑duties expectations.
Get email alerts on the Treasurer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Coconino County Treasurer Sarah Benatar updated supervisors on the treasurer’s role, balances under management and planned operational changes during budget hearings May 15, highlighting a bank change with enhanced fraud protections and a staff realignment to meet separation‑of‑duties expectations.
Nut graf: The treasurer’s office acts as the county’s bank and investment manager for the county and for other taxing jurisdictions. Benatar said the office reconciled about $1.2 billion already in the fiscal year and expects up to $1.4 billion for the full year; she outlined a planned bank/vendor transition to implement lockbox processing, positive pay and additional anti‑fraud features and asked the board to consider a recurring FTE to meet separation‑of‑duties requirements.
Portfolio and deposits Benatar reported roughly $465 million on deposit and about $400 million in investments managed by the treasurer’s office; she said school district funds account for approximately 45% of funds managed. The treasurer emphasized that in‑house portfolio management avoids money‑manager fees and estimated that outsourcing investments at typical market rates would cost about 25 basis points—roughly $1 million annually on a portfolio the size she described.
Bank change and lockbox plan The treasurer announced plans to change the county’s servicing bank and implement a lockbox for property tax payments so mailed checks go directly to a PO box processed by the bank. Benatar said the change will speed payment posting, reduce local processing lag, and implement stronger fraud protections and added security features for county and district funds. She said banking fees are charged to the interest earned by the pooled portfolio and not the treasurer’s operating budget.
Separation of duties and staffing request Following audits and internal review, Benatar said industry best practices and requested auditor‑general access to financial records are driving changes in internal controls. The Uniform Manual for Arizona County Treasurers (UMAT) has not been comprehensively updated in decades, she said, and separation of duties requires that staff who post cash not be the same staff who reconcile or perform certain IT functions. For that reason the treasurer requested a recurring Treasury Specialist FTE dedicated to disbursements and banking duties, plus temporary wage increases during transition; the manager recommended the increment for FY26.
Collections and operations Benatar reported strong property‑tax collection performance—about 98% collected by fiscal year end—and said the office tracks cash‑flow models that account for inflation, emergency needs and delayed grant drawdowns. She also discussed technology investments and said the office plans to offer improved card‑payment options, kiosks for in‑person payments, and a vendor‑provided automated payment option that could reduce staff processing by consolidating payments into a single file for the treasurer’s office.
Why it matters Faster posting of property tax receipts improves county cash flow and reduces risk when large grants and emergency needs create tight windows for fund availability. Improved banking fraud protections and separation‑of‑duties staffing reduce the operational and legal risk to the county and to co‑pooling taxing jurisdictions.
Ending Supervisors praised the treasurer’s oversight and monthly reporting and acknowledged that the treasurer’s requested staffing and bank service changes address both long‑standing control questions and immediate operational needs brought into focus by recent national cases and a changing payments environment.

