Alfalfa County auditors observe batch-pay process; commissioners discuss missing sheriff reports and training

Alfalfa County officials said auditors visited the county office to observe the purchase-order batch-pay review process and that the visit prompted staff to slow down and document multiple review steps.

The comment came during a county meeting when Speaker 1, a county official, said auditors "wanted to see the process of putting the POs on batch pay and first review and second review and third reviewing," and that "that's why we were kinda crazy this morning." The official told the board the auditors were "getting in 6 weeks" and that some staff were new to audits.

Why it matters: Auditors observing internal payment processes can prompt immediate procedural checks and may affect the timing of payments or require follow-up documentation. County staff said the observation included a review of how purchase orders move through batch-pay and multiple review stages.

During the same discussion, Speaker 1 reported the sheriff's office had not turned in monthly reports for November through April. "We have the sheriff's January no. I'm sorry. November November, December, January, February, March, and April. They didn't realize they didn't turn those in," Speaker 1 said. The board did not record a formal vote in the transcript on that point.

Speaker 1 also asked about training for excise-board members, noting earlier classes could not be repeated and that some members had asked for online classes or webinars. "I actually, emailed June and was asking her for if I'm having more classes online or webinars because our excise board has already taken them all," Speaker 1 said, adding "we still have till December." The official suggested a webinar on textual corrections could benefit the excise board and local rescue responders.

Board members interjected briefly with procedural comments and seconds to motions, but the transcript does not show any formal motion text or recorded vote tied to the auditors' visit, the missing reports, or a training assignment. Those items were discussed as operational and follow-up matters rather than action items recorded in the meeting minutes.

Clarifying details raised at the meeting included that auditors were reviewing the county's batch-pay procedure over multiple review steps; the sheriff's monthly reports that were said to be missing covered November through April; and staff expected to have training options available through December.

The meeting record shows the county flagged these administrative issues for follow-up; no ordinance, contract award, or budget change tied to the discussion was recorded in the transcript.