Huntington auditor issues unqualified opinion but flags budget line‑item oversights

Huntington Mayor Norton convened the Huntington City Council annual audit review on April 23, 2025, and auditor Doug Rasmussen told the council the city’s FY2024 financial statements received an unqualified opinion while identifying a limited compliance finding related to budgeting.

Rasmussen told the council that “in our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position” of Huntington as of June 30, 2024. He said that an unqualified opinion means the auditors did not find material qualifications during their testing, but that an audit is based on sampling and does not guarantee perfection.

The auditor reviewed key fund results reported in the audit. He said the general fund showed a deficit for the year of about $127,003, which reduced the general fund balance to roughly $538,000. He described the capital projects fund as having a roughly $29,000 deficit and noted increases in several smaller governmental funds: a roughly $10,001.70 increase in the perpetual care fund (fund balance about $178,004.30), an $800 increase in the community reinvestment fund (about $3,005.09), and a roughly $5,001.95 increase in the Municipal Building Authority (MBA) fund (balance as reported in the audit).

Rasmussen said enterprise (business-type) activities were positive: the utility fund showed about a $271,000 increase in net position, which included roughly $229,000 in grant proceeds; excluding those proceeds the auditor said the utility fund showed a larger increase in net position. The secondary water system showed about a $55,000 increase in net position.

The audit report also included a report on compliance and internal control. Rasmussen said auditors identified “one item” that needed to be reported under government auditing standards: certain expenditures were recorded or paid without a corresponding line‑item amount budgeted in the general fund. He explained the practical cause: payments from the general fund to the Municipal Building Authority (MBA) for lease/rent obligations (in effect, debt payments) were not budgeted under a specific line item in the general fund, producing technical budget over‑expenditures for some departments (the auditor cited the fire station lease and park improvements as examples of line items showing overages in the budget tables).

On the state review process, Rasmussen said the State Auditor’s Office reviews these matters. He described a first instance as typically a “soft” finding the state will watch for repeated occurrences; a repeat finding can bring stronger enforcement. The city’s drafted response in the audit file reads: “Huntington City acknowledges the oversight and will refine budget procedures to prevent future issues,” which Rasmussen said will be submitted as the corrective response.

Council members present asked clarifying questions during and after the presentation about the $17,000 and $14,000 overages and whether those amounts had already been corrected in the current budget. Rasmussen said the payments themselves had been made and the issue was the absence of a dedicated line‑item at budget adoption; the city’s corrective action is to include the lease/lease‑payment amounts in the general fund budget going forward.

With no further questions, the mayor called for a motion. A council member moved to adjourn; Lisa Miller seconded. The council voiced approval and the meeting adjourned.

Why it matters: An unqualified audit opinion indicates Huntington’s FY2024 financial statements were presented fairly for fiscal reporting purposes, which is important for financial transparency and borrowing capacity. The budget‑line oversight flagged in the audit is a procedural issue that the State Auditor’s Office monitors; if repeated in future audits it could prompt closer review.