Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sheriff Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
County audit flags sheriff-related bank accounts and vehicle purchases for further review
Summary
Deputy COO Landry Murchison told the Clayton County Board of Commissioners that internal audit work uncovered Ameris Bank accounts tied to the sheriff's operation and vehicle purchases not recorded in county asset lists; staff said it is investigating revenue remittance and procurement documentation.
Deputy Chief Operating Officer Landry Murchison told the Clayton County Board of Commissioners on June 17 that internal audit work has identified sheriff-related bank accounts and vehicle purchases that are not fully documented in county records.
Murchison said staff reviewed an Ameris Bank account ending in 7189 whose August 31, 2023 statement showed a beginning balance of about $211,000, a low balance of $1.97 and an average balance of about $208,000. Audit staff traced expenditures from that and related accounts to vehicle purchases and vendor payments that did not appear in the county's procurement and asset logs.
The finding matters because the county relies on complete asset and revenue records for insurance, budgeting and financial reporting. Murchison said finance had not had prior knowledge of the Ameris accounts and that the audit uncovered payments to restaurants and vehicle service vendors and multiple checks to dealerships. Audit staff told the board they had traced 26 vehicles representing about $1,238,000 in expenditures that were not recorded through the county's normal procurement or asset-tagging processes.
Murchison said the audit team is still requesting records from vendors including Wade Ford, Legacy Ford, Carl Black and Hiram to identify how and from which accounts vehicles were purchased. He also cited automatic credits from a company identified as Network Communications into the Ameris account and flagged longstanding county receipts identified as 'vending and telecommunications' revenue that historically have been remitted to the county.
Murchison reminded the board of a legal principle in the Georgia Sheriff's Association handbook and litigation (Lawson v. Lincoln County, Georgia Supreme Court, 2008) that a sheriff may not operate county-owned property or revenue-generating services outside the county budgeting and remittance processes. He said the audit is trying to determine whether funds tied to telecommunications or commissary activity were properly remitted and whether vehicle purchases were funded from noncounty sources that nonetheless should be recorded by county finance.
Commissioners asked clarifying questions. Commissioner Hambrick asked whether the county would be liable for incidents involving vehicles that had not been serviced through the county fleet; Murchison replied that if the vehicles are titled to the county and used for county business, the county could be liable. Finance and fleet staff continue to collect bank statements and vendor documentation and expect additional statements from 2024 and 2025 to clarify revenue and expenditure flows.
The audit update did not include any formal action by the board; staff said it would return with additional documentation once vendors and banks provided records.
Staff will continue document collection and reconciliation; the board received the update and opened the floor to questions.
