Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Municipal Audit topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

River Heights auditor issues three "unmodified" reports; general fund stronger than budgeted

3382434 · January 7, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The city auditor presented three unmodified audit reports for fiscal year 2024 and highlighted a roughly $409,000 net increase across funds and a roughly $175,000 favorable general fund variance; the auditor recommended optional online training resources and said he will follow up on a utility revenue variance.

Matt, River Heights’ contracted financial auditor, presented the city’s annual audit during the council meeting Jan. 7 and delivered three "unmodified" reports covering financial statements, internal controls and compliance. An unmodified opinion indicates the auditor did not identify material weaknesses in the areas reviewed.

Matt told the council the combined result across governmental and business‑type activities showed about $409,000 more revenue than expenditures for the year, adding to the city’s surplus. He said the city held approximately $2,000,000 in the Public Treasurers' Investment Fund (PTIF) at year end. On the general fund, he reported a favorable variance: the city budgeted roughly $1,100,000 in revenues and realized about $1,135,000; budgeted expenditures of about $961,000 resulted in actual spending of about $816,000, leaving a favorable variance near $175,000.

The auditor flagged a larger-than-expected change in “charges for services” under business‑type activities: 2023 reported roughly $901,000 versus about $695,000 in 2024 (a decline of roughly $200,000). Matt said he would review the underlying detail and follow up with city staff and the council; he suggested the pump house project and well renovation as one possible factor. On compliance, he noted the city met approximately 20 state compliance areas the auditor reviews, including public-notice requirements and budget adoption. The auditor suggested elected officials and staff consider optional online training materials available from the state auditor’s office for fraud awareness, open‑meetings requirements and municipal reporting.

The audit was presented as a report (no council motion required). The council thanked the auditor and asked staff to provide additional detail on the business‑type charge variance for review.