Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Auditor: Tuttle’s FY2024 finances healthy but flagged bank collateralization, reconciliation discrepancy and federal‑grant reporting requirements
Summary
HSPG presented the FY2024 audit, noting strong general‑fund reserves (about 4–5 months), roughly $800,000 of ARPA funds spent in 2024 with ~$400,000 remaining to be spent by Dec. 2026, a $60,000 bank‑reconciliation discrepancy, and a compliance comment about deposits not being fully collateralized.
TUTTLE — The city’s FY2024 audit, presented by Andy Cromer of HSPG, found the city’s general fund to be in a healthy position and raised several items for staff follow‑up.
Cromer said Tuttle’s general fund reserve is roughly in the “4 to 5 month range,” a level he described as healthy. He told council that the audit included a required federal compliance schedule because the city spent more than $750,000 of federal money — largely ARPA funds — in 2024. Cromer reported the city spent about $800,000 of ARPA in 2024 and has about $400,000 still unspent; that remaining balance, he said, would have to be spent by December 2026 to meet federal deadlines.
The audit also contained a compliance comment related to deposits: at year‑end the city’s deposits with financial institutions were not fully collateralized, meaning the city could be exposed if a bank failed. Cromer said staff has plans to address collateralization and recommended monitoring. He also identified a bank‑reconciliation discrepancy — approximately $60,000 — between the city’s accounting records and bank statements; council and staff discussed software and timing issues as a likely cause and staff reported they believe they have located the difference.
Cromer reviewed credit‑card purchase controls and suggested the city review whether card purchase procedures should be aligned with the purchase order process. He described a separate professional letter with additional observations that would be provided to the governing body (a one‑page document of suggestions separate from the state filing).
Council approved the audit by roll call. Staff told the council they will file the audit with the State Auditor’s Office, address collateralization monitoring with the bank and follow up on reconciling the $60,000 difference and the auditor’s suggested policy reviews.
What council members asked for next: monthly review of deposit collateralization (staff said they will do monthly reviews though quarterly was the conservative recommendation in the packet), and return in December with contract documentation and any additional clarifications staff needs to provide to council.
