Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Finance Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Scurry County audit shows healthy cash position, $4.7M in wind/solar funds set aside for roads
Summary
County auditor reported an unmodified 2024 opinion, a move to a modified cash basis and a stronger net position driven by new grant and energy-revenue inflows; no audit findings were reported. The court heard Q&A about capturing salaries and grant accounting.
The county’s outside auditor presented the 2024 financial report and told the Commissioner’s Court the books are clean and the county finished the year with stronger net position than a year earlier. “You had a really good year,” the auditor said, noting government‑wide assets and positive changes in net position.
The auditor recommended continuing a modified cash‑basis presentation and said the county received an unmodified opinion with no findings. Key adjustments included booking fixed assets and leases under updated standards; the presentation showed government‑wide assets a little over $22 million and a change in net position of approximately $2.8 million. The auditor said cash holdings were strong — roughly in the tens of millions — but noted some of that cash is already designated: about $4.7 million from wind and solar revenues is deferred for future road repairs, and roughly $3 million of ARPA funds remain subject to obligation rules.
Why it matters: the modified cash‑basis approach and the unmodified opinion simplify readers’ view of cash inflows and outflows and remove the volatility that pension accounting can introduce. The auditor said that a state single‑audit will be required if the county’s federal expenditures reach the threshold next year and flagged upcoming GASB changes that could affect reporting in future years.
Commissioners asked for clarification about road‑and‑bridge spending tied to grants. One commissioner noted apparent overages on specific county‑road projects; the auditor and presiding official explained that salaries and routine precinct road work can be captured on grant projects (not necessarily overspending) and that precinct budgets also cover routine road duties. The court did not identify audit findings related to internal control or compliance in the presented report.
The court acknowledged the audit presentation and thanked staff for the work; no formal action beyond acceptance of the audit presentation was required at the meeting.
The county will continue to monitor single‑audit thresholds, GASB reporting changes, and the timing for obligating ARPA funds.
