Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Audit Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
James City County receives unmodified FY2024 audit opinion; one non‑material state finding noted
Summary
Cherry Bekaert audit manager Brooke Peterson reported an unmodified opinion on James City County’s FY2024 financial statements and on compliance with major federal programs; auditors noted one non‑material noncompliance under state specifications and reported no material internal control weaknesses.
Get email alerts on the Audit Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Williamsburg — James City County officials heard a summary of the fiscal year 2024 audit on Dec. 3 from Brooke Peterson, audit manager for Cherry Bekaert. Peterson said the firm issued an unmodified (clean) opinion on the county’s financial statements for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2024.
The auditors also issued an unmodified opinion on the county’s compliance for each major federal program under the single‑audit requirements and reported no material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting or compliance. Peterson said the audit identified one non‑material noncompliance matter required to be reported under state specifications; she did not characterize the matter as material.
Peterson noted accounting changes and presentation updates in the financial statements: the county raised its capitalization thresholds for capital assets and implemented GASB 100 accounting changes and error corrections. She also said the Economic Development Authority moved from being shown as a discretely presented component unit to a blended component unit, which will change how that entity appears in exhibit schedules.
Peterson said there were no corrected or uncorrected misstatements to discuss, no consultations with outside accountants that the auditors deemed significant, and no events that called into question the county’s ability to continue as a going concern. The audit manager also said Cherry Bekaert was not aware of any independence threats that would affect the audit opinion.
The engagement partner Rob Churchman and Peterson’s contact information were made available for follow‑up questions. The board thanked the audit team for the work.

