Davis County controller: in-house tax system can't produce year-end balances; urges formal close, process redesign

Davis County Controller Curtis Koch told the Audit Committee that the county's in-house tax collection platform (Busy/CoreTax) "does not have the ability to give a point in time balance" and "does not have the ability to perform year end closing," a limitation he said prevents reliable annual settlement and reconciliation.

Koch told the committee he sent a January 22 memo because Utah code requires an annual settlement, particularly when an elected treasurer leaves office. He said the system was built over six years and capitalized at about $2,200,000, but that conversion errors and the platform's rolling database have left historical data uncleansed and unreconciled.

"It's never been reconciled since launching," Koch said, adding that the county historically covered gaps by applying distribution percentages — a practice he described as a "horse blanket" approach that can hide years of errors. He said the controller's office reconciles to the bank while the treasurer's office should reconcile collections to the bank, and that both reconciliations should match.

The controller walked committee members through year-end bank reconciliations for inmate trust, collector and the general bank account. Koch said the county runs roughly $293,000,000 through its funds and noted investment balances (PTIF) around $97,000,000; he also reported a small ending discrepancy of $483 that the office will correct with a journal entry at year end.

Committee members and staff asked whether external auditors test the collector's accounts; Koch said external auditors focus on the general ledger, which heightens the county's need for internal reconciliations that tie the general ledger, bank and tax collection systems together.

Information Systems staff and process leads urged starting with a clear mapping of business processes before attempting technical fixes. An IS representative said if processes are simplified and agreed upon, technology can be reconfigured or replaced to support them; staff characterized 2025 as a transition year and cited tax year 2026 as a realistic target for implementing a reconciliation-capable approach.

Koch also flagged specific operational items that must flow through the tax system (for example, credit card processing fees) so distributions are accurate. He urged the committee to "put a stake in the ground" with a formal year-end close to stop a rolling database from carrying forward unresolved plug entries (noted in prior TC 750 state filings).

The controller recommended documenting mitigating controls for 2024 where system limitations required compensating practices; where documentation is lacking, the county risks a higher fraud/risk rating under the state's assessment form, which awards no partial credit on some controls. He said his office will continue monthly reviews of reconciliations and work with the treasurer and assessor to finish distribution processes.

The Audit Committee asked for a report back at a future meeting on progress mapping processes and on any technical changes; Koch said he will continue to provide monthly reconciliation reporting to the committee.