Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Audit Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council accepts audited financial statements; auditors flag asset‑record and posting deficiencies
Summary
Auditors gave the city an unmodified opinion on Richfield's fiscal‑year 2025 financial statements but reported a significant deficiency in capital‑asset records, a missing posted minute (May 2025), and a fraud‑risk assessment timing issue; council moved to accept the audit.
The council voted to accept the independent auditors’ report for Richfield’s fiscal year ending June 30, 2025, after auditors from Kimball & Roberts presented an unmodified (clean) opinion but highlighted control and compliance findings.
"In our opinion ... the accompanying financial statements present fairly in all material respects the respective financial position" of the city for the year ended June 30, 2025, an auditor read aloud in their opinion statement. The auditors summarized key figures: total governmental fund balance reported at about $11.8 million, with approximately $7.45 million available for spending and an unassigned general‑fund balance in the neighborhood of $3 million (noted as about 35% of general‑fund expenditures under relevant guidance).
While the financial statements themselves received a clean opinion, auditors identified several findings in the management‑letters and compliance sections. The most significant control issue involved the capital‑asset schedule: one land purchase had not been recorded, five traded vehicles had incorrect cost values due to improper disposal accounting, and some completed capital projects had not been moved off construction‑in‑progress into capital assets. Auditors recommended implementing a formal annual reconciliation process and improved coordination among departments to ensure asset additions/disposals are timely recorded.
Auditors also reported compliance issues that prompted recommendations: (1) May 2025 meeting minutes were not posted within the statutory timeframe on the state public‑notice website; (2) the fiscal‑year 2025 fraud‑risk assessment had not been completed and approved within the fiscal year as required by state guidance; and (3) not all council members previously had documented OPMA training (the training was conducted during this meeting).
Council action: A motion to accept the audit was made, seconded, and approved by roll call. Council directed staff to implement the auditors’ recommendation to reconcile and maintain capital‑asset schedules annually and to ensure minutes and required state filings are posted within statutory deadlines.
Next steps: Staff committed to reviewing asset schedules, updating posting procedures for minutes, and submitting any late filings to the state as required. The auditors noted the city’s response to the recommendations and indicated they will follow up in the next audit cycle.
