Southampton County board directs forensic audit of public schools after weeks of citizen complaints

Dozens of residents pressed the Southampton County Board of Supervisors on Aug. 27, 2024, to investigate the school divisionand the board on Thursday directed staff to prepare a request for proposals for a forensic audit of the Southampton County Public School Division.

The action followed an extended citizenscomment period in which parents, teachers and community leaders documented facility failures, alleged untimely payments and questioned how grant and payroll dollars were spent. Mandy Hall, who said she had compiled financial and administrative details, asked the board to "authorize and initiate a full forensic audit of Southampton County Public Schools," citing Code sections 15.2‑2511 and 15.2‑2512 to frame the request.

Why it matters: The boardnot only heard repeated, detailed complaints about school buildings and internal controls but took a formal step to evaluate finances and administrative practices. A forensic audit could involve a review of payroll, grant administration, procurement and potential conflicts of interest, and it may lead to further board or state action depending on findings.

What residents told the board: In the public comment period, several speakers described poor facilities and alleged financial irregularities. Michael Flythe said, "If you see a problem and don't fix it and choose to ignore it, you are the problem," describing falling ceiling tiles and unsanitary bathrooms. Other parents and staff described closed or nonworking bathrooms, alleged removal of warning signs during official tours, unpaid travel and stipend claims and gaps between school‑division ledger figures and the county audit documents.

Mandy Hall set out examples she said warranted an independent review: monthly bills not attached to agendas; major variances between budgeted and actual expenditures; apparent unspent or repurposed funds for vacant positions (example: mechanic and psychologist salaries); missing or late activity‑fund controls; and questions about grant acceptance and project timing. Hall said a forensic audit would examine not only revenue and expenditures but hiring practices, procurement, credit‑card use and potential conflicts of interest.

Board action: The board went into a closed session that included discussion of school finances and, on returning to open session, a supervisor moved that staff develop an RFP for a forensic audit and prepare a letter asking the school board and superintendent to cooperate. The motion was approved by the board.

What the board did not resolve Thursday: The board directed staff to start the procurement process for an independent audit and asked the administrators to request cooperation from the school board. The RFP process and the audit timeline were not finalized at the meeting; the board did not release details about scope, budget or a completion date. The superintendent of schools did not present a formal response during the meeting.

Next steps: Staff will prepare an RFP and a letter to the school board asking for cooperation; the RFP and any vendor selection will be public actions to be scheduled for future meetings. The board did not set a timeline when it instructed staff to proceed.