Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Audit Treasurer topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commissioners invite treasurer to explain late audit adjustments, ask for regular investment reports

Grand Traverse County Board of Commissioners · September 3, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After receiving the 2024 audit summary and an unmodified opinion, the Grand Traverse County Board voted to invite the county treasurer to an upcoming meeting to explain the treasurer’s role in audit adjustments and to provide an investment/interest report to the board.

The Grand Traverse County Board of Commissioners voted to invite the county treasurer to the Oct. 1 board meeting to explain the treasurer’s participation in the 2024 audit and to request regular investment and interest reporting.

The board heard a presentation on the 2024 audit that included a clean, unmodified opinion but also a set of adjustments and procedural recommendations. The finance presenter told commissioners that auditors recommended more timely bank reconciliations and monthly investment reporting, and that certain ARPA revenue entries required adjustments after year-end invoicing.

"We did receive an unmodified opinion, which is the best... that's known as a clean audit opinion," the finance presenter said, describing revenue and net-position changes and outlining the auditors’ process and recommendations.

Commissioner Walter and others pressed for public accountability about why the report was filed after the statutory due date and whether process issues originated in the treasurer’s office. Walter moved, and the board carried by roll call, an invitation asking the treasurer to appear on Oct. 1 (or the soonest available meeting) to share the treasurer’s role and participation in the audit adjustments and findings.

Commissioners debated whether the treasurer—an elected official—could be compelled and whether the session should be public. Several members said they preferred an open meeting to provide transparency to residents; one commissioner noted that, under state law, the board has limited mechanisms but can invite the treasurer to explain operations.

The board also separately requested that, when the treasurer appears, the treasurer provide an investment or interest report so the commission can better understand how county cash and investments are earning or being allocated. The auditors’ recommendation for monthly investment reports prompted the request; the finance presenter acknowledged the recommendation and said auditors specifically suggested regular reporting because the treasurer manages a significant pool of cash and investments.

The motion to invite the treasurer passed on a roll-call vote (recorded support from a majority with one recorded no), and board staff said the treasurer would be scheduled for Oct. 1 or the next available meeting. The invitation covers the treasurer’s participation in the audit process and related material that involved the treasurer’s office, including bank reconciliations and interest reporting.

Next steps: the treasurer is expected to appear for the invited session and to discuss the requested investment report format and cadence; the board may then consider a formal motion about reporting frequency if needed.