Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Audit Schedule Controls topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

FAAC outlines audit schedule, system evaluation and follow‑up on cash reconciliations

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

The committee set target windows for CCRSD and town audit presentations (May and June), recommended evaluating reporting between MUNIS and NISC, and heard that reconciliations for 2024 are complete while 2025 work is underway ahead of fieldwork.

Members of the Financial Audit Advisory Committee used the April 14 meeting to align the audit calendar, prioritize follow‑up controls work and schedule future agenda items.

Staff reported outreach to auditors for the FY25/FY26 cycle: the CCRSD audit presentation was targeted for May (two candidate dates were May 12 and May 26) and the town audit was tentatively planned for June, pending auditor availability and dependencies on the retirement board’s actuarial work. Committee members noted calendar constraints (June 2 Carlisle elections and school‑year end absences) and several members said they will be unavailable in the last half of June; staff will propose windows to auditors and confirm dates.

The committee reiterated a recommendation to evaluate reporting and reconciliation between NISC and MUNIS (the goal is to identify efficiency or reporting improvements and return findings in the fall). Jason reported that the light‑plant auditor expects to be on site in early May for fieldwork and tentatively aims for a draft report by July, with completion possibly slipping to August depending on outstanding items. Staff and auditors said CLA finished reconciling 2024 and are progressing through 2025 cash reconciliations and expect to be caught up before audit fieldwork begins.

Separately, the committee discussed an email from member Brett that staff characterized as sharing opinion on matters under committee consideration outside a public meeting; the chair said the email had been included in the public record and that, going forward, such commentary should be routed through an administrator to avoid potential open‑meeting‑law concerns.

The committee agreed to revisit its charge at the next meeting (chair selection, one‑year terms and the committee’s formal recommendation role) and to place cash reconciliation updates and the NISC/MUNIS evaluation on upcoming agendas.