Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kings Mountain audit earns clean opinion; two performance indicators require LGC response
Summary
City officials said the 2024–25 audit produced an Unmodified Opinion and no material weaknesses; auditors noted two performance indicators that will require a formal response to the Local Government Commission regarding Water/Sewer capital asset ratios and Electric Fund transfers.
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The City of Kings Mountain received an Unmodified Opinion on its 2024–25 annual audit, city officials told the City Council at its Feb. 10 meeting.
Chris Costner, assistant city manager and finance director, introduced the audit presentation and said the City was issued “an Unmodified Opinion, which is a clean opinion.” Brandy Fesperman of Martin Starnes & Associates reviewed the audit highlights, including an available general fund balance of $12,921,129 and a current-year available fund balance equal to 55.14% of expenditures and transfers out.
Fesperman also presented the city's revenue and expenditure breakdowns: property taxes (38% of general fund revenue) and public safety (45% of general fund expenditures). Outstanding debt as of June 30, 2025, was reported at $28,247,471, with a legal debt margin of $148,000,000. The audit identified two financial performance indicators: the Water/Sewer Fund’s capital asset condition ratios and transfers out from the Electric Fund. Costner said the city will prepare the required response letter to the Local Government Commission to address those indicators and maintain compliance.
The audit report included no material weaknesses or internal control deficiencies, city staff said. Costner directed council to the quarterly financial report included at the end of the agenda packet for further detail and noted the full audit will be posted to the city’s website after formal approval by the Local Government Commission.
The presentation concluded without formal debate or a council vote on the audit report itself; staff described next steps for the LGC response and the posting of audit materials.
