Audit committee re‑elects CFO Jacob Sumar as chair; Brown Edwards outlines FY26 audit plan and risks

Jacob Sumar, the county’s chief financial officer, was re‑elected chair of the Albemarle County Audit Committee during its May 19, 2026 meeting.

Megan Arbrite of Brown Edwards and Company then presented the firm’s planning and communication letter for the FY26 audit and summarized the audit work plan. “This is our planning communication letter. This is our communication to you guys, and it’s very standard year‑to‑year,” Arbrite said, describing the document the auditors will distribute to the full board after this meeting.

Arbrite identified two primary audit risks the firm will monitor this cycle. The auditors described management override of controls as “a standard, across‑the‑board risk,” emphasizing that strong policies can be circumvented if individuals choose to bypass them. The second risk is capital asset and capital improvement project reporting, an area auditors said remains complex because of the volume of projects, lease accounting and note‑disclosure requirements.

Addison, another Brown Edwards auditor, walked committee members through the FY26 schedule: preliminary work the week of June 15 (including state‑required VRS procedures and select internal control testing), school activity fund testing in July, single‑audit work in late summer, a first on‑site final fieldwork week on Sept. 28 and follow‑up fieldwork the week of Oct. 16, with report‑preparation and draft management letters to follow for the fall audit committee meeting.

On single‑audit requirements, Arbrite said the county currently is not classified as a “low‑risk” auditee under federal guidelines, which increases federal testing coverage. She also noted a change from the Office of Management and Budget: the threshold for testing large federal awards increased from $750,000 to $1,000,000. “That difference changes the percentage of awards we test; when a client is not low‑risk we test a larger share,” she said.

The auditors also discussed GASB guidance changes. They said GASB 103 will require a more reader‑friendly Management’s Discussion and Analysis and clearer budget‑to‑actual explanations, and that GASB 104 provides clarifications for capital asset note disclosures. Auditors said preparatory work with county staff is underway to align FY25/FY26 reporting with the new standards.

There were no substantive questions from committee members about the audit approach. Sumar thanked staff and audit contacts including controller office staff for coordinating the engagement, and the committee moved on to the fraud‑hotline update.

The audit committee directed staff to proceed with the schedule outlined by auditors and to circulate the planning communication letter to the full board once finalized.

The committee is expected to reconvene in late November or early December to review audit results and management letters ahead of the Board of Supervisors presentation of audited financial statements.