Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Financial Controls Reconciliation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee presses staff for monthly reconciliation metrics after water/sewer receivables variance
Summary
The committee asked finance staff to produce monthly reconciliation metrics (cash‑to‑bank, cash‑to‑GL, receivables aging) so progress can be tracked. Staff traced a year‑end variance in water/sewer receivables to misposted fixed charges and expect process fixes by July 1.
At the May 12 meeting the Finance Audit Advisory Committee pressed staff for measurable, recurring metrics to monitor remediation of control weaknesses. Jennifer (finance staff) walked the committee through a status memo that enumerated outstanding control items and the staff responses to each.
Committee members asked for a simple monthly table that reports reconciliation timing targets (for example, cash‑to‑bank days, cash‑to‑GL days and receivables reconciliation age) so the committee could see progress over time. One member ran a February example and calculated 69 days for a cash reconciliation, and members asked staff to produce prior months’ history and to set clear targets (the committee discussed a target range of 45–90 days depending on the activity).
On the operational side staff reported they traced a material variance in water and sewer receivables to posting practices: non‑usage items (adjustments, fixed charges, service fees) were getting posted so that customer payments did not reduce the associated receivable balances. Jennifer said the team identified the root cause, is correcting posting detail, and expects to reverse the stagnant variance once the corrected process is in place. Staff said they will work to have the process fixes complete by July 1 and to reduce outstanding timing differences.
Committee members also discussed staffing and training: initial reconciliations were constrained by a one‑person process, and staff said they are cross‑training additional employees so steps can be performed in parallel (step‑one, step‑two, step‑three). That change is intended to shorten throughput time and reduce month‑end carryovers.
Auditors contracted for specific reviews (including CLA’s forensic work on CMLP) are completing first‑half FY25 work while staff proceed with the second half; auditors and staff expect to finish reconciliations and respond to auditor requests before on‑site fieldwork in late May/early June. The committee requested a one‑month status update at the next meeting and asked staff to provide a simple metrics table showing historical months and current progress.
