Houston County audit committee accepts 2015 financial audit identifying three findings

The Houston County Audit Committee on an early procedural vote accepted an audit report covering the county’s financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2015, after a presentation from the office of the comptroller.

The presenter from the office of the comptroller told the committee, “Our report on Houston County's financial statements is unmodified,” and summarized three findings: that appropriations in a general debt service fund exceeded the limit of available funding; that the office exhibited accounting deficiencies; and that the office had failed to submit the annual written hotel‑motel tax report.

The comptroller’s presentation flagged a reporting discrepancy in prior‑year fund 151. The handout shown to the committee listed differing amounts for the same lines: at one point the presenter noted “budget committee 1.3 million” versus a commission‑approved figure of 203,000, and later cited figures of “budget committee 202,195” and a commission‑approved deficit of “907,901.” The presenter said the discrepancy resulted from a copy error on the reported revenues and that, despite the apparent deficit on the report, revenues ultimately came in to meet expenditures.

On the second finding, the presenter said month‑end closings are on track and that May’s closing would be finished by the end of the week; the office is current through May. On the third finding — the missing hotel‑motel tax report — a county official from the mayor’s office said they had not previously filed the annual report and only became aware of the requirement after audit staff notified them. That official said they researched a Houston County private act and the state levy on the funds and stated the county would submit the report in July.

Committee members discussed audit logistics and outreach to the audit team; the presenter offered contact information for audit staff. The presenter also reminded the committee that the public may report suspected government waste or fraud through a posted hotline.

A committee member moved to accept the audit findings and another seconded. The committee approved the motion by voice vote; the presenter confirmed the findings were accepted. During public comment, a resident said they could not hear the presentation and requested copies of the handouts; staff agreed to provide them.

The committee did not record individual roll‑call votes in the transcript; the acceptance occurred by voice vote and was announced as approved.