Auditor: Good Thunder earns clean 2025 audit; reserves strong though small-staff controls noted

Paul, a senior audit manager with Carlson SV, told the Good Thunder City Council that the city's 2025 financial statements earned an unmodified — commonly called a clean — audit opinion after the firm incorporated the fire-relief actuarial report into the records. "For those of you who don't know me, my name is Paul. I work for Carlson SV. I'm a senior audit manager with the firm," he said, explaining the scope and three standard audit opinions the firm issues.

The audit team found sufficient evidence to support the numbers and disclosures in the financial statements, Paul said: "You no longer have a qualified opinion. You have a clean audit opinion, or what we call in the auditing world, unmodified." He said that meant the team was able to rely on recorded amounts and footnote disclosures for 2025.

The presentation emphasized strong reserve positions across funds. Paul reported a year-end unassigned general-fund balance of about $918,000 and noted days-of-reserves metrics that place the city well above typical guidance (discussion referenced roughly 651 days for governmental activities and more than 1,100 days for business-type activities in the slide deck). The general fund showed a roughly $115,000 increase versus the prior year, primarily driven by higher-than-budgeted donations and investment earnings.

At the same time, Carlson SV reported recurring, non-exceptional internal-control findings typical of small jurisdictions, including limited segregation of duties and material audit adjustments tied to the city's one-person accounting operation. The auditor recommended that council members stay involved with routine oversight tasks (for example, review checks and bank reconciliations) and consult the firm's more detailed management report for specific control recommendations and journal entries the audit identified.

Paul also urged the council to consider fund-structure adjustments to smooth capital spending: creating capital reserve or capital-outlay funds would let the city set aside money annually for large, intermittent costs (for example, seal coating or a fire-rescue vehicle) instead of using one-year budgeting that can cause spikes in a single fiscal year.

The audit team did not report any legal-compliance findings for 2025. Paul praised city staff for cooperation during fieldwork and encouraged the council to review the full management letter for recommended administrative changes.

The council followed the presentation with questions about specific line items (seal-coating costs, capital planning, and a potential rescue truck for the fire department). The auditor offered to assist the city in setting up project fund accounting and to perform follow-up work if the council requests it as the large water/sewer project progresses.

The council did not take formal action on the audit report at the meeting beyond the presentation and questions; Paul said the firm would provide the management report and adjustments list for the council's review.