Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Works Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DuPage County public works audit draws clean opinion; net position increases
Summary
Outside auditors Baker Tilly gave DuPage County Public Works a clean (unmodified) FY2025 opinion and reported higher net position and cash balances; committee members asked about accounting changes for compensated absences and a rise in benefit expense that auditors described as largely non‑cash actuarial adjustments.
The DuPage County Public Works Committee on June 16 received a clean, unmodified audit opinion for fiscal year 2025 from Baker Tilly and voted to place the report on file.
Joe Lycap, auditor with Baker Tilly, told the committee the firm "did once again issue to clean or unmodified opinion on the system's financial statements," and said the single-audit of federal programs likewise had no reportable findings. The report showed 2025 revenue of $39,100,000 and expenses of $30,900,000; total net position for the department rose from $127,300,000 in 2024 to about $135,500,000 in 2025. Cash and cash equivalents increased from $28.5 million to $33.8 million, and the auditors said required debt-service coverage ratios were met or exceeded.
Nick (public works staff) summarized the department's five‑year capital plan and said the results were "exactly what we were hoping for," noting that recent borrowing for planned construction accounts for an increase in liabilities. Lycap added that the audit identified no material internal control weaknesses and that the firm issued a separate reporting and insights letter addressing audit responsibilities and areas of emphasis.
Committee members asked questions about one accounting change and an apparent spike in benefit costs. Lycap said the implementation of a new accounting standard on compensated absences increased the reported liability related to unused sick time but described the effect as immaterial to the system and primarily an accounting presentation matter. "That wouldn't...get rid of the...comment that the standard was implemented this year," Lycap said, and added there is no separate funding mechanism tied to that footnote.
A member asked why employee benefit expense rose about 200 percent year over year. Stan (finance staff) explained that the swing largely reflects actuarial updates to pension and OPEB assumptions and the county's proportionate share of those liabilities. He characterized the change as a non‑cash accounting adjustment tied to actuarial remeasurement rather than an operational cash shortfall.
Following discussion, the committee voted to receive and place the FY2025 Public Works audit on file; staff said the document will be inserted into the county's overall audit and posted online by the finance department.
The committee took no corrective actions at the meeting; the audit and the auditors' reporting letter were accepted and will be available as part of the county's posted financial statements.
