Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Disciplinary Actions topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Kansas Board of Accountancy approves multiple stipulations, fines and censures in registration and peer-review cases

Kansas Board of Accountancy · July 1, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board accepted Stipulation and Consent Orders in numerous matters—mostly for firms practicing without lawful registration—imposed fines (commonly $250), assessed costs under K.S.A. 1-206, approved registrations and censures, and dismissed one peer-review summary order following deliberation.

At its April 27, 2018 meeting in Topeka, the Kansas Board of Accountancy accepted a series of Stipulation and Consent Orders resolving multiple investigations into firms and permit holders who, the Board found, had practiced without lawful firm registration or had other compliance deficiencies.

The Board, chaired by John R. Helms, CPA, approved orders requiring appearances before the Board, fines (commonly $250), payment of costs pursuant to K.S.A. 1-206 (including attorney and court reporter fees), approval of firm registrations where applicable, and formal censure. Motions to accept the stipulations were made and seconded by Board members and carried by vote; several review-investigators recused themselves from the matters in which they had participated as investigators.

Notable outcomes included acceptance of Stipulation and Consent Orders for Accounting Alliance, P.A.; Norman R. Harp, CPA, P.A.; Brian Reed Nail/Nail CPA Firm, L.C.; KDWALLSTREET Financial Services, LLC; Edw. B. Stephenson & Co., CPAs Chartered; M K Straight, CPA, LLC; Chad E. Cowan, CPA, P.A.; and others, each requiring a $250 fine, assessment of costs under K.S.A. 1-206, approval of registration where relevant, and censure. Berkower, L.L.C. resolved a prior peer-review-related summary order through a stipulation that included a $1,500 fine and costs. One Summary Order related to Browder & Associates, P.C. was dismissed after the Board went into closed session to deliberate and then reconvened.

The Board also approved a Stipulation involving Julie Ann Morris finding she had practiced without a valid permit and had advertised in a manner the Board found false or misleading; the terms included a $250 fine, costs and censure, and approval of her application for an initial permit. The Board approved a larger fine and conditions in a matter involving Candice Wheeler, finding she failed to disclose prior tax warrants on her permit application, practiced without a valid permit and failed to timely notify the Board of a change in employer and address; terms included approval of her renewal, a $500 fine, costs under K.S.A. 1-206, and censure.

The Board imposed a stipulation with payment terms in one matter (Bradley R. Thies and Barr Assurance and Advisory, Inc.) in which costs of $7,097.89 were to be paid in three installments by April 30, May 15 and June 15, 2018. For Le Compte, P.C., the Board required notification within ten days of acceptance of attest engagements for Kansas clients, Board-approved pre-issuance review of attest engagements with deficiencies corrected before issuance, payment of associated costs, and censure. The Board then voted to issue a Protective Order under K.S.A. 1-501(h) to restrict disclosure of peer review report discussion in the agency record.

Several Board members recused themselves from consideration of matters in which they had been the investigator; those recusals and the acceptance or dismissal of summary orders were recorded in open session. Where motions were recorded, the minutes show the mover and seconder and state "upon a vote, the motion carried"; the record does not include roll-call vote tallies.

The Board's actions address registration compliance and peer-review issues across multiple firms and individuals; the formal orders impose fines, costs and monitoring conditions that the Board characterized as necessary to bring respondents into compliance with Kansas requirements.