Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board asks county attorney to refer Airport Authority financing and procurement for AG review
Summary
Following a finance‑committee session, the board asked the County Attorney to investigate potential procedural and statutory problems at the Mohave County Airport Authority related to loan accounting, timing of loan proceeds, an exclusivity clause with a fuel vendor, and missing legal review documentation. The board voted to ask the county attorney to engage the state attorney general if warranted.
After a detailed finance committee briefing, the Mohave County Board of Supervisors voted Aug. 3 to ask the county attorney’s office to review and — if appropriate — refer possible violations by the Mohave County Airport Authority (MCAA) to the Arizona Attorney General’s Office. The board’s action followed staff and supervisor questions about unaudited financial reporting, loan timing and whether the MCAA followed statutory procurement and authorization requirements.
Finance committee members described an initial FY26 unaudited spreadsheet that included an $850,000 entry posted as "miscellaneous revenue." Committee members said that entry represented proceeds of a loan and should have been treated as a liability, not revenue; when corrected, the MCAA compilation moved from an operating profit to a reported operating loss of approximately $664,600 for FY26 on roughly $4.9 million of revenue. The committee also discussed a $700,000 financing arrangement with a fuel provider (Titan Fuels) documented in an amortization/security package that appears to show loan proceeds dated 06/01/2026, a promissory note dated later and an exclusivity clause naming Titan as sole fuel supplier during the loan period.
Supervisor Lettman and other board members raised concerns that MCAA had not produced required legal review memos, a formal board resolution authorizing the borrowing, basic debt‑service and cash‑flow analysis, or evidence that the board evaluated repayment sources as required by Title 28. Board members questioned whether the airport director had authority to execute loan documents and noted the promissory note in the MCAA packet lacked notarization.
Given the volume and technical nature of the documentation, the board approved a motion directing the Mohave County Attorney's Office to take necessary action and bring any potentially unlawful matters to the state attorney general's office for further review. The county attorney's office previously assisted in obtaining some requested public records from the MCAA when the clerk's initial request received limited response. Supervisors asked for bank records and other documentary evidence in follow‑up public records requests to verify timing and receipt of funds.
The board emphasized the goal of restoring accurate audited financial reporting and ensuring statutory compliance by the airport authority; the action is a referral for further legal review rather than an immediate finding of fraud or criminality.
