District officials have established adequate controls over the claims processing function that ensure claims are audited in a timely manner, properly supported and for legitimate District purposes. We selected and reviewed 25 claims, totaling $138,151, to determine if purchase orders were issued prior to the ordering of goods and services and if claims were for legitimate District purposes and audited prior to payment. The claims we tested were audited prior to payment and appeared to be for proper District purposes. We commend District officials for designing and implementing an effective system of controls over the claims auditing process.

Town officials did not monitor fuel usage or ensure Town employees performed reconciliations of gasoline and diesel fuel consumption. As a result, officials were unaware that 23,151 gallons of gasoline totaling approximately $51,900 was unaccounted for. Because staff did not adequately record diesel fuel consumption or perform monthly fuel inventory reconciliations, the Town has an increased risk that diesel fuel could have been lost, wasted or misused. In addition, Town staff routinely circumvented the Town's purchase order system by issuing purchase orders after obtaining goods and services (confirming purchase orders), thereby avoiding the preapproval process that occurs through the Comptroller's Office. From a random sample of 49 purchases, we found that 40 (82 percent) totaling $139,584 were made without being preapproved. Finally, the Board needs to improve its oversight of funds collected by the recreation department. The Director did not ensure that records were properly maintained to allow for review and audit and did not deposit receipts in a timely manner. We reviewed 127 receipts totaling $17,840 for timeliness of deposit and found that the Director did not deposit any of the receipts in a timely manner.

The Board and District officials did not effectively manage fund balance in accordance with statute. Over the last four years, District officials have overestimated expenditures and used very little of the revenue from the Districts' wind power agreement to reduce real property taxes even though that agreement has generated over $32 million since 2006-07. As a result, the District's unassigned fund balance more than doubled from $5.3 million in 2010-11 to $10.8 million in 2013-14. The unassigned fund balance as a percentage of next year's budgeted appropriations increased from 21 percent to 42.6 percent – nearly $9.8 million over the 4 percent limit. Further, District officials have not developed adequate multiyear financial and capital plans to address how they will use wind power revenues and have been using the insurance and liability reserve funds (with accumulated balances totaling $2 million) as repositories for even more excessive fund balance. Despite significant wind power revenues, District officials have levied $3.79 million in taxes each year from 2010-11 through 2013-14 and have increased the tax levy to $3.87 million for 2014-15.

The District is serving nutritious meals to its students. However, the meals cost more to prepare than the revenue generated by the meal sales. In addition, the District's productivity level for meals per labor hour is below the industry averages. Although the industry averages may not be achievable given certain District conditions, District officials can use the industry averages to monitor operations and work towards increasing productivity. The District reported deficits in its school lunch fund totaling more than $230,000 over the last three fiscal years. During this same time period, the fund's assigned unappropriated fund balance declined to $0. Ultimately, the fund will require a subsidy from the general fund, which materially affects the tax levy growth.

District officials' overreliance on fund balance to finance operations resulted in planned operating deficits during the audit period and reduced unrestricted fund balance to approximately $200,000 (0.2 percent of the ensuing year's appropriations) as of June 30, 2014. Given the size of the District's operations, fund balance has been reduced to a dangerously low level. In addition, the District budgeted to appropriate $1.4 million of fund balance and $800,000 of reserves in the 2014-15 budget. We project that the District will use the entire amount appropriated and incur a $2.2 million operating deficit. Because the District plans to appropriate $1 million in fund balance to finance the 2015-16 budget, there will be no unrestricted fund balance remaining as of June 30, 2015. The District also lacks a multiyear financial plan for its operations and capital needs. Without a well-designed plan, it is difficult for the Board to make timely and informed decisions about the District's programs and operations.

Although the Town disbursed almost $2.2 million in 2014, neither the Supervisor nor the Board provided adequate oversight of the disbursement process to ensure that only proper Town disbursements are being made. Upon taking office, the Supervisor continued to employ a bookkeeper and contract with two vendors (the payroll vendor and an outsourced bookkeeper) hired by the former Supervisor, who collectively perform the disbursement duties in his office. However, the Supervisor does not provide adequate oversight of the bookkeeper or the two vendors. In addition, the Supervisor does not ensure all disbursements are approved by the Board and does not always control his signature. Furthermore, the Board does not perform an annual audit of the Supervisor's records.

The Department needs to improve its monitoring of the revolving loan program. Department employees did not routinely obtain information showing the number of jobs created to determine whether the loan program successfully created jobs. Also, the Department does not actively enforce the repayment of delinquent loans and does not have a process in place to determine when it is appropriate to write off “uncollectible” delinquent loans. As a result, 37 of the 65 outstanding loans (57 percent) are delinquent. These delinquent loans ranged between two and 80 months overdue. Additionally, the loan receivable balance may be overstated by $367,992 because some of the delinquent loans are not likely to be repaid. In addition, in March 2012, the Council passed a resolution to donate two tax-acquired real properties valued at $72,700 to the Oswego City Revitalization Corporation (OCRC) for use in its “Rehab and Resell” program. The unpaid property taxes for these properties amounted to $20,929, and the City expects to receive this amount after OCRC rehabs and sells the properties. There is no authority for the City to make a gift of real property, even if in furtherance of an urban renewal program. This transfer should have been made at the highest marketable price.

In November 2012, the Office of the State Comptroller issued an audit report of the Town which indicated deficiencies in the Town's accounting records and reports. While the Town experienced significant budget variances from 2010 through 2014, the Board and Supervisor adequately addressed many of the deficiencies in the accounting records and reports. However, the bookkeeper continuously created unnecessary and cumbersome journal entries during our audit period. As a result, interfund advances reported in the annual financial report as of December 31, 2014 erroneously totaled more than $1.2 million because cash balances for the town-outside-village general and highway funds continued to be reported in the town-wide funds. Furthermore, while the 2014 annual financial report correctly showed reserved cash that agreed with the Town's reserve fund balances, the bookkeeper did not record the transfer of these funds to the reserves in a timely manner or record town-outside-village general and highway fund cash balances in the accounting records.

Town officials did not properly manage the town-wide and town-outside-village general fund balances. Town officials appropriated $1.2 million or an average of $396,000 a year (22 percent of the budget) in the town-wide general fund over the past three years that was never used because revenue estimates were unreasonable. In addition, they also did not adopt reasonable revenue estimates for the town-outside-village general fund. As a result, they accumulated almost $2.7 million in the town-wide general fund and more than $1.5 million in the town-outside-village general fund. These amounts represent 140 and 107 percent of each of the funds' ensuing years' budgets. Town officials also have not developed a formal plan to use the fund balances that have been accumulated, nor have they adopted a policy for the acceptable levels of fund balance to maintain. As a result, they may have missed an opportunity to reduce the tax levy.

The Board has not developed adequate policies, procedures or financial plans to effectively monitor Town finances. Without established budgetary guidance and adequate financial training, the Board repeatedly adopted budgets that were not based on realistic revenue estimates and appropriated fund balance that was not used to fund operations. As a result at the end of 2014, the town-wide general and highway funds accumulated combined unassigned fund balance totaling more than $800,000. The Supervisor maintained accurate and up-to-date accounting records that were reconciled with the bank statements until June 2014. Since then the records have not been reconciled, which severely diminished the Board's ability to provide fiscal oversight. As a result, the Board was unaware of the Town's true financial position at the end of 2014 and increased the 2015 real property tax rate by 113 percent. In addition, the Board has not adopted a multiyear financial plan to address the use of fund balance to finance operations or formal plans for reserve funds already established. Finally, the Board did not perform an annual audit of the books and records of Town officials and employees who received or disbursed money in 2014.

On June 25, 2014, the County entered into a 17.5 year lease agreement for 28,000 square feet of office space known as the Wyoming County Agriculture Business Center of Excellence (Business Center). The Business Center is intended to house various County departments and functions for a lease payment of $389,480 per year. The Board did not demonstrate that it performed an appropriate cost analysis of the selected site, or considered alternative sites or options. At the end of the 17.5 years the County has the option to purchase the building for $1, totaling a potential cost of approximately $6.8 million. As a result, we estimate that the County may pay $1.8 million more than necessary over the next 17.5 years for this building. In addition, the County's procurement policy does not provide clear guidance for procuring and awarding professional service contracts or contracts for insurance coverage. We found that for seven of the eight sampled professional service contracts reviewed, totaling $2.8 million, the County did not provide any evidence that a competitive method, such as a request for proposal, was used when soliciting these services. Further, we found that the County has used the same insurance provider for over 20 years without soliciting quotes from any other providers. Finally, the Board has not adopted comprehensive written policies and procedures to safeguard cash collected at departments even after the apparent theft of approximately $90,000 of funds from the County Department of Motor Vehicles that went undetected for over a year due to lax controls and supervisory oversight.

The Town is currently experiencing severe fiscal stress. Cash on hand at December 31, 2014 was insufficient to meet the Town's ordinary operating demands and the Town's liability for income taxes withheld from Town employees was almost equal to the total cash assets of the Town. This cash flow crisis was caused by the sewer fund continually lacking sufficient revenues to finance operations. The sewer fund had an accumulated fund balance deficiency at the end of 2014 totaling $14,098 and owed the general fund more than $33,000 from current and previous years' interfund advances. These advances were not repaid at year-end, as required, and Town officials had no repayment plan in place. The Board also did not maintain fund balance at reasonable levels because it continually used fund balance to finance operations. As a result, fund balances were depleted requiring the Town to borrow money against future revenues and leaving the general and highway funds in a position where they can no longer support the sewer fund. To improve the financial condition of these funds, in 2015 the Board raised total real property taxes more than $50,000 (13 percent) from the prior year and increased sewer rates from $660 to $690 annually. However, these measures alone are not enough to return the Town to financial solvency because Town officials dramatically overestimated sewer revenue in the 2015 budget by including relevied sewer rents that were already recorded as receivable. To ensure the Town improves its fiscal health, the Board needs to develop a multiyear financial plan, adopt structurally balanced realistic budgets and develop a plan to repay advances to the sewer fund and resolve funding issues that meet the Town's needs and provide sufficient operating cash flow.

The District has contracts with 39 of 43 home school districts or counties stating the District will bill tuition monthly and payment is due within either 30 or 60 days. We reviewed all 82 invoices totaling $1,169,707 for September 2014 and March 2015 and determined that the District billed all of these amounts in a timely manner. In addition, 65 invoices (79 percent) totaling $1,051,780 were paid within 60 days; all but one of the invoices, totaling $9,325, had been paid by June 30. While the District has implemented procedures to ensure that nearly all current year invoices were collected within the fiscal year, it continues to record an accounts receivable balance of $859,227 consisting of amounts over 90 days past due as of June 30, 2015. Amounts due from Suffolk County totaling $847,663 for fiscal years 2000-01 through 2014-15 represent 99 percent of the accounts receivable. As part of the District's effort to collect the amounts due from Suffolk County, it issued a letter dated May 12, 2015 in which it reduced the amount due for years prior to 2007-08 by $275,522, leaving a past due balance of $572,141. The District continues to seek collection of the amounts owed by Suffolk County.

The Board did not adopt realistic and structurally balanced budgets and did not properly manage fund balance. The Board did not adopt a policy to determine the amount of fund balance to be maintained and adopted town-wide (TW) general fund budgets that relied too heavily on appropriated fund balance as a financing source. The Board did not require estimates of year-end fund balances to help determine the amount of fund balance to apply to the next year's budget. In addition, budget estimates for TW general fund expenditures were not reasonable and the fund relied on revenue anticipation notes to fund operations. As a result, the TW general fund balance declined from $358,728 at the beginning of 2012 to a deficit of $335,025 at the end of 2014. This deficit fund balance represents about 30 percent of the 2015 budgeted appropriations for this fund. In 2013, the Town suffered significant flood damage which contributed to the $258,758 deficit fund balance in the part-town highway fund at the end of 2013. The fund balance in this fund improved to $3,845 at the end of 2014, due largely in part to receiving federal funds. However, this fund balance represents less than 1 percent of the 2015 budget and it provides very little financial cushion for managing unforeseen events. Additionally, the Board has not developed a multiyear financial and capital plan to address the long-term priorities.

The Supervisor did not maintain complete, accurate and up-to-date accounting records and reports or provide adequate oversight of the bookkeeper during our audit period. The lack of oversight and the bookkeeper's failure to record all transactions in a timely manner and prepare monthly bank reconciliations caused the accounting records to be inaccurate and incomplete. As a result, the Supervisor could not provide the Board with sufficient monthly financial reports to allow it to adequately monitor and manage the Town's financial operations. The Supervisor also did not file the required 2013 and 2014 annual financial reports with the Office of the State Comptroller in a timely manner. In addition, the Board did not perform annual audits of the Supervisor's records.

The District is serving nutritious meals to its students. However, the meals cost more to prepare than the revenue generated by the meal sales. In addition, the District's productivity level for meals per labor hour is below the industry averages. Although the industry averages may not be achievable given certain District conditions, District officials can use the industry averages to monitor operations and work towards increasing productivity. In addition, the District reported deficits in its school lunch fund totaling almost $298,000 over the last three fiscal years. Although the fund had approximately $42,000 in assigned unappropriated fund balance at the end of the 2013-14 year, minimizing deficits in future years will be critical. Ultimately, if fund balance is no longer available, the fund will require a subsidy from the general fund.

The Board did not ensure that cash disbursements and receipts were properly accounted for and that Association assets were safeguarded and used for proper purposes because it did not include key internal controls in its adopted bylaws and other policies. The bylaws, last updated in May 2008, establish the Treasurer's financial responsibilities, but the Treasurer does not follow the minimal guidelines established. In addition, the bylaws do not require that an official review and approve Association invoices/bills prior to the Treasurer making payment. Further, the bylaws provide limited guidance on cash receipts procedures. The Board has not provided any guidance or adopted procedures for the Association's fundraising activities. The Board also did not provide adequate oversight of the Treasurer, who was responsible for receiving, recording and disbursing Association funds. The Treasurer does not maintain any accounting records and does not file required reports with the Board, the State Comptroller's Office or the Internal Revenue Service. Further, Association officials have not implemented necessary policies and procedures over the purchase and use of fuel, resulting in an apparent misuse of fuel by the Chief and an alleged theft of diesel fuel.

Adequate records and reports were not maintained to enable the Board to appropriately manage the District's finances. The Treasurer did not provide the Board with accurately completed bank reconciliations, monthly cash reports, up-to-date quarterly budget status reports and balance sheets in a timely manner. The Business Office did not always record revenues in a timely manner, and we found significant errors in the District's bank reconciliations, in addition to unsupported journal entries and uncorrected errors that perpetuated discrepancies in the accounting system. Additionally, the District did not repay interfund loans by year end, and certain funds were unable to repay interfund loans. Without accurate financial records and reports, the Board's ability to oversee the District's finances is diminished.

The District's main transportation contractor did not reimburse the District for all fuel used for non-District purposes. This occurred because District officials permitted the contractor to control the entire fuel accountability process. Consequently, the contractor ordered and used more fuel than was needed for District operations. Approximately 30 percent of the fuel purchased by the District and delivered to the contractor's tanks was not used for District transportation purposes and the contractor failed to disclose all of its non-District related fuel use to District officials. While the contractor reimbursed the District for the majority of this excess fuel, we estimate that the contractor still owes the District approximately $74,000 for fuel used for non-District purposes from July 1, 2013 through March 31, 2015. There is no authority for the District to purchase fuel for resale to private parties for the private party's own use. Furthermore, District officials did not verify fuel use calculations prepared by the contractor, which were not made according to contract terms, and ensure fuel was properly accounted for.

The Board needs to improve its budgeting process to properly budget for and monitor Town financial operations. The Board has not adopted policies and procedures or a long-term financial plan to govern the budget process or the appropriate level of fund balance to maintain in each fund. Lacking appropriate budgetary guidance, the Board adopted unrealistic budgets that relied heavily on the appropriation of fund balance as a financing source. In addition, the Board did not authorize a $100,000 interfund advance from the Town-wide (TW) general fund to the Town-Outside-Village (TOV) highway fund or ensure this advance was repaid within the year with interest, as required. At the end of 2014, the TOV highway fund had an accumulated fund balance deficiency of more than $23,000 and the TW general, TW highway, TOV general, water and sewer funds had fund balances that exceeded a reasonable cushion necessary for the next year, ranging from approximately 40 percent to more than 400 percent of next year's appropriations. In addition, the Board did not provide adequate oversight of the Supervisor's financial and recordkeeping duties. The Board has not adopted investment or procurement policies as required by General Municipal Law or ensured that Town officials implemented procedures to control the Town's financial operations. As a result, the Supervisor did not maintain adequate control over the Town's accounting records and adequately oversee the financial duties performed by the bookkeeping firm. In addition, the Board did not perform annual audits of the books and records of all Town officials and employees who received or disbursed money during the year.