The Comptroller did not adequately perform her financial recordkeeping and reporting duties or provide the Board with monthly financial reports.

The purpose of our budget review was to determine whether the significant revenue and expenditure projections in the City’s proposed budget for the 2022-23 fiscal year are reasonable.

Town officials (officials) did not adequately configure network and computer user access controls. In addition to sensitive IT control weaknesses that were communicated confidentially to officials.

The purpose of our budget review was to determine whether the significant revenue and expenditure projections in the City's proposed budget for the 2022-23 fiscal year are reasonable, and whether the City took appropriate action to implement or resolve recommendations from our budget review issued in May 2021.

The Supervisor did not ensure that the Town's accounting records and reports were complete, accurate, up to date, reliable or timely. As a result, the Board's ability to monitor the Town's financial affairs, accurately assess the Town's financial condition and make sound financial decisions was compromised.

When purchasing goods or services, Village officials did not always seek competition as required by law or Village's procurement policy.

Although Village Court officials properly collected, deposited, reported and remitted fines and fees, they did not maintain accurate records and reports.

Corporation officials did not always seek competition or maintain adequate documentation of purchasing processes when procuring goods and services.

City officials did not implement all recommendations in our previous budget review letter when preparing the 2022-23 proposed budget. As a result, we found that certain significant revenue and expenditure projections in the 2022-23 proposed budget continue to be unreasonable and other matters that require City officials' attention.

Although the Board evaluated projects prior to approval, the Board did not adequately establish and document its evaluation and approval process. In addition, the Board did not properly monitor the performance of businesses receiving financial benefits.

The Justices did not ensure all collections were properly collected, recorded, deposited, reported and remitted in a timely and accurate manner, or that all adjudicated cases were reported.

The former Treasurer did not record and deposit collections in an accurate manner.

The Clerk did not record, deposit, disburse or report all money collected in a timely and accurate manner.

The Board and District officials did not procure natural gas in accordance with New York State General Municipal Law (GML), at the most favorable terms or in the best interest of District taxpayers.

Significant revenue and expenditure estimates in the tentative budget are reasonable. The Village's tentative budget includes a tax levy of $12,029,454, which is within the limit established by law

The Justices did not provide adequate oversight of Court operations. As a result, errors and irregularities were found in the Court's records.

District officials did not demonstrate that certain goods and services were procured in accordance with the New York State General Municipal Law (GML) or the District’s procurement policies.

City officials did not always assess and bill garbage fees in accordance with the City Code (Code). Officials also did not provide adequate oversight or develop policies and procedures for assessing and billing garbage fees.

The Board did not provide adequate oversight of financial operations. The Board did not develop financial procedures for collections and disbursements, periodically monitor the budget or ensure the constitution (bylaws) were followed. As a result, neither the Company nor we were able to confirm all money was recorded and deposited intact.

The purchasing agent did not ensure purchases adhered to the District's purchasing policy for goods and services not subject to competitive bidding. As a result, the purchasing agent approved 17 purchases totaling $150,961 without knowing whether the purchases were a prudent and economical use of taxpayer money, and in the District's best interest.