opinion




Goochland’s got the audit woes
Published: May 05, 2010
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

So, what’s going on with the countywide audit? 

Many of you are asking the question; here, we’ll try to answer it.

Why is the countywide audit important? Isn’t this just basic bookkeeping?
The countywide audit was requested by the Board of Supervisors last year after an investigation of the county’s utilities department revealed almost $200,000 in undeposited checks from fiscal years 2007 and 2008.  A subsequent forensic audit found that unremitted payments, as well as past due invoices, had been an ongoing problem in the department.

KPMG, a firm hired nearly a year ago, has discovered errors, in some cases totaling millions of dollars, which were made throughout the county. These mistakes are related to governmental activities, the school board, the economic development authority and the county’s utilities department and sanitary districts.

What did KPMG report in its most recent update, given last month?
Although no money was missing from the coffers, said County Administrator Rebecca Dickson, the way that money was divided among those coffers, and how those coffers were organized, has been an uncontrolled process for years.

How did this happen?
KPMG representative Rob Churchman told the Board of Supervisors last month that accounting mistakes resulted from flawed reporting practices and a lack of checks and balances.

This year’s audit also found that the county had, in past years, failed to take ownership of its financial reporting process, relying instead on its former auditor, Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates, to compile its annual financial statements.

Is the county getting closer to finally figuring out what went wrong, and how to fix it?
County Administrator Rebecca Dickson said last week that although she had originally planned to present the final audit report to the Board of Supervisors on May 4, there have been delays in the process. The audit will be sent to KPMG’s national office for review, said Dickson, before being presented on June 1 at 7 p.m.


Who had Goochland previously used as its auditor?
Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates was Goochland’s independent auditor since the early 1980s, says Assistant County Administrator John Wack, although the firm may have been involved with the county before that; no one The Gazette has asked (and we have asked quite a few county officials) can say, exactly, when the firm started working for the county.

How much did the county pay Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates?
In response to a request by The Gazette, Wack said that Goochland’s current financial system dates back to 1988. According to the county records the firm was paid a total of $755,064 between February 1988 and December 2009.

What did Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates do for the county?
Wack says that the firm provided the following services: Preparation of the annual financial statements, rate studies for the public utilities department,  fiscal impact analyses for bond issuances,  and other financial consulting services, such as for potential economic development projects and intergovernmental negotiations.

Why did Goochland County keep choosing Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates to perform its audit?
Well, for one thing, Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates worked cheap, consistently turning in proposals that were well below those presented by the firm’s competitors.

Who was on the audit committee that chose our county’s former auditing firm, and how did supervisors vote on the issue?
The following timeline was created using the meeting minutes of the Board of Supervisors:

In 2001 the Audit Committee included Supervisors James Eads and Andrew Pryor, School Board members James Haskell and Raymond Miller, Janice Alvis and former County Treasurer Geraldine Parrish.

In 2002, four auditing firms presented proposals. On a motion by Pryor, seconded by former Supervisor James Bowles Sr., the Board of Supervisors voted 5-0 to approve a three-year contract with Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates.

In 2005 the Audit Committee included Eads, former Supervisor Joseph Lacy Jr., School Board members James Haskell and Max Cisne, Treasurer Brenda Grubbs and GPCS Director Susan Berquist.

In 2005, on a motion by Eads and seconded by Lacy, supervisors voted 5-0 to hire Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates for a three-year contract that was at least $17,000 less than a competing proposal.

In 2007, Supervisor William E. Quarles is asked by Lacy to join Eads in serving on the Audit Committee; Quarles replaces Lacy on the committee in 2008.

In 2008, on a motion by Eads, seconded by Butler, supervisors voted 5-0 to retain the auditing services of Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates.

In 2009, Eads and Butler are appointed to the Audit Committee to assist in selecting a new audit group, after Interim County Administrator Lane Ramsey points out a need for better fiscal practices.  According to Purchasing Agent Al Elias, as cited in the minutes, the county received six proposals from auditing firms, but did “not get a proposal from the firm that performed the audit in the past.”

In 2009, on a motion by Creasey, seconded by Buter, supervisors voted 5-0 to hire KPMG to perform its annual audit.



Reader Comments


john wright of Manakin Sabot, VA  |  May. 6, 2010, 11:51 AM

The real purpose of any audit is to provide assurances to the readers of the financial statements are, in the opinion of the auditor, free from material misstatements. In other words, you can believe that what is written (facts and figures)in the financial statements is true.

Auditors are meant to be independent, objective third party professionals. How can a firm be independent and objective, if they are the ones who actually prepared the financial statements?

Also, how can anyone be independent and objective if they are engaged for decades? There is much talk within the financial world about the potential conflict of interest of being independent, yet relying on the client (in this case our county) to provide you with income needed to be a profitable business. This conflict has been addressed by the profession through mandated ethics training, and a suggestion that audit firms be rotated periodically. Robinson, Farmer, Cox Associates asserts that they remained independent by rotating its own staff and even which of their offices performed field work. In my humble opinion, this wasn’t sufficient.

Last, as is the case with many things in life, apparently with auditors, “you get what you pay for.”  It should have been a huge red flag for the audit committee, the county’s administration and the supervisors themselves that RFCA’s bids were so dramatically under the next closest competitor. A savings of $17k in 2005, when average annual payments to RFCA were under $36k, means that RFCA was roughly 1/3 cheaper than the next closest competitor. I don’t know about anyone else, but that would have indicated to me that either they weren’t bidding on exactly the same services as everyone else, or that they planned on cutting corners in order to win the bid. Cutting corners on audit field work can get EVERYONE into hot water.


Page 1 of 1 pages


Submit Your Comments Below

Name: (Required)

Email: (Required)

Location:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:



By clicking submit, you agree to our terms and conditions.

Deal of the Day