We found that local officials are doing the bare minimum to comply with mandated ethics requirements, and that gaps exist in awareness of and compliance with the provisions of municipalities’ codes of ethics. For example, even though all 31 of the local governments we visited had adopted codes of ethics, 16 percent of these codes did not address even the minimum number of ethics elements required by GML. Moreover, 52 percent of the municipalities had not distributed their codes to all their officers and employees, as required by GML. Our survey responses from local government CEOs, officials and employees showed that the lack of adequate codes of ethics and inconsistent distribution of the codes is widespread. Unless each local government adopts a code of ethics – and ideally a code that covers more than what is minimally required by GML – and vigorously enforces the code’s provisions, taxpayers can have little assurance that local officials are serious about identifying conflicts of interest and protecting public assets from misuse. Ethics Oversight in New York State Municipalities[complete audit - pdf]
See related letters to: Town of Barker, Village of Broadalbin, County of Chautauqua, Town of Cheektowaga, County of Chenango, Town of Clay, County of Clinton, County of Columbia, Town of Greece, Town of Greenburgh, Village of Kiryas Joel, County of Monroe, County of Montgomery, Town of Mt. Morris, County of Nassau, Town of New Baltimore, Town of New Scotland, Village of Perry, Village of Plandome Heights, City of Rochester, City of Schenectady, Village of Shoreham, Town of Smithtown, Town of South Valley, County of St. Lawrence, County of Tompkins, City of Troy, Town of Union, Village of Waterville, County of Westchester, City of White Plains

Management Oversight
We found that the Board had not developed written policies and procedures covering procurement, investments, ethics and claims auditing. As a result, there is a greater likelihood that the Library could pay more than necessary for goods and services, the Library may not be maximizing investment opportunities, and that errors or irregularities could occur and remain undetected. Clifton Park-Halfmoon Public Library District[complete audit - pdf]

From our review of 65 Environmental Protection Fund (EPF) projects, we found that municipalities frequently have not drawn down EPF award funds within the original estimated timelines. However, municipalities have filed project extensions with the oversight agencies and completion dates for specific projects have been extended. We found that environmental projects are often complex and involve careful coordination of funding and resources. In addition, various factors have affected the municipalities' ability to complete the projects within the original estimated timeline and to submit reimbursement vouchers. Environmental Protection Fund Projects: Are Local Governments Completing Them Timely?[complete audit - pdf]
See related letters to: City of Kingston, City of Peekskill, City of Rome, County of Tompkins, Town of Riverhead, Town of Rosendale, Town of Saugerties, Town of Smithtown, Town of Tonawanda, Village of Solvay

Board of Assessment Review
Two of the five BAR members grieved their 2009 property tax assessments directly to the BAR on which they served, resulting in assessment reductions of $223,555 and annual tax savings of approximately $11,411. Although these BAR members disclosed their interest in the properties being grieved to the Assessor, they did not disclose their interests to the Mayor as required by law. In addition, there was no written documentation on file to show whether they voted on the decision made to reduce their assessments. City of Fulton[complete audit - pdf]

Internal Controls Over Selected Financial Activities
Of the 18 audit recommendations, 14 recommendations were implemented, one recommendation was partially implemented, one recommendation was not implemented and two recommendations were no longer applicable. Highland Falls-Fort Montgomery Central School District[complete audit - pdf]

Internal Controls Over Purchasing, Claims Auditing and Separation Payments
The Board has not designed an internal control system for the audit and approval of claims. We reviewed 202 payments totaling $1,620,995 made to 117 vendors and found no indication that the Board had audited and approved any of the claims. Claims also lacked adequate documentation to show that the purchases were valid and necessary College expenditures. College officials also did not always seek competitive bids for purchases of $10,000 or more, as required by College policy and General Municipal Law. Finally, controls over retirement incentive payments also need to be improved. We tested the retirement incentive payments totaling $429,696 that the College made to all 14 faculty members who retired during our audit period and found that the College overpaid two employees by a total of $44,379. Rockland County Community College[complete audit - pdf]

Internal Controls Over Selected Financial Activities
Of the nine audit recommendations included in the report, four recommendations were fully implemented, one recommendation was partially implemented, and four recommendations were not implemented. Saugerties Central School District[complete audit - pdf]

Internal Controls Over Estate Assets
The Administrator has not established proper procedures or controls to adequately safeguard estate assets or to protect the interests of the estate’s creditors and beneficiaries. Specifically, he did not ensure that all decedent assets are identified, documented, collected, safeguarded, appraised, liquidated and properly credited to the estate. For example, he did not control the identification, documentation, collection, and sale of assets found during a search of a decedent’s premises. He did not maintain adequate inventory records and there was minimal photographic or video evidence documenting the existence and condition of assets that were found and subsequently liquidated. Moreover, because he did not use a competitive selection process and family and acquaintances of the Administrator benefited from estate activities, we question whether the Administrator has consistently acted in the best interest of the estate when retaining these individuals. He did not maintain adequate supporting documentation for certain estate expenditures and/or disbursements to individuals, especially attorneys. Niagara County Public Administrator[complete audit - pdf]

Internal Controls Over Financial Condition and Town Clerk Receipts
Because the Supervisor and the Town Clerk did not ensure that all necessary financial records were maintained and that all financial activity was reported accurately and timely, as required, the Board did not receive adequate information on which to base its financial decisions and consequently it failed to adequately monitor the Town’s financial operations and the operations of the Town Clerk, respectively. In addition, internal controls over cash receipts in the Town Clerk’s office were not appropriately designed or operating effectively. Our accountability at June 25, 2009 showed an overage in the Town Clerk’s account of $8,587. Town of Belfast[complete audit - pdf]

Tax Collector
The Collector’s system of recording tax payments does not allow her to easily identify if there has been an error or omission in recording a tax payment. Although the Collector can compare the daily bank deposits to the receipts recorded in the daily cash book, there is no way for the Collector to compare the receipts recorded in the daily cash book, which are recorded by the date of receipt, to the tax roll book which is organized by tax bill number. As a result, at the time of settlement with the County Treasurer in 2008 and 2009, the Collector was unable to identify the sources of surplus balances of approximately $8,000 and $8,550, respectively. Town of Hancock[complete audit - pdf]

Internal Controls Over Selected Financial Operations
The Board has not established written procedures governing cash receipts or provided sufficient oversight over Town officers and employees who receive cash on the behalf of the Town. Because there is no policy or procedure governing issuing cash receipts, the Town Clerk and other Town employees did not issue receipts for cash transfers and transactions, including $18,320 worth of construction and demolition disposal fees and $5,130 in vending machine water sales in 2008. Also, the Board and the Supervisor have not established an adequate segregation of the Town Clerk’s duties related to water rents receipts. Finally, the Town’s two water districts (#1 and #2) did not repay interfund advances totaling $209,138 transferred from the general fund by the close of the fiscal year in which they were made, as required by General Municipal Law. Town of Henderson[complete audit - pdf]

Internal Controls Over Financial Operations
The Board did not provide adequate oversight of the Village’s financial operations. The Board did not segregate the Treasurer’s duties or institute compensating controls where necessary and it did not annually audit the Treasurer’s records and reports. The Board did not establish controls to ensure that it audited all claims and that all claims were supported by adequate documentation and were in compliance with the Village’s procurement policy. In addition, the Board did not ensure that timesheets containing supervisory approval were prepared and kept on file to support payroll payments to hourly workers. Finally, we found that controls were not established to ensure cash receipts and disbursements were adequately safeguarded, and that financial activity was properly supported and accurately recorded and reported on a timely basis. Village of Middleville[complete audit - pdf]

Fire Department Operations
The Board did not properly enter into fire protection contracts. The Village did not have a fire protection contract with the Town of Milford. In addition, the Company did not consent to the fire protection contract with the Town of Middlefield. Further, we found that during the audit period, the Village paid $37,676, or approximately 35 percent of the total fire protection revenues collected from the Towns of Milford and Middlefield to the Company. However, the fire protection contract with the Town of Middlefield did not allow for such payments and there was no contract with the Town of Milford. Finally, the Board did not ensure that Department purchases were made in accordance with statutory requirements and the Village’s procurement policy. Village of Milford[complete audit - pdf]

Internal Controls Over Financial Activities
Of the 15 audit recommendations, eight recommendations were fully implemented, five recommendations were partially implemented and two recommendations were not implemented. Ravena-Coeymans-Selkirk Central School District[complete audit - pdf] | [2007 audit report - pdf]

2009-10 Second Quarter Report on Results of Operations
Based on our analysis of the District’s general fund revenues and expenditures reported as of December 31, 2009, we determined that the District is on track to exceed its revenue projection and to stay within its budgeted expenditure limits. If this trend continues, the District could end the year with a surplus of about $993,000, or $3.4 million more than the planned operating deficit of $2.5 million. However, there are still instances in which District officials are charging encumbrances and expenses against budget line codes with no budgeted appropriations, or spending and encumbering funds in excess of budgeted appropriations. Finally, District officials have either expended, or earmarked for a specific purpose, $4.96 million of AIG funds received in 2007-08. However, they have not earmarked and amended their 2009-10 budget to integrate the remaining $1.04 million. Roosevelt Union Free School District[complete audit - pdf]

Board Oversight and Treasurer’s Duties
We found that the Board did not properly oversee financial operations. As a result, the District did not collect over $10,000 from the Town of Lincklaen for fire protection services, the District had average monthly balances of $43,636 in excess of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) coverage from March through September 2008, and District officials did not solicit price quotes for 16 purchases totaling $40,475. In addition, we found that accounting records were generally incomplete and inaccurate, and the Treasurer did not prepare and submit annual financial reports to the OSC and Town Clerk for the fiscal years ending December 31, 2005 through December 31, 2008. South Otselic Fire District[complete audit - pdf]

Rochester Rhinos Soccer Stadium Civic Project
The Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC), the Dormitory Authority of the State of New York (DASNY) and the City’s Urban Renewal Agency (RURA) failed to perform due diligence activities to determine PAETEC Park’s business-worthiness and overall feasibility because they believed they had little control over a project funded by an appropriation from the New York State Legislature. For example, no agency assumed lead agency responsibility for the project to coordinate oversight. ESDC and DASNY did not believe a lead agency was necessary, and RURA believed the State was responsible for protecting State monies. Although a soccer team is playing at the stadium - thanks to $19 million in State monies and to the appearance of a new owner at the last minute - current City officials acknowledged that they view the project as "making the best of a bad situation." Spending State funds on projects that are not scrutinized for their feasibility is a risky way to pursue economic development. There is a significant risk that PAETEC Park will continue to need City funds to operate in the foreseeable future. Finally, we found that all grant funds were used for properly documented PAETEC Park project costs. City of Rochester, Empire State Development Corporation, and Dormitory Authority of the State of New York[complete audit - pdf]

Internal Controls Over Cash Receipts
The City did not have formal policies or procedures over the cash receipts function and the Common Council did not exercise adequate oversight. We found that the Treasurer’s Office did not maintain accurate and complete cash receipt records. Our tests of receipts found numerous discrepancies between the amounts recorded as received, the amounts actually received and the amounts deposited into the City’s bank accounts. In addition, users of the computerized cash receipt system, including the Treasurer and two clerks, have the ability to change receipt information such as receipt number, amount, and user identification within the system without supervisory approval. However, our testing did not find any material exceptions. City of Rensselaer[complete audit - pdf]

Cash Receipts in the Department of Public Works
In December 2008, City officials adopted a new policy and established revised procedures for handling cash receipts by the DPW. However, we found that the Commissioner of Public Works did not take any immediate action to implement the new procedures, reportedly had not done so as of the end of fieldwork in May 2009, and had done little to implement these procedures as of August 2009. For example, while the new policy requires that receipts for trash bag and compost sales be remitted daily to the Finance Department for deposit, we found that moneys are remitted on average, every 5.75 days and as late as 27 days after receipt. Also, we found that trash bags available for sale by the DPW were not inventoried daily as required. The lack of inventory control of trash bags was a significant deficiency that contributed to the prior theft. City of Saratoga Springs[complete audit - pdf]

Internal Controls Over Financial Operations
The Board did not carry out its responsibility of establishing or overseeing appropriate internal controls over District financial operations. The Board did not prepare the District’s budget in the format stipulated by Town Law; ensure that the Treasurer submitted the required annual financial reports to OSC in a timely manner; or ensure that reserve funds were used as intended, all of which contributed to an unreserved, unappropriated fund deficit of $39,807 at December 31, 2007. The Board also allowed the Treasurer to perform all key aspects of District financial operations without providing independent oversight or verifying accuracy. Finally, because the Board failed to oversee the District’s fiscal affairs, the District was in non-compliance with General Municipal Law (GML) and policy requirements requiring competitive bidding for purchases, and did not use competition in obtaining significant professional services. Brewster Southeast Joint Fire District[complete audit - pdf]

Selected Financial Activities
Of the 15 audit recommendations, 11 recommendations were fully implemented, two recommendations were partially implemented, and two recommendations were not implemented. East Aurora Union Free School District[complete audit - pdf] | [2006 audit report - pdf]

Internal Controls Over Selected Financial Activities and Information Technology
Of the 12 audit recommendations, five recommendations were fully implemented, six recommendations were partially implemented and one recommendation was not implemented. Unatego Central School District[complete audit - pdf] | [2008 audit report - pdf]