3.0.b. SWCSR 08-15-2019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

CliftonLarsonAllen LLP CLAconnect.corn INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON MINNESOTA LEGAL COMPLIANCE Board of Directors Sherburne Wright County Cable Communications Commission Buffalo, Minnesota We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, the statement of balances arising from cash transactions of Sherburne Wright County Cable Communications Commission (the Commission) as of December 31, 2017, and the related statement of cash receipts, disbursements, and changes in cash fund balance, and the related notes to the financial statements, and have issued our report thereon dated May 15, 2019. We expressed an adverse opinion on accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America because the financial statements are prepared on a basis of accounting that demonstrates compliance with the regulatory basis of accounting prescribed or permitted by the Minnesota Office of the State Auditor, which practices differ from accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. However, our opinion was unmodified on the financial statements presented under this regulatory basis. The Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Other Political Subdivisions, promulgated by the State Auditor pursuant to Minnesota Statutes §6.65, contains six main categories of compliance to be tested: contracting and bidding, deposits and investments, conflicts of interest, claims and disbursements, miscellaneous provisions, and tax increment financing. Our audit considered all of the listed categories, except that we did not test for compliance with the provisions for tax increment financing, because this area did not apply to the Commission. In connection with our audit, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the Commission failed to comply with the provisions of the Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Other Political Subdivisions, except as noted in the paragraphs below. However, our audit was not directed primarily toward obtaining knowledge of such noncompliance. Accordingly, had we performed additional procedures, other matters may have come to our attention regarding the Commission's noncompliance with the above-referenced provisions, insofar as they relate to accounting matters. During claims and disbursements testing, it was noted that not all claims were paid timely. Minnesota State Statute 471.425 requires that all bills be paid within 35 days of receiving an invoice. During miscellaneous provisions testing, it was noted that the Commission does not have a written out of state travel policy. Minnesota State Statute 471.661 states that all government entities must have an out of state travel policy that controls travel outside of Minnesota for elected officials of the unit of government. @A member of NeXIa (12) International