The District has overestimated appropriations in the adopted budgets by about an average of 14 percent annually over the past three years. As a result, a significant portion of the fund balance appropriated in the general fund was not needed to finance operations and unassigned fund balance has exceeded the 4 percent legal limit each of the last three fiscal years. The District has reduced the reported level of year-end unassigned fund balance from 9.3 percent of the ensuing year's budget at the end of 2012-13 to 6.9 percent at the end of 2014-15, but when the unused appropriated fund balance is added back, the recalculated unassigned fund balance exceeds 20 percent of the next year's appropriations for each of the three years. In addition, the District's tax certiorari reserve is overfunded by approximately $567,000 and, based on historic costs, the unemployment insurance reserve has enough funds to cover 37 years of expenditures.

While the Board and District officials reported fund balance levels in accordance with the law, District officials annually appropriated fund balance towards the subsequent year's budget, of which not all of the amounts were used because the Board and District officials consistently overestimated appropriations. When the appropriated fund balance not needed to finance operations is included in unrestricted fund balance, the District's recalculated unrestricted fund balance in all three years ranged from approximately $2 million (9 percent) to $2.2 million (11 percent), exceeding the statutory limit. This trend is projected to continue through 2015-16 based on our review of the current budget. In addition, the Board and District officials have not properly managed four reserves that appear to be overfunded or contain funds that are improperly restricted by approximately $7.6 million, which is approximately 35 percent of 2015-16 budgeted appropriations. District officials also consistently budgeted for expenditures that could have been paid for with reserve funds. Although unrestricted fund balance continued to increase through June 30, 2015, District officials continued to increase the tax levy every year. Had District officials maintained the same tax levy as in 2012-13, residents could have realized approximately $720,000 in cumulative savings. As a result, District officials missed opportunities to reduce taxes.

The Board consistently overestimated appropriations in the District's adopted budgets. Although the District reported year-end unrestricted general fund balance at levels that essentially complied with the 4 percent statutory limit, the Board adopted budgets which included appropriated fund balance and reserves that were not needed as funding sources because the Board and District officials overestimated appropriations by an average of 8.8 percent over the last three fiscal years. As a result, the District experiencing an operating surplus in 2011-12 and operating deficits in 2012-13 and 2014-15 that were significantly less than planned. When the unused appropriated fund balance was added back, recalculated unrestricted fund balance averaged about 8 percent of the ensuing year's appropriations, exceeding the legal limit. In addition, the employee benefit accrued liability reserve was overfunded by $1.39 million, which was nearly 40 times the amount of compensated absences reported by the District.

The Board has consistently overestimated appropriations in its adopted budgets by about 9 percent over the past three years. As a result, a significant portion of the fund balance appropriated in the general fund was not needed to finance operations and unassigned fund balance has exceeded the 4 percent legal limit from fiscal years 2012-13 through 2014-15. The District has reduced the reported level of year-end unassigned fund balance from 12 percent of the ensuing year's budget at the end of 2012-13 to 8.6 percent at the end of 2014-15. However, when the unused appropriated fund balance was added back, the recalculated unassigned fund balance exceeded 15 percent of the next year's appropriations in all three years.

District officials ensured that retiree health insurance contributions were properly billed, collected and deposited. Although the account clerk performs most of the duties, District officials implemented proper compensating controls to ensure bills are accurate, money is collected from all retirees and money is deposited into District bank accounts. They also have a process in place to timely identify deceased retirees. However, they could further increase controls to ensure deceased retirees are identified timely.

Although the District has procedures specific to the maintenance of IT inventory, the Board has not adopted an asset policy establishing capitalization or tagging thresholds, control over assets, or how to maintain records for these assets. Consequently, three assets valued at $1,650 could not be located and 21 assets valued at $69,370 were either not tagged or the asset tag numbers did not agree with the asset records. Furthermore, 10 assets purchased in 2015-16 valued at $57,573 were not recorded on the asset list and nine assets valued at $45,750 were listed as disposed of, but were still in service. We also found that 18 of 20 assets listed as disposed of, valued at $32,920, did not have documentation indicating authorization or approval. As a result, District officials do not have assurance that all District property is accounted for properly.

The District's unassigned fund balance has exceeded the 4 percent legal limit from fiscal years 2012-13 through 2014-15. At the end of 2014-15, the District's fund balance was approximately $2.4 million, or 9.7 percent of the ensuing year's appropriations. This amount exceeds the limit by 5.7 percentage points, or about $1.4 million. Although the District's unassigned fund balance has exceeded the statutory limit for the past three fiscal years, the Board increased the tax levy from $7.8 million in 2012-13 to $8.3 million in 2015-16, an increase of about 6 percent. Finally, the Board has not adopted a multiyear capital or operational plan for the use of surplus fund balance.

While Council and City officials have taken certain steps to improve the City's operations and reduce its related costs, they did not ensure that all City operations were functioning at the lowest cost to taxpayers. Refuse expenditures consistently exceeded revenues and health insurance expenditures have increased. Furthermore, through 2014, the City's outstanding debt included payments for items that are beyond their useful lives. City officials were aware of these issues and are developing plans to reduce these expenditures. In addition, we identified a number of opportunities related to non-property tax services that could help improve the City's fiscal health. Specifically, we identified opportunities for City officials to consider for sewer and refuse operations, building permits, parking operations and, potentially, gross receipts tax revenues.

The Treasurer did not comply with the bylaws that require getting approval before making disbursements, even though all Company checks had two authorized signatures. The Treasurer provided the Board with a list of cash disbursements on each monthly Treasurer's report for bills that were previously paid. However, other than the Treasurer, Company officials did not review documentation supporting each cash disbursement to ensure payments were for valid Company purposes. Therefore, we reviewed all cash disbursements for our audit period, consisting of 106 disbursements totaling $17,665, which included 92 checks totaling $17,285 and 14 petty cash disbursements totaling $380. We found that 28 disbursements totaling $5,293 were not adequately supported, which prevented us from determining if these disbursements were for valid Company purposes.

We examined a sample of 2014-15 payroll transactions totaling $1.14 million and found that the District's salary and wage payments were accurate and leave records were properly maintained. However, District officials did not document their verification of eligibility for retirement incentives, totaling $90,000, that were paid to three former employees, which resulted in a payment of $30,000 to one individual that was inconsistent with CBA provisions. In addition, the District paid $6,962 for unused vacation to the former Superintendent that was not provided for in the former Superintendent's employment contract.

The District needs to improve its controls over payroll processing. Although the payroll clerk performs procedures to double check her own work, the review process should involve someone independently reviewing payroll prior to processing. Such a review could include comparing payroll source documents, such as signed time sheets, to payroll reports to verify that hours or days worked agree and reviewing payroll change reports which show the changes from one payroll to the next. Although we did not identify any material discrepancies, the lack of adequate oversight of the payroll clerk's duties increases the risk that errors or irregularities in the processing of payrolls could occur and remain undetected, or not be detected in a timely manner.

The Board and District officials could improve their efforts to ensure retirees enrolled for health insurance benefits are eligible. The Board has not developed written policies or procedures to monitor retiree health insurance eligibility. The District also made payments to providers totaling $3.6 million without receiving support indicating enrollee information and/or premium rates. Further, District officials are not proactively ensuring the continued eligibility of retirees. As a result, the District has an increased risk that it could be paying for ineligible enrollees.

District officials managed fund balance responsibly in accordance with statute. Real Property Tax Law allows a school district to maintain up to 4 percent of the ensuing year's budget as unrestricted fund balance. The District has maintained approximately this amount of unrestricted fund balance for the three fiscal years that we reviewed. District officials' adopted budgets were reasonable because revenues and appropriations were based on known sources and historical trends. Furthermore, District officials adequately monitored the budgets throughout the year. Although total reserves remained relatively flat, we analyzed the individual reserves and determined that the reserve for compensative absences is overfunded. This reserve must be used only for cash payments for accrued and unused sick, vacation and certain other leave time owed to employees when they leave District employment. As of June 30, 2015, we determined the District's liability for compensated absences was approximately $1.3 million. However, the reserve balance was over $2.4 million. Therefore, the reserve was overfunded by approximately $1.1 million. While District officials effectively managed financial operations, the Board should have adopted a reserve policy that established the reserves to be used, how they would be funded and when they would be used.

The Board and District officials need to improve the budget process to ensure that adopted budgets are reasonable, allowing them to effectively manage the District's financial condition. The Board overestimated appropriations in the adopted budgets in four of the past five years. This generated almost $4.3 million in combined operating surpluses from 2010-11 through 2014-15. While the Board used operating surpluses to fund various reserves and capital projects, they also appropriated an average of $1.8 million in fund balance as a financing source in the annual budgets over this period. However, District officials used appropriated fund balance to fund operations in only one year. As a result, 84 percent of the amount appropriated was not needed due to operating surpluses. When the unused appropriated fund balance is added back to fund balance, the District's recalculated unrestricted fund balance ranged between 10 and 12 percent of the ensuing year's appropriations, exceeding the 4 percent limit in the last four fiscal years.

The Board and District management effectively managed the District's financial condition. The District's unrestricted fund balance from fiscal years 2010-11 through 2013-14 remained consistent at approximately 1 percent of the subsequent year's appropriations. For the 2014-15 fiscal year, the unrestricted fund balance was $4,237,425, or 4 percent of the subsequent year's appropriations, which is a significant increase from prior years. The District's 2014-15 fiscal year financial position improved significantly primarily because the District sold a school building. The District sold the building for $8.5 million and put $5 million of the proceeds toward the funding of a voter-approved capital project for improvements to the high school and middle school. We also reviewed the District's 2015-16 adopted budget and determined that revenue and expenditure estimates appeared reasonable. We commend the Board and District management for taking positive action in managing the District's financial condition.

District officials did not maintain fund balance in accordance with statutory requirements. The unrestricted fund balance exceeded the statutory limit of 4 percent of the ensuing year's budget for each of the last three years, ranging from 5 to 11 percent. From 2012-13 through 2014-15, the District's unrestricted fund balance increased by $568,000, or 108 percent. As of June 30, 2015, the District's reported unrestricted fund balance totaled $1.1 million, exceeding the statutory limit by $691,000. Further, over these three years, the District actually used $382,000, or 18 percent, of the $2.2 million of fund balance appropriated to finance operations. During 2014-15, District officials appropriated $681,641 to help finance the 2015-16 budget; however, we project that they will use about $121,000 (18 percent). As such, the District's unrestricted fund balance will continue to exceed the statutory limit. District officials have established a repair reserve in 2015-16 with some of the excess funds. However, over the last three years, when unused appropriated fund balance was added back, the District's recalculated unrestricted fund balance exceeded the statutory limit each year, ranging from 13 to 16 percent of the ensuing year's budget.

District officials did not effectively manage cafeteria operations. District officials did not perform a cost-per-meal analysis and did not always consider past productions when planning future meals, which contributed to the cost of producing a meal exceeding the price charged. As a result, the general fund is subsidizing the school lunch fund, on average, $66,000 annually. District cafeteria staff do not produce the meals in a productive manner. The District's productivity level for meals per labor hour (MPLH) is not within the industry averages. Although the industry averages may not always be achievable given certain District conditions, District officials can use the industry averages to monitor operations and work towards increasing productivity, when necessary. District officials should actively monitor the MPLH to improve the operational productivity. Further, District officials did not adequately segregate duties over the collection, accounting and depositing of money or implement adequate mitigating controls, which increases the risk of recording and depositing errors or irregularities.

District officials established adequate procedures for payroll to ensure employees were accurately paid at their approved salaries or wages. Establishing and adhering to a good system for processing and verifying payroll payments helps ensure that employees will be accurately paid their salaries and wages. We commend District officials for establishing an effective system that ensures the accuracy of compensation paid to employees.

District officials employed budgeting practices that generated operating deficits, but only used a fraction of the appropriated fund balance to fund operations. This resulted in fund balance appropriations that were not needed. As a result, during the 2012-13 through 2014-15 fiscal years, the District's unassigned fund balance was 9.65 to 12.35 percent of the ensuing years' budgets, while the statutory limit for fund balance was 4 percent. In addition, the Board transferred moneys to the District's reserves without calculations or justifications for the funding levels in the reserves and maintained balances in the unemployment insurance reserve and workers' compensation reserve that were excessive because those balances could fund related costs for 15 years and six years, respectively. These budgeting practices increase the risk that funds will not be used productively and that tax levies will be higher than necessary.

The Board did not effectively manage reserves and fund balance. We found that, as of June 30, 2015, the District had an account for post-employment benefit liabilities totaling over $7.1 million when there is currently no authority to reserve funds for this purpose. District officials also could not provide documentation for the establishment of its unemployment reserve fund. Additionally, three reserve funds with balances totaling over $1.5 million may be excessively funded. Had the unauthorized post-employment benefit liability funds been properly reported, total unrestricted fund balance would have been 23 percent of the ensuing year's budgeted appropriations, far exceeding the statutory limit of 4 percent. The District also did not use appropriated fund balance of $1.62 million, which would further increase the unrestricted fund balance beyond 23 percent.