This page contains the following documents:
1. The Auditor’s Compliance Review of the Deeds Equipment Account.
2. Summary of Transactions of the Deeds Equipment Account from 2004 to 2014, including links to detailed documents.
3. E-Mail to Investigator with Explanation of Summary of Transactions.
1. The Auditor’s Compliance Review of the Deeds Equipment Account
Ron L. Beaulieu & Company
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
|
www.rlbco.com accting@.rlbco.com |
41Bates Street Portland, Maine04103 |
Tel:(207)775-1717 Fax:(207)775-7103 |
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMPLIANCE OF REGISTER OF DEEDS EQUIPMENT ACCOUNT WITH NEW HAMPSHIRE REVISED STATUTES
To the County Commissioners
of County of Strafford, New Hampshire
Dover, NewHampshire
Report on Compliance
We have audited County of Strafford, New Hampshire's compliance with the requirements described in the New Hampshire Revised Statutes, Chapter 478, Section 478:17j for the period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2013.
Management's Responsibilities
Management is responsible for compliance with the requirements of laws, specifically New Hampshire Revised Statutes.
Auditor's Responsibility
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on compliance of County of Strafford, New Hampshire's Register of Deeds Equipment Account based on our audit of the requirements referred to above. We conducted our audit of compliance in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether noncompliance with the requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on the County. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence about County of Strafford, New Hampshire's compliance with those requirements and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.
We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion on compliance with New Hampshire Revised Statutes, Chapter 478, Section 478:17j. However, our audit does not provide a legal determination of County of Strafford, New Hampshire's compliance.
Opinion on Compliance
In our opinion, County of Strafford, New Hampshire complied, in all material respects, with the requirements referred to above that could have a direct and material effect on the County for the period from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2013.
Portland,MaineApril29,2015
2. Summary of Transactions of the Deeds Equipment Account from 2004 to 2014, including links to detailed documents.
Click on hi-lighted entries in columns for detailed information
STRAFFORD COUNTY DEEDS EQUIPMENT FUND
| 2004-2014 | ||||||||||||||||
| YEAR | A | B | c | D | E | F | G | H |
||||||||
|
DEPOSITS INTO EQUIPMENT ACCOUNT |
WITHDRAWALS FROM EQUIPMENT ACCOUNT |
EXPENDITURES FROM CAPITAL DEEDS EQUIPMENT 01.9902.809 |
ADJUSTMENTS TO
EXPENDITURES* |
ACTUAL COUNTY SUBSIDY (Col. C plus Col. D minus Col. A) |
PAYBACK OF SUBSIDY FROM EQUIPMENT ACCOUNT** |
EXPENDITURES FROM REGISTRY OF DEEDS 01.4120.223 & 01.4120.229 |
BALANCE OF BANK ACCOUNT AT YEAR END (Col.A minus Col. B) |
|||||||||
| Balance fwd. | $1,567.05 | |||||||||||||||
| 2004 | $68,521.67 | $64,000.00 | $74,000.00 | $0.00 | $5,478.33 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $6,088.72 | ||||||||
| 2005 | $65,880.99 | $71,964.71 | $77,532.00 | $0.00 | $11,651.01 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $5.00 | ||||||||
| 2006 | $5,736,501 | $57,365.01 | $75,594.05 | $0.00 | $18,229.04 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $5.00 | ||||||||
| 2007 | $46,901.90 | $46,901.90 | $59,251.55 | $0.00 | $12,349.65 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $5.00 | ||||||||
| 2008 | $38,220.57 | $38,220.57 | $44,853.30 | $0.00 | $6,632.73 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $5.00 | ||||||||
| 2009 | $41,465.75 | $41,465.75 | $44,465.24 | $0.00 | $2,999.49 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $5.00 | ||||||||
| 2010 | $36,094.06 | $36,094.06 | $34,531.00 | $0.00 | ($1,563.06) | ($1,563.06) | $89,640.00 | $5.00 | ||||||||
| 2011 | $34,434.91 | $34,434.91 | $33,120.00 | $0.00 | ($1,314.91) | ($1,314.91) | $85,857.30 | $5.00 | ||||||||
| 2012 | $40,283.45 | $40,283.63 | $40,279.01 | $0.00 | ($4.44) | ($9,334.21) | $81,859.80 | $4.82 | ||||||||
| 2013 | $40,821.01 | $34,314.58 | $38,159.20 | ($3,844.62) | ($6,506.43) | $0.00 | $0.00 | $6,511.25 | ||||||||
| 2014 | $32,068.20 | $38,418.08 | $38,418.08 | $0.00 | $6,349.88 | $0.00 | $0.00 | $161.37 | ||||||||
| Total | $502,057.52 | $503,463.20 | $560,203.43 | ($3,844 .62) | $54,301.29 | ($12,212.18) | $257,357.10 | |||||||||
| *Deducted the cost of replacing carpet before withdrawing funds from Equipment Account Fund. | ||||||||||||||||
|
**payback of subsidy was in the form of transferring the subsidy amounts of $1563.05 for 2010 and $1314.91 for 2011 to the General Fund. For 2012, the subsidy was in the form of taking $9334.21 worth of 2012 invoices originally |
||||||||||||||||
|
charged to the Deeds budget in the General Fund and charging them to the Equipment Account.
3. E-Mail to Investigator with Explanation of Summary of Transactions. |
||||||||||||||||
Attached please find my revised spreadsheet where I have added column G to indicate eligible e the Registry of Deeds' General Fund accounts 01.4120.223 a nd 01.4120.229 for 2010, 2011, and the General Ledger Report and copies of all invoices for those expenditures. These expenditures RSA Chapter 478, Section 478: 17 and total as follows: |
|||||||||||||||||||||
| 2010 | $89,640.00 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2011 | $85,857 .30 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2012 | $81,859.80 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $257,357.10 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| These eligible expenditures more than cover the payback of subsidy for each year as follows: | |||||||||||||||||||||
| 2010 | ($1,563.06) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2011 | ($1,314.91) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| 2012 | ($9,334.21) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | $12,212.18 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| This information should certainly be considered and included in your investigation. These sizable attached documents supporting these numbers should alleviate concerns of whether or not it was legal to transfer the entire balance from the Equipment Account Fund (less $5) to pay back the General Fund and should alleviate concerns of the vague language of the RSA regarding non-lapsing funds. These transactions did occur the same year of the transfers. There are simply not enough surcharge fees deposited into the Deeds Equipment fund to support the eligible expenditures required to maintain the deeds equipment projects, so the County Commissioners have made a commitment through passage of their annual budgets to support these projects when the collection of surcharge fees were inadequate to cover the costs. | |||||||||||||||||||||