City of Dunkirk – Budget Review (Chautauqua County)
The lack of complete, accurate and current accounting and financial records significantly limited this review and precluded auditors from determining the reasonableness of all of the city’s significant revenue and expenditure projections. The city’s most recent Annual Financial Report (AFR) was submitted to the Office of the State Comptroller (OSC) for the 2023 fiscal year; the 2024 AFR was due April 30, 2025. The most recent available independent audited financial statements were finalized for 2024 in October 2025. The external auditor’s findings reported in the 2022, 2023 and 2024 financial statements further support OSC’s position that the city’s accounting records are not reliable or up to date. These findings also acknowledge the rapid deterioration of the city’s finances and report that officials do not have the ability to effectively monitor the city’s cash position or results of operations, making financial planning and budgeting incredibly difficult. The city’s most recently completed audited financial statements reported that as of Dec. 31, 2024, the general, water, wastewater, refuse and boardwalk funds had deficit fund balances totaling $15.3 million. The city’s financial condition continued to decline during the current year because the 2025 adopted budget was not structurally balanced and due to a large unbudgeted $1.8 million payment for the purchase of two pumper trucks. With fund balance depleted, the city has limited options available to fund any increases in operating costs. City officials were not planning to increase water or wastewater rates to address the deficits in the water and wastewater funds. The 2026 budget includes a proposed tax levy increase of $198,675 (2%) which will exhaust 86.37% of the city’s constitutional tax limit. As a result, the city’s ability to raise taxes going forward will be severely limited.
Seaford Union Free School District – Capital Assets (Nassau County)
District officials did not maintain complete and accurate capital asset records. Auditors determined that, while assets totaling $1.7 million were inventoried, the district’s inventory records lacked sufficient detail to account for and safeguard the assets. Assets totaling $196,089 were not inventoried, and assets totaling $42,314 were missing and could not be located. The inventory list did not include all necessary information to locate and identify assets. For example, 358 IT assets on the inventory list totaling $1.7 million did not have a serial number. Additionally, 280 assets totaling $630,009 (including 186 IT assets totaling $200,705) did not have the current location recorded on the inventory list. Town of Kingsbury – Multiyear Planning for Fund Balance and Reserves (Washington County)
The board and officials did not develop and adopt a multiyear financial plan, a fund balance policy or a reserve policy. As a result, officials continued to accumulate unrestricted fund balance without defining the amounts the board deemed necessary and without documenting future goals or expectations for the accumulation of funds. Had the board and officials developed and adopted a multiyear financial plan and fund balance and reserve policies, the goals of maintaining an adequate level of fund balance and improving the town’s capital assets over time would have been more transparent to the town’s taxpayers. Without such plans or policies, the board cannot assess revenue trends, expenditure commitments, financial risks and the affordability of new services and capital investments over time.
Town of Hornellsville – Financial Management (Steuben County)
The board did not effectively manage the town’s fund balance. Despite maintaining significant unrestricted fund balances, the board overrode the tax levy limit each year and adopted budgets that increased real property taxes by a total of 18% in calendar years 2022 through 2025. As a result, the board maintained unrestricted fund balances that, as of Dec. 31, 2024, were sufficient to fund more than five years of water, three years of sewer and half of the combined town-wide (TW) funds’ 2025 budgeted appropriations. In addition, the board did not treat taxpayers equitably because it inappropriately allocated sales tax revenues totaling $1.1 million to the TW funds instead of the town-outside-village funds in calendar years 2022 through 2024. The board also did not adopt a written fund balance policy until Feb. 11, 2025, after the State Comptroller’s audit notification, or adopt comprehensive written multiyear financial or capital plans. Although auditors provided recommendations in their prior audit, the board did not implement adequate corrective action to address the deficiencies.
City of Little Falls – Budget Review (Herkimer County)
The tentative budget includes revenues of $966,599 for revenue sharing state aid, $480,000 for garbage collection user fees, $177,000 for the sale of real property, $350,000 for ambulance charges, $60,000 for the sale of timber, $1.4 million for metered water sales, $1.6 million for sewer rents and $138,500 for golf revenues. These revenues may not be reasonable. The budget also does not include a contingency appropriation in any fund. In addition, the budget includes approximately $1.16 million in debt payments, which are likely overestimated by $37,327. The budget also includes retirement appropriations totaling approximately $1.3 million for members of the state retirement system and appropriations totaling $161,398 for workers’ compensation costs. These appropriations were not properly allocated to each of the operating funds.
Wyoming County Industrial Development Agency (WCIDA) – Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT)
WCIDA officials ensured PILOTs they calculated were accurate and in compliance with the PILOT agreements. During the audit period, WCIDA officials calculated PILOT billings for nine wind and solar energy projects, totaling $971,547. Auditors reviewed the PILOT billings for five of these agreements totaling $280,693 and determined they were accurate and in compliance with the PILOT agreements.
Town of Danby – Audit Follow-Up (Tompkins County)
A previous audit, Town of Danby – Board Oversight (2022M-127), determined that the board did not seek competition when procuring goods and services and audit claims prior to payment. The audit included 14 recommendations to help officials monitor and improve the town’s purchasing and claims auditing procedures. The board and town officials failed to implement any of the 14 audit recommendations and were unable to provide reasonable explanations for their lack of action. The board also persisted in procuring goods and services that may not have been made in a cost-effective manner and the board’s ability to effectively monitor the town’s financial operations continued to be diminished. ### |