"Missing" GLA Board Funds Excceds $100,000.00
Aug 23, 2016 20:14:09 GMT -7
bluebird, zorro, and 1 more like this
Post by Admin on Aug 23, 2016 20:14:09 GMT -7
"Missing" GLA Board Funds now top $100,000.00
Administrator's Note:
Regina Wunsch recently reviewed the summer GLA Board Financial Statements and discovered that the Accounts Receivable dropped over $100,000.00 in June and July. She has requested more detailed financial documents from the Board. The "recalcs" that Regina refers to are recalculations of past due balances being done by Micah and Julie at Accounting Tax Solutions on 111 N. 3rd St. in Livingston, Montana. The recalculation process started in April when Micah attended a Finance Committee meeting.
Regina released her open letter via the GLFPC email list and we have copied it here. The thread title was written by the Forum.
Regina Wunsch recently reviewed the summer GLA Board Financial Statements and discovered that the Accounts Receivable dropped over $100,000.00 in June and July. She has requested more detailed financial documents from the Board. The "recalcs" that Regina refers to are recalculations of past due balances being done by Micah and Julie at Accounting Tax Solutions on 111 N. 3rd St. in Livingston, Montana. The recalculation process started in April when Micah attended a Finance Committee meeting.
Regina released her open letter via the GLFPC email list and we have copied it here. The thread title was written by the Forum.
To the members of the Board,
A I request the following financial reports that should have been made available at the August board meeting to explain the approximately $100,860 drop in receivables from June to July 31, 2016 as there was no explanation contained in the treasurer’s report posted on the GLA website:
1. A spreadsheet listing all past due landowners whose accounts have been recalculated and those still needing to be recalculated, There should be three columns for every month since the recalcs started, one listing what each landowner owed at the time of the recalc and the other listing the recalculated amount and the third the difference. Each column should show a total on the bottom. Furthermore there should be a column at the end of the spreadsheet showing the total difference to date and all landowners whose accounts have been recalculated should be marked with an asterisk ( * ).
As the board should be receiving the real time before and after account data for each recalculated account, this information should be readily available and should not take long to enter. The creation of the spreadsheet itself takes only basic Excel skills and should be able to be quickly created by the administrative assistant.
2. The revised (current) June 30 YTD Balance Sheet & YTD Accrual and Cash based P&L statements.
3. The revised (current) June only Accrual and Cash based P&L statements.
4. the July only Accrual and Cash based P&L statements.
I ran into Rudy last week in Bozeman and he asked me some questions regarding the books. At the time he mentioned that there was an approximately $73,000 drop in receivables from June to July. He thought about $45,000 was due to the recalcs and the rest due to payments for the July assessment invoices. As installment invoices are entered for the first of the month and due at the end of the same month, they do not result in a decrease in receivables at the end of the month they are entered. To the contrary, they either have no effect if there is a 100% collection rate or they result in an increase for the amount that is not paid. Therefore the July assessment installment invoices cannot account for the difference.
I checked the August board meeting July financials posted on the website. The July 31 with June comparison shows a difference of $23,378 not $73,000. I then checked the June 30 Balance sheet posted on the website. That Balance sheet shows $73,649 more in receivables as the amount for June 30 on the July 31 Balance sheet.
As no updated financials were posted to account for this change I used what was provided to at least attempt to account for the $23,378 difference showing on the July 31 Balance sheet.
1. The uncollected 3rd installment land and dwelling assessments (July) using the data provided add up to approximately $6,777. To account for that, the actual drop in receivables had to be around $30,155, not $23,378.
2. Adding the amount of other receivables collected in July (difference in cash from June to July) for 2012,13,14 and 15 land and dwelling assessments, finance charges, penalty, GAV, Chip Seal, Discounts, Project Review Fees, Lien Fees and Misc. Income equaling $2,946, leaves an unaccounted for drop in July receivables of approximately $27,200, making for a total of approximately $100,850.
As no further information has been provided by the Board one must assume that the recalcs in July effected an approximately $27,200 decrease and the recalcs in June a $73,649 decrease in receivables.
This is much higher than the $45,000 that Rudy mentioned. Also, according to Rudy the recalcs are not finished and no information has been provided by the Board as to how many more need to be done. Therefore I am requesting all of the documents listed above to try to account for this very high drop in receivables for myself as the Board has not done so, although required to do so by law. I am requesting that the documents be submitted to me within 5 business days of receipt of this email, by 5 pm August 23, 2016 or a detailed accounting for this drastic drop in receivables.
B I would also like an accounting for the drop in income from June to July in the July Cash based P&L statement for the following income accounts as there was nothing regarding this in the treasurer’s report:
2013 land assessments -$5.16
2015 land assessments -$202.32
2013 dwelling assessments -$5.16
401 Lien Fees Paid -$1.35
440 Misc. Income -210
Where were these funds shifted to and why?
C I request that the % rate of collection of 2016 land and dwelling be reported in the treasurer’s report in conformance with GLA invoicing practice. Assessments are billed in four installments, not on a quarterly basis. Reporting the rate on a quarterly basis as is currently done does not give an accurate picture of the collection rate. July 31 marks the due date of the 3rd installment payments. The actual collection rate as of July 31, using the financials provided is 80.7% for 2016 land assessments and 81.69% for 2016 dwelling assessments. The final installment is invoiced on October 1and due October 31. All 2016 assessments should be collected by that time.
Thank you for your prompt attention to these matters.
Regina Wunsch SG 72