Audit gives North Fayette County Municipal Authority clean bill of health
The North Fayette County Municipal Authority received a clean bill of financial health in its 2012-13 audit report.
Bob Softcheck, authority manager, told board members Tuesday night that Edward P. Opst, certified public accountant, found no discrepancies when he reviewed the authority's financial records.
“The accountant said our financial statements are fairly accurate,” Softcheck said. “We received an unspecified rating, which is the highest you can receive in an audit.”
Opst wrote a letter to board members, outlining a favorable audit report.
The financial highlights of the report indicated that the total assets of the authority as of March were $45,849,256, which represents an increase of $4,928,379 from March 2012, Opst said.
As of March 31 this year, Opst said the authority's cash balance was $4,638,822, which represents an increase of $1,495,029 from 2012.
“Net positions may serve over time as a useful indicator of a government's financial performance,” Opst said. “In the case of the authority, assets exceeded liabilities by $36,969,081 at March 31, 2013.”
Board member Phil Mahoney said one of the reasons the authority is in good financial shape is because it approved a rate increase last year.
The authority delayed action on adopting a new rate structure that will take effect with the November 2013 billing.
Mahoney suggested that the authority discuss the issue at its July meeting because several board members were absent from Tuesday's meeting.
Cindy Ekas is a contributing writer.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- ‘Trigger clause’ in ordinance unnecessary, says Connellsville’s health board
- Community Field Day fundraiser planned at East Park in Connellsville
- Robber threatens employee at Subway in Uniontown Mall