In one of his last audit reports, State Auditor Tom Schweich gave a rating of “poor” to the Clinton County Collector and Property Tax System. Schweich was found dead of an apparent suicide on Thursday.
The former County Collector Sharon Cockrum resigned effective May 31, 2014, and a successor, former Chief Deputy Collector Anita Shelly King was appointed and sworn into office on June 17, 2014. The scope of the audit included, but was not necessarily limited to, the period from March 1, 2014, to May 31, 2014, and the year ended February 28, 2014.
The report lists some unusual cash-management problems, including tens of thousands of dollars in cash found in a closet.
According to the Citizens Summary (found here), “The County Collector did not take steps to oversee day to day operations of the office, and was generally not in the office during regular work hours.”
“The Deputy Collector found $46,208 in cash in the County Collector’s office closet during the audit. The County Collector’s staff could not provide reasons why these monies were on hand and stored in the closet.”
***The audit also noted an apparent shortage in the Collector’s main bank account of more than $4 thousand, and nearly $1,000 in recorded receipts that were not deposited and may be missing. Problems with duplicate property tax receipt fees and advertising fees receipt records indicated additional funds may be missing.
***In addition, according to the report, the County Collector’s office did not always prepare bank reconciliations on all accounts, and the County Collector’s office did not always disburse liabilities in a timely fashion. Also, the audit report indicates the County Collector’s office did not properly document the amount of money received during a tax sale in the property tax system.
***The County Collector did not timely file the February 28, 2014, annual settlement with the County Clerk. The County Commission and County Clerk do not adequately review additions and abatements entered into the property tax system and neither the County Commission nor the County Clerk adequately reviews the annual settlements of the County Collector. Also, the County Collector had not established adequate password controls.