State Auditor Finds Problems With Billing At Water Districts

The state auditor’s office has recommended some changes in the way four Valley water districts manage their billing and bookkeeping.

In July, managers of the Moab, Model, Pasadena Park and Trentwood water districts received letters detailing “weaknesses” found during state audits of the individual districts.

All had problems with billing procedures and the way customers’ payments were recorded.

Washington state auditor Brian Sonntag said his office is attempting to be more pro-active in its scrutiny of small two- or three-person operations, which he said are “considered high-risk areas” because one person at each water district often handles all of the district’s customer billing, receipts for payments and deposits to the county treasurer.

“This is preventative maintenance for the water districts,” Sonntag said. “The management letters reflect our attempt to help them become more efficient. They don’t say anyone did something wrong.”

Curing the problems cited by the auditor could be costly to the small water districts.

“Would you take a vitamin that cost $500 apiece?” said Kathleen Small, secretary and manager of the Moab Water District. “It comes down to cost. And we’re going to have to pass this cost down to the customer. Districts pay for the audit. This one cost $2,800.”

In response to the auditor’s recommendations, Moab spent another $5,500 for an automated billing system.

“For an office that was told they did nothing wrong, we’ve spent $8,300 and we service only 510 customers,” Small said.

Some districts will be able to purchase computer systems, as Small’s was. Others won’t.

“For a district like us and for others like us, the finances are not necessarily there to have the latest technology for billings and finances, said Ronald Welch, manager of Pasadena Park Irrigation District. “The system in place has been working really well, but the auditor is concerned about fraud and things like that.”

While the auditor’s office recommended making changes, it didn’t dictate how each water district should implement those changes. Sonntag said his office isn’t interested in telling the water districts how to run their businesses, in part because he recognizes that the water districts operate differently and vary in size.

“And we’re not saying that you have to go out and purchase an automated system. That might not be the best decision for a district,” Sonntag said.

For Trentwood Irrigation District, implementing changes will mean a once-a-month review by a member of the board of directors of bookkeeping work, said manager Mike Miller. The board member will initial all entries.

“The auditor wants someone looking over the shoulder of the person who has been doing the work,” Miller said. “And that’s another system of checks and balances.”

During the next audit cycle, which is four years from now, the state will check to see that changes have been made.

, DataTimes