American Fork's last four audits report no state-law noncompliance

American Fork's independent auditors reported instances of noncompliance with Utah's state audit requirements in six straight years, fiscal 2016 through 2021, the most recent of them five years ago. Each year they described the problems in a separate letter to city management rather than in the annual financial report. The city's audits for the four years since, fiscal 2022 through 2025, report no instances of noncompliance. ^[1][2][3]

The language is the same each year. In the fiscal 2021 report, Larson & Company wrote that its procedures "disclosed instances of noncompliance, which are required to be reported in accordance with the State Compliance Audit Guide and which are described in a separate letter to management dated December 21, 2021." The fiscal 2017 report, by Gilbert & Stewart, says the same of a letter dated Nov. 15, 2017. ^[2][3]

In every one of those years the auditors still found the city "complied, in all material respects" with state requirements. The noncompliance did not change their opinion. ^[2][3]

What was tested

The state guide covers areas such as budget compliance, fund balance limits, justice courts, restricted taxes, fraud risk assessment and government fees. Those were the areas tested in fiscal 2021. ^[2]

The city's reports for fiscal 2022 through 2025 report no instances of noncompliance, and its federal single audits for 2023 through 2025 list no findings. ^[1][4]

The 2020 and 2021 letters

The fiscal 2020 letter, dated Dec. 30, 2020, lists two state compliance findings. The broadband fund was in a deficit and "was not reduced by the required 5%." The broadband, PARC and transit-oriented development funds "exceeded budgeted appropriation for expenditures." It gives the cause of the overspending as "Oversight by management." ^[5]

The city responded that "due to a change in key staff positions this oversight was not corrected by management in final budget" and that management "will be more vigilant in maintaining budget integrity in the future." ^[5]

The same letter lists fiscal 2019 findings: the broadband deficit, budget overruns in the broadband and internal service funds, and approved minutes not posted to the state website within three days. It says the minutes finding "appears to have been addressed and corrected." ^[5]

The fiscal 2021 letter lists one current finding: the downtown redevelopment, police impact fee and internal service funds "exceeded budgeted appropriation for expenditures," again attributed to "Oversight by management." It says the 2020 broadband deficit finding "was addressed and corrected in the current period" and the 2020 budget finding "was substantially repeated in the current year, although different funds." ^[6]

The city responded that it "is aware of the budget issues" and that "periodic adjustments will be done throughout the year to keep expenditures within budgeted appropriations." ^[6]

The letters for fiscal 2016 through 2019 were not among the records reviewed for this story.