Cottonwood Heights' 2025 audit found late cash deposits and a department over budget

Cottonwood Heights' audit for the year ended June 30, 2025 reported two instances of noncompliance with state law, according to the schedule of findings by Larson & Company, PC. ^[1]

The auditor's state compliance report says the city complied in all material respects with the requirements tested, and that its opinion is not modified with respect to the noncompliance. ^[2]

Cash deposits

Finding 2025-001 cites the state requirement that a city deposit all collections in a qualified depository within three banking days. The auditor wrote that physical cash received by the city was not deposited within three banking days, and attributed the cause to "oversight by management and staff." ^[1]

In its response, the city said its cash receipting is "very minimal with most deposits being under $100 at most," that deposits had been held because of the small amounts and deposited together, and that "a practice has been set in place" to make deposits within compliance guidelines regardless of amount. ^[1]

The finding does not state how many deposits were late or their total value. ^[1] The auditor's report says the city's responses were not audited and that it expresses no opinion on them. ^[2]

The department over budget

Finding 2025-002 cites the state law barring a city officer from spending more than a department's total appropriation, and says the Highways and Public Improvements department exceeded its budgeted appropriations. ^[1]

The General Fund's budget-and-actual statement shows the department spent $3,094,946 against an adopted and final budget of $2,781,627, a $313,319 difference. The finding itself does not state an amount. ^[3]

Total General Fund expenditures were $22,881,739, which was $272,325 under the $23,154,064 final budget. Other departments' spending was below their final budgets. ^[3]

Management agreed with the finding. It said the department was over budget "due to an unexpected increase in our annual invoice related to fire hydrant maintenance from Salt Lake City public utilities," that the city tried unsuccessfully to negotiate it down, and that the council is aware and the issue "has been addressed moving forward." ^[1] The city's transmittal letter lists Salt Lake City Public Utilities as the contractor that repairs and maintains city fire hydrants. ^[6]

A July 14, 2026 staff memo on the proposed fiscal 2027 budget lists $25,000 for "SLC Fire Hydrant Maintenance" among public works additions. ^[5]

Other audit results

The schedule lists no findings from the prior year. ^[1] In its report on internal control over financial reporting, the auditor said it did not identify any deficiencies it considered material weaknesses, and that its tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards. ^[4]