Control and compliance issues in the report
11 control and compliance findings.
Here is what they mean.
Regulatory financial and major-program compliance opinions were clean despite one material weakness. The principal issues were unreconciled accounts, aged unfunded costs, and unreliable asset records.
At a glance
The highest financial-reporting control category
Issues reported in at least one earlier audit
Opinion scope varies by report year and accounting basis
Most regulatory statements received clean opinions—with an important exception.
Unmodified regulatory-basis and major-program compliance opinions; adverse GAAP-basis opinion.
Read the three opinion scopes
- New Jersey regulatory basis: Unmodified.
- U.S. GAAP: Adverse because the mandated regulatory basis differs from GAAP.
- Fixed assets: None
What needs to change
“Material weakness” is an audit-control classification, not an allegation of fraud. Open a finding for the condition, why it matters, the auditor's recommendation, repeat history, and the City's separately labeled response.
2013-001 · noncompliance material to basic financial statements
· Repeat since 2012
Aged unfunded capital costs
Unfinanced costs totaling $35,872,028 for capital projects over five years old remained on the City's books, including $25,970,341 for general and school projects and $9,901,687 for water projects.
Aged unfunded capital costs
Unfinanced costs totaling $35,872,028 for capital projects over five years old remained on the City's books, including $25,970,341 for general and school projects and $9,901,687 for water projects.
The aged balances created cash-flow concerns and did not comply with State requirements for funding completed capital projects.
Fund all Unfunded Deferred Charges to Future Taxation and Water Rents over five years old for which unfinanced costs have been paid.
Official report p. 304 · Includes a compliance issue
2013-002 · material weakness
· Repeat since 2012
Grant, UEZ, and capital-account reconciliations
CDBG, HOME, HOPWA, and ESG balances were not reconciled to HUD's IDIS system; UEZ balances were not reconciled to JCEDC records; and capital improvement authorizations did not agree with the subsidiary ledger.
Grant, UEZ, and capital-account reconciliations
CDBG, HOME, HOPWA, and ESG balances were not reconciled to HUD's IDIS system; UEZ balances were not reconciled to JCEDC records; and capital improvement authorizations did not agree with the subsidiary ledger.
Grant and UEZ balances could not be validated, and unreconciled capital authorizations could be overexpended or misstated.
Adopt closing procedures requiring appropriate personnel to reconcile CDBG, HOME, HOPWA, ESG, UEZ, capital improvement authorizations, and other applicable accounts to underlying records and oversight-agency reports.
Questioned costs: None.
The City stated that Community Development would retain year-end IDIS reports, review and close temporary CDBG, HOME, and HOPWA accounts, and reconcile UEZ accounts with JCEDC records.
Official report pp. 305–306, 309–310
2013-003 · significant deficiency
Fixed-asset inventory and tracking
Fifteen of 48 sampled assets could not be located, disposal records appeared incomplete, identifying information was missing, and departmental tagging, transfer, and disposal policies were not followed.
Fixed-asset inventory and tracking
Fifteen of 48 sampled assets could not be located, disposal records appeared incomplete, identifying information was missing, and departmental tagging, transfer, and disposal policies were not followed.
The fixed-asset system did not comply with N.J.A.C. 5:30-5.6 and could become materially misstated and unreliable for tracking City property.
Make every asset traceable to the inventory through tags or other identifiers and enforce existing disposal and transfer procedures.
Official report pp. 307–308 · Includes a compliance issue
Comment 1 · control deficiency
· Repeat since 2012
Grant receipts posted to incorrect lines
Testing found grant receipts posted to incorrect grant lines, requiring a reallocation line in the grant-receivable detail.
Grant receipts posted to incorrect lines
Testing found grant receipts posted to incorrect grant lines, requiring a reallocation line in the grant-receivable detail.
The report does not state a separate effect.
Post receipts to the correct grants and grant years.
Official report p. 316
Comment 2 · control deficiency
· Repeat since 2012
Dormant grant receivables and reserves
The grants fund carried $53,734,763 of receivables and $45,820,738 of appropriated reserves, including aged balances likely to be uncollectible or inactive, plus dormant capital-fund grants and $368,981 of Local Law Enforcement Block Grant money.
Dormant grant receivables and reserves
The grants fund carried $53,734,763 of receivables and $45,820,738 of appropriated reserves, including aged balances likely to be uncollectible or inactive, plus dormant capital-fund grants and $368,981 of Local Law Enforcement Block Grant money.
The report does not state a separate effect.
Investigate dormant receivable and reserve balances for collectability, posting to correct grant years, proper disposition, expenditure eligibility, or return to grantors.
Official report pp. 316–317
Comment 3 · control deficiency
· Repeat since 2012
Unavailable payroll-deduction support
Testing of employee deductions and W-4 authorizations could not be completed because supporting documents were archived, stored, or otherwise unavailable.
Unavailable payroll-deduction support
Testing of employee deductions and W-4 authorizations could not be completed because supporting documents were archived, stored, or otherwise unavailable.
The report does not state a separate effect.
Permanently retain W-4 forms and employee-deduction support in personnel files.
Official report p. 317
Comment 4 · control deficiency
Missing vendor W-9 forms
Eighteen of 60 sampled vendors lacked retained W-9 forms, preventing completion of testing over whether required 1099 forms had been filed.
Missing vendor W-9 forms
Eighteen of 60 sampled vendors lacked retained W-9 forms, preventing completion of testing over whether required 1099 forms had been filed.
The report does not state a separate effect.
Obtain and retain W-9 forms from all vendors and review them for compliance with federal 1099-reporting rules.
Official report pp. 317–318
Comment 5 · compliance finding
Untimely deposits by City departments
The Health Department did not always deposit receipts within 48 hours, and Parks Maintenance forwarded several months of tree-planting receipts in December, contrary to N.J.S.A. 40A:5-15.
Untimely deposits by City departments
The Health Department did not always deposit receipts within 48 hours, and Parks Maintenance forwarded several months of tree-planting receipts in December, contrary to N.J.S.A. 40A:5-15.
The report does not state a separate effect.
Require the Health Department and Parks Maintenance to deposit receipts within 48 hours.
Official report p. 318 · Includes a compliance issue
Comment 6 · control deficiency
Retiree-benefit eligibility reviews
The City had no formal policy for self-auditing whether retirees, spouses, and dependents receiving medical benefits remained eligible.
Retiree-benefit eligibility reviews
The City had no formal policy for self-auditing whether retirees, spouses, and dependents receiving medical benefits remained eligible.
The report does not state a separate effect.
Periodically verify continuing medical-benefit eligibility and institute formal verification controls.
Official report p. 319
Comment 7 · control deficiency
Certificates of Occupancy omitted from tax roll
Six of 60 sampled Certificates of Occupancy had not been added to the City tax roll by the testing date.
Certificates of Occupancy omitted from tax roll
Six of 60 sampled Certificates of Occupancy had not been added to the City tax roll by the testing date.
The report does not state a separate effect.
Review all Certificates of Occupancy and add improvements as assessments promptly.
Official report p. 319
Comment 8 · control deficiency
Uncollected elevator-inspection fees
More than $180,000 of elevator-inspection bills issued in July 2013 remained uncollected at year end.
Uncollected elevator-inspection fees
More than $180,000 of elevator-inspection bills issued in July 2013 remained uncollected at year end.
The report does not state a separate effect.
Follow up on elevator-inspection billings to collect City revenue more promptly.
Official report p. 319
The report's management crosswalk is internally inconsistent about the repeat status of the fixed-assets finding.
Choose a report year
CY is a calendar year, FY is the older June-ending fiscal year, and TY2010 is the transition period. Comparative CY2022 also represents CY2021.
Official PDF archive
Supporting source evidence, not the primary reading experience. Independent audits only; budgets and Annual Financial Statements are separate.
| Report | Years covered | Source |
|---|---|---|
| CY2025 | 2025, 2024 | Open official PDF |
| CY2024 | 2024, 2023 | Open official PDF |
| CY2023 | 2023, 2022 | Open official PDF |
| CY2022 |
2022, 2021
No separate CY2021 report was published; this comparative audit covers both 2022 and 2021.
|
Open official PDF |
| CY2020 | 2020, 2019 | Open official PDF |
| CY2019 | 2019, 2018 | Open official PDF |
| CY2018 | 2018, 2017 | Open official PDF |
| CY2017 | 2017, 2016 | Open official PDF |
| CY2016 | 2016, 2015 | Open official PDF |
| CY2015 | 2015, 2014 | Open official PDF |
| CY2014 | 2014, 2013 | Open official PDF |
| CY2013 | 2013, 2012 | Open official PDF |
| CY2012 | 2012, 2011 | Open official PDF |
| CY2011 |
2011, 2010
This report covers CY2011 and the 2010 transition year.
|
Open official PDF |
| TY2010 |
2010
Transition-year report for the period ending December 31, 2010; it also compares the fiscal year ending June 30, 2010.
|
Open official PDF |
| FY2010 | 2010 | Open official PDF |
| FY2009 | 2009 | Open official PDF |
| FY2008 | 2008 | Open official PDF |
| FY2007 | 2007 | Open official PDF |
| FY2006 | 2006 | Open official PDF |
Project Solomon is independent of the City of Jersey City. Structured audit facts are manually source-checked; City management responses are unaudited.