Laserfiche WebLink
CliftonLarsonAllen LLP <br />CLAconnect.com <br /> <br />(35) <br /> <br />INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT ON MINNESOTA LEGAL COMPLIANCE <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Honorable Mayor, Members of the <br />City Council, and Citizens <br />City of Gem Lake, Minnesota <br /> <br /> <br />We have audited, in accordance with the auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of <br />America and the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards <br />issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the financial statements of the governmental <br />activities, the business-type activities, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information <br />of the City of Gem Lake, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes to the <br />financial statements, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements, and have issued <br />our report thereon dated June 18, 2018. <br /> <br />The Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for Cities promulgated by the state auditor pursuant to <br />Minn. Stat. §6.65, contains seven categories of compliance to be tested: contracting and bidding, <br />deposits and investments, conflicts of interest, public indebtedness, claims and disbursements, <br />miscellaneous provisions, and tax increment financing. Our audit considered all of the listed categories, <br />except that we did not test for compliance with tax increment financing because the City did not have <br />any tax increment financing. <br /> <br />In connection with our audit, nothing came to our attention that caused us to believe that the City of <br />Gem Lake, failed to comply with the provisions of the Minnesota Legal Compliance Audit Guide for <br />Cities, except as described in the schedule of findings and recommendations as items 2017-004, 2017- <br />005, and 2017-006. However, our audit was not directed primarily toward obtaining knowledge of such <br />noncompliance. Accordingly, had we performed additional procedures, other matters may have come to <br />our attention regarding the City of Gem Lake’s noncompliance with the above-referenced provisions. <br /> <br />The City’s responses to the findings identified in our audit are described in the accompanying schedule <br />of findings and responses. The City’s responses were not subjected to the auditing procedures applied <br />in the audit of the financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on them. <br /> <br />The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of compliance and the results of <br />that testing, and not to provide an opinion on compliance. Accordingly, this communication is not <br />suitable for any other purpose. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />CliftonLarsonAllen LLP <br />Minneapolis, Minnesota <br />June 18, 2018 <br />