Laserfiche WebLink
� <br />�R✓. +�.% o ? .:313e ..«t �upJ.:ks� �:N� . � s?«' F4.ro 4- ' <br />� � � / <br />C E R T 1 F i E D P U B l. I C A C C O U N T A N T 5 <br />INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT ON COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS AND <br />REGULATIONS BASED ON AN AUDIT OF THE GENERAL PORPOSE <br />FINANCIAL STATE.dENTS PERFORDtED IN ACCOR6Ai7CE WITH GOVERN6fENT <br />AUDIT STANDARDS ISSOED BY THE GAO <br />City Council <br />City of Roseville, yinnesota <br />We have sudited the general purpose financial statements of the <br />City of Roseville, Minnesota, for che year ended Decemoer 31, <br />1989, and have issued our report thereon daced April �, 1990. <br />We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted <br />auditing standards and Government Auditing Standards, issued by <br />the Comptroller General of the United States, and the provisions <br />of the Leqal Compliance Audi� Guide promulgated by the Lega1 Com- <br />pliance ;ask corce pursuant to Minnesota Statutes Sec. 6.65. <br />Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to ob- <br />tain reasonable assurance about whetner thz financial statements <br />are free of material misstatement. <br />Comoliance with 1aws, regulations, contracts, and grants appli- <br />cable to the City of Roseville, biinnesota, is the responsibility <br />of the Ci=y of Roseville's management. As part of obtaining <br />reasonable assurance about wnecher �he financial scatements are <br />free of material misstatement, we oerformed tests of tne City o� <br />Roseville's compliance with certain provisions of laws, regu- <br />lations, contracts, and grants. However, it should be noted that <br />our objective was not to orovide an opinion on overall comoliance <br />with such provisions. <br />The results of our tests indicate that, with resaect to the items <br />tested, the Ci�y of Roseville, Minnesota, complied, in all mater- <br />ial resoects, with those provisions referred to in tne preceding <br />paragraph. With resoect to items not tested, nothing came to ouc <br />attention that caused us to oelieve that the City of �oseville, <br />Minnesota, had not comglied, in al1 material respects, with those <br />provisions. <br />The Leqal Compliance Audit Guidz covers five main categories of <br />comoliance to �e tested: contracting and bidding, deposits and <br />investments, conflicts of interest, puplic indebtedness, and <br />claims and disbursements. Our study included al1 of �he listed <br />categories. <br />. , ri '..�_. <br />