The Woodward News

March 15, 2013

Board OKs bond bid, hears audit

Chris Cooper
Woodward News

Woodward, Okla. — The Woodward Board of Education held a special meeting Thursday to receive bids for $5,335,000 building bonds.

Offers from several banks were heard, but the board accepted the low bid 0.703413 percent average interest rate from the Stock Exchange Bank in Woodward.

Financial Advisor Jordan Smith with the Stephen L. Smith Corporation advised the board that the percentage was a fantastic rate.

The board thanked the bank for the impressive rate, and President of Stock Exchange Bank Bruce Benbrook, who was at the meeting said, "We're glad to help, we appreciate everything the school board does, and this is just a small way our bank can help out."

Accountant Buddy Carroll also presented the 2011-2012 audit during the meeting. Carroll said everything looked exceptional and while there were no severe deficiencies, he had two areas of concern.

The first was a situation where an architect and a vendor had been paid for services associated with a construction project, each exceeding $25,000, and Carroll was unable to find the required affidavits attesting to the correctness of the contract.

The second was a payroll discrepancy where in one instance the actual amount of payment did not match the amount identified on the employment contract. The contract amount was for $36,578.74 while the actual amount paid was $36,601.00 for a total of $22.26 difference.

Superintendent Tim Merchant addressed the concerns in a letter stating that attempts would be made to work with the financial software vendor to devise an additional step within the software program that would require a physical action, or answering a question insuring a sworn affidavit has been received by the school, before final approval and printing of a check for any invoice code and amount that would require a sworn affidavit by law.

Second, Merchant said new corrective actions of physically checking all salary amounts against contracted amounts have already been taken and that the over-payment of $22.26 had been paid back by the employee.