The district attorney advised the board to pursue a limited, expedited audit focused on the 2025 budget so the county could finalize its operating numbers before the Oct. 8 deadline, while leaving open a later, broader probe of earlier years if warranted.
The DA told commissioners that State Auditor staff believed they could locate the source of the skewed numbers quickly and provide guidance within one to two weeks. She said she had not requested a full forensic audit because she had seen no evidence of criminal activity beyond an embezzlement matter already under investigation. "I didn't request a full forensic audit at this point in time because I have no evidence that any criminal activity, other than the embezzlement... is occurring," the DA said.
The DA recommended reconciling the county's checkbook with bank statements and suggested a two‑tier approach: a short, targeted engagement to correct urgent budget numbers followed by a separate engagement to review FY2023–24 if necessary. That compromise carried weight with commissioners who supported the board motion to engage the State Auditor for a limited period and then pursue expanded review by subsequent engagement.