Auditing Clinton: what the city's audit and budget show

The Utah Ledger is reviewing Clinton's public financial records: independent audits, budgets, bond documents and City Council minutes. This series reports what those records show, and each statement links to the record it comes from. Clinton's fiscal year runs July 1 to June 30.

Clinton is in Davis County. Its council has five members; Mayor Marie Dougherty presides at meetings. ^[4]

What the audit says

Child Richards CPAs & Advisors of Ogden wrote, in a report dated Jan. 12, 2026, that the city's fiscal 2025 financial statements "present fairly, in all material respects" its financial position. ^[1]

General fund revenues were $15,871,094 and expenditures were $13,794,085. The fund balance rose by $1,397,576 to $6,190,511. Of that, $155,925 was nonspendable, made up of $90,639 in prepaid items and $65,286 in inventory, and $6,034,586 was unassigned. ^[1]

The city's narrative discussion in the same report gives the nonspendable amount as $151,925, which differs from the balance sheet's $155,925. ^[1]

Across all governmental funds, the ending fund balance was $11,131,603, including $2,061,493 in the capital improvements fund. ^[1]

When the auditor presented the report on Jan. 27, 2026, the minutes record him noting "one state compliance item related to the General Fund balance slightly exceeding recommended thresholds." A separate story in this series covers that item. ^[2]

The written report is now readable in full. Child Richards' Jan. 12, 2026 report gives unmodified opinions on the financial statements and on state compliance. Its schedule of findings lists one item, 2025-01, on fund balance. The criteria line says state code bars a city's unrestricted general fund balance from exceeding 35% of the general fund's total revenue, and the condition line puts Clinton's at 38%. The cause line says additional revenues pushed the balance above budgeted amounts, and the effect line says the financial statements were not affected but the city is out of compliance with the Utah Code. ^[1] The auditors recommend that Clinton either appropriate the funds for expenditure or, if they are meant for long-term capital use, transfer them to the capital projects fund. Management's response says it will make sure to transfer enough to be within compliance. The auditors say they did not audit that response and express no opinion on it. The Ledger has no record that a transfer happened, and the report does not show current compliance. One quirk: the compliance report's closing paragraph says "two instances of noncompliance" but names only item 2025-01, and the schedule lists just that one. ^[1]

A financial audit checks whether money was recorded and reported correctly. It is not a review of whether each project or program delivered what it promised.

Debt

The report's discussion section says, "The City does not have any outstanding bonds or notes." Its long-term liabilities at June 30, 2025, were compensated absences and the net pension liability. ^[1]

That has since changed on paper. A public notice says the council adopted a resolution on Nov. 12, 2025, authorizing up to $3,900,000 in Water Revenue Bonds, Series 2026, at no more than 4% interest, payable from water system net revenues. A separate story covers the borrowing. ^[3]

Redevelopment

The city's redevelopment agency is reported among the nonmajor governmental funds. Its restricted fund balance was $274,746 at June 30, 2025. ^[1]

The budget

The council adopted the fiscal 2026-27 final budget, Resolution 18-26, on June 23, 2026. Councilmembers Spencer Arave, Jennifer Christensen and Adam Larsen voted yes, Councilmember Dane Searle voted no, and Councilmember Chris Danson was excused. ^[4]

The final budget's general fund revenue schedule totals $17,034,748. It includes $4,194,875 in base-year property tax and $335,693 drawn from general fund balance. ^[5]

At the June 16 budget hearing, Dougherty said about $1.2 million in requests had been removed to avoid a property tax increase, according to the minutes. That night the council set a certified tax rate of 0.001985 by a 4–1 vote, with Searle opposed. ^[6]

Other stories in this series cover the gap between the city's street plan and its street budget, and the water borrowing.