3 Accounting
3.8 Expenditures
3.8.5 Voucher Certification and Approval
3.8.5.10 Chapter 42.24 RCW requires the auditing officer of a municipality to audit all claims against the municipality prior to payment and certify that claims are just, true and unpaid.
The auditing officer is an individual elected or appointed pursuant to statute. The auditing officer is responsible for certifying claims of officers and employees of the municipality as well as preparing and submitting vouchers for payment. The auditing officer should be a different individual than the check signer.
Claims refer to all external payments that are made to satisfy obligations of the entity, regardless of how payments are processed (e.g., through warrants, checks, EFTs, etc.). Claims include refunds, reimbursements, bond payments, federal tax payments, payments to other governments, grants, transfers or payments made to component units or joint ventures, etc. Claims do not include internal activities such as interfund loans, interfund reimbursements, interfund payments (i.e., to internal service funds), indirect cost allocations or other internal accounting transactions, purchases of investments, transfers between funds/bank accounts owned by the entity, etc.
3.8.5.20 The auditing officer’s certification may be made on each individual claim voucher. Alternately, the municipal legislative body may approve use of a blanket voucher certification.
A blank voucher must indicate the particular claims certified. Blanket certification does not relieve the auditing officer of his/her responsibility and liability for each individual claim.
3.8.5.30 Certifications must be signed and dated by the auditing officer. For all claims, except expense reimbursement claims certified by officers or employees (see 3.8.2 Employee Travel), the certification must include the following language:
I, the undersigned, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the materials have been furnished, the services rendered or the labor performed as described, or that any advance payment is due and payable pursuant to a contract or is available as an option for full or partial fulfillment of a contractual obligation, and that the claim is a just, due and unpaid obligation against the (city/county/district), and that I am authorized to authenticate and certify to said claim.
3.8.5.40 The auditing officer’s certification for employee/officer expense reimbursement claims must include the following language:
I, the undersigned, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the claim is a just, due and unpaid obligation against the (city/county/district), and that I am authorized to certify to said claim.
3.8.5.50 The certification by the auditing officer does not relieve the governing body from the responsibility and liability for each voucher approved. The governing body is responsible for ensuring the system of auditing and certifying vouchers provides the greatest possible protection of public resources, the governing body, and the municipality.
3.8.5.60 To document governing body approval, the following should be entered in the minutes:
The following voucher/warrants/electronic payments are approved for payment:
| [Funds] | Total |
| Voucher (Warrant) | |
| numbers: _____ through _____ | $_____ |
| Payroll warrant | |
| numbers:_____ through _____ | $_____ |
| Electronic Payments | |
| dates:_____ through _____ | $_____ |
3.8.5.70 The municipality’s legislative body may authorize the procedure for issuing warrants, checks, and/or electronic payments before the legislative body approves claims. The legislative body may stipulate that certain kinds and/or amounts may not be paid before the body has reviewed the supporting documentation and approved the claims.
3.8.5.80 To authorize payments prior to legislative body review, the municipality must enact the policies and procedures meeting the following conditions required by RCW 42.24.180:
- The auditing officer and the officer designated to sign the checks, warrants, or initiate an electronic payment must have an official bond. The amount is determined by the legislative body and cannot be less than $50,000.
- The legislative body must adopt contracting, hiring, purchasing, and disbursing policies that implement effective internal control. Electronic payments should be addressed by policies that implement effective internal control over initiating and approving transactions; see 3.8.11 Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) – Disbursement.
- The legislative body must review and approve the claims paid at its next regularly scheduled public meeting (within one month of issuance for cities and towns).
- If the legislative body disapproves claims, the auditing officer and the officer designated to sign the checks, warrants, or initiate the electronic payments must recognize these claims as receivables of the municipality. The municipality must pursue collection diligently until the amounts are either collected or the legislative body is satisfied and approves the claims.
3.8.5.90 The original copy of all vouchers should be filed in the office of the auditing officer of the municipality. The detailed accounts to which the expenditures are to be posted must be clearly designated. Supporting documentation must be retained and either attached to the vouchers or canceled by the auditing officer to prevent reuse. See 3.1.4 Original Supporting Documentation or requirements.
3.8.5.100 Municipalities that do not issue their own warrants (i.e., rely on another municipality as treasurer) should retain vouchers and other supporting documentation (e.g., invoices, listing of approved vouchers, etc.). The treasurer may request support with warrant/voucher submissions, but this does not relieve the municipality of the responsibility to retain these supporting documents.