# T018 — Conway Asset Forfeiture Schedule vs Cash Ledger The City Finance production presents two different accounting dates for the same $180,000 Flock obligation. Its informal Asset Forfeiture Log reduces the running schedule by the full amount on the ordinance date, while its cash-account trial balances and previously produced vouchers place the two actual payments in July 2025 and January 2026. The spend itself is not in doubt; the unresolved issue is what accounting state the January schedule line represents. ## Statement A The Asset Forfeiture Log records a single January 14, 2025 line: > `1/14/2025 — O-25-09 Flock Safety Cameras — -$180,000.00` ([[Conway Asset Forfeiture Log 2023-2026]], `raw/city-of-conway/FOIA-2026-205/Jan 2023 - Present Asset Forfeiture Accounting.pdf`, p. 1.) Read without a defined balance field, this line could appear to record the entire transaction on the Council-authorization date. ## Statement B The cash-account and vendor-payment records place the actual disbursements later: - `7/9/2025 — AP Computer Cks 120299-120369, 07/09/2025` — `$60,000.00` credit ([[Conway Flock Payment Trial Balances]], `Dunlap FOIA request_July 2025 TB showing first install pmt.pdf`, p. 1). The same-date voucher says, “Flock safety falcon cameras, first installment” ([[Flock Payment Records — INV-56859 and INV-81961]], `raw/city-of-conway/FOIA-2026-125/PO 97136.pdf`, p. 1). - `1/16/2026 — AP Computer Cks 123039-123119, 01/16/2026` — `$120,000.00` credit ([[Conway Flock Payment Trial Balances]], `Dunlap FOIA request_Jan 2026 TB showing final install pmt.pdf`, p. 1). The same-date voucher says, “Final payment for camera system” ([[Flock Payment Records — INV-56859 and INV-81961]], `raw/city-of-conway/FOIA-2026-125/PO 00151.pdf`, p. 1). The 2025 balance sheet also carries `$120,000` in trade accounts payable at year-end rather than treating both installments as 2025 cash disbursements ([[Conway Asset Forfeiture Annual Statements 2023-2025]], `Dunlap FOIA request_2025 Asset forfeiture financials.pdf`, p. 2, “Trade Accounts Payable 120,000”). ## Why it matters The distinction controls how the Asset Forfeiture Log may be used. If the January line is an appropriation, encumbrance, or reservation of available balance, it should not be described as a January cash payment. If it is intended as cash accounting, it conflicts with the City's own trial balances, vouchers, and year-end payable. The core procurement finding remains stable: O-25-09 authorized $180,000 and the City later paid $60,000 plus $120,000 to Flock. ## Resolution status `open` — resolution requires the native schedule/ledger, its column definitions and formulas, or a City explanation identifying the January line's accounting type. ## Discovery Discovered during the July 22, 2026 ingest of City of Conway `FOIA-2026-205` by comparing the four-page Asset Forfeiture Log to the two payment-month trial balances, the 2025 annual balance sheet, and the earlier payment vouchers. ## Notes This tension concerns classification and timing, not whether the Flock contract was authorized or paid.