[0:00]

[0:56] We can all stand and say the Pledge.

[1:02] I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America

[1:06] and to the Republic for which it stands.

[1:09] One nation under God, indivisible,

[1:12] with liberty and justice for all.

[1:15] Thank you, everybody.

[1:17] OK, so we have our agenda item.

[1:19] And I think the first thing is public comments.

[1:21] Is that right.

[1:23] I'll do roll call.

[1:24] Oh, sorry.

[1:24] Roll call.

[1:25] OK member Thompson here.

[1:27] Member Garcia here.

[1:29] Member English here.

[1:30] Vice Chair Gregor here.

[1:32] We do have a quorum, and then we approve the agenda.

[1:37] OK, anybody against approving the agenda.

[1:42] I motion we approve the agenda I second.

[1:45] All in favor.

[1:49] Aye Thank you.

[1:50] The agenda is approved.

[1:53] Audience comments.

[1:54] There's nobody in the audience.

[1:56] Do we have any written comments that were submitted.

[1:59] We do not.

[2:00] OK, so moving on with the action item

[2:02] we were talking about that Devin,

[2:04] thanks for giving us that task.

[2:07] It is important for the city to do an audit,

[2:10] and I know that there's been a lot of people talking

[2:14] about our budget on social media and questioning a lot of things.

[2:19] Our recent campaign, there was a lot

[2:20] of debate back and forth about budget items and things

[2:24] like this.

[2:25] So I think it is a very important thing that we choose

[2:29] an auditing firm and that there is confidence by the residents,

[2:34] by this board and by the commission

[2:36] that we move forward with this.

[2:38] Given that, I'd like to ask, I kind of

[2:41] came up with a little methodology,

[2:43] and I'd like to ask any of the board members,

[2:45] if you have any objections to any of the firms

[2:48] that were presented to us.

[2:51] Any objections to us.

[2:53] Well, there's one that I would like

[2:55] to see some clarification on Cherry as it relates

[2:59] to what happened in Vero Beach.

[3:03] In that, because that seemed pretty out of very expensive

[3:10] and overrun and just one item.

[3:13] I did want to introduce our procurement

[3:15] manager, John Taylor.

[3:16] He's right here for us.

[3:18] And so he can help shepherd us through the process

[3:21] of the evaluations as well.

[3:23] So if you guys have any questions,

[3:25] he's certainly a subject matter expert

[3:28] and the procurement world.

[3:29] So I'm John Taylor and I'm the procurement manager

[3:31] for the city of ST Pete Beach.

[3:32] I've been here around three plus years

[3:35] and I've been doing procurement for around 40 years.

[3:38] So I'm older than I look.

[3:39] But the homework probably is not Devin.

[3:42] That's from me.

[3:44] Anytime we do an RFP, it's required

[3:46] that a committee, whether it's internal

[3:49] or in this case, the budget and finance

[3:52] review committee to score based on the bids

[3:59] that are received back.

[4:01] So at this point, you can discuss

[4:03] any of the different folks that are vendors that applied

[4:09] for this, such as what MS English was just talking about,

[4:14] and you can discuss amongst yourselves.

[4:16] Did anyone go through and score all the sheets.

[4:20] I did.

[4:20] OK, beautiful.

[4:22] So what will happen is once you have your discussion,

[4:26] then anything that y'all bring up we can will be in record.

[4:31] I will take the scoring sheets, the completed scoring sheets.

[4:34] I will tally all of them to find out

[4:36] who the lower bid or the highest bids

[4:39] are as far as what your point ratio is.

[4:43] And then we'll come back to the committee

[4:45] to let you know who that winner is at that point in time.

[4:50] If there are number of vendors that you would like

[4:54] to have more discussion about.

[4:57] We can do that after the fact, or even if you wanted

[5:00] to bring them in to have an actual discussion with for you

[5:06] can do that as well.

[5:07] But we need to narrow down that list versus all eight

[5:11] of them coming in at one time.

[5:14] OK Any questions.

[5:15] Thank you for answering my question on how to put

[5:18] the points in the spreadsheet.

[5:21] And it is a little bit different.

[5:23] We scored this one differently simply because there are so many

[5:26] different areas that it's not like a normal bid

[5:31] per se, because it's dealing with a lot of things

[5:35] the infrastructure of the city, the auditing process.

[5:39] So we did the 5030, 2020 being the pricing.

[5:45] A lot of times we look at pricing first,

[5:47] we should really look at that last make sure they

[5:51] have all the qualifications.

[5:52] And then when you have all the qualifications,

[5:54] then we look at the pricing.

[5:56] And that tends to be the last thing that we

[5:59] look at as a defining point.

[6:03] I mean, I have a number of questions.

[6:07] I will answer anything that I can.

[6:08] Well, the first one I asked Devin already

[6:11] and the question is, why aren't we using James more

[6:14] or who we used in the past.

[6:17] What I was wondering too.

[6:19] And we have at this point in time,

[6:22] and I think we are using them now for more

[6:27] than just auditing services.

[6:29] And we've gotten to the end of the time frame

[6:31] that we can actually use James more as auditors.

[6:35] They've been with us for quite a few years.

[6:37] We've moved after their initial five years.

[6:41] We extended them for an additional five years.

[6:44] And I believe that 10 year mark has is now up.

[6:48] So we can't go back with them.

[6:50] We have to go with a new auditor.

[6:52] And then the other piece to that is

[6:53] that we have to maintain separations of duties,

[6:57] because they are now assisting us with bank

[7:00] reconciliations and cash.

[7:01] And as an audit firm, you can't help a city reconcile and work

[7:06] with cash and be the auditor.

[7:08] You have to have that separation of duties.

[7:10] So that's why they didn't propose

[7:12] or put in, because we're using them in a different capacity.

[7:15] And that was going to be one of my other questions,

[7:17] because a number of these vendors

[7:19] had other services than just auditing.

[7:21] And is there an appetite or a vision for the needing of any

[7:27] of these other services from or so it sounds like we

[7:31] can't from what you just said.

[7:33] So they can do what's called non attest

[7:35] services so they can do the financial statements for us.

[7:39] They can help us with any of the GASB implementations.

[7:43] So a large one that came out in the past few years was GASB 87.

[7:49] That was a huge lift.

[7:51] And GASB 96.

[7:53] Those two auditors can help with doing

[7:56] reconciliations to make sure that we're recording

[7:59] those entries properly.

[8:01] So those are more considered non attest services

[8:04] and they charge a different rate for that.

[8:06] The other thing that your auditors will do is they'll

[8:10] help with your schedule of expenditures of federal awards,

[8:15] which we obviously have a decent amount

[8:18] this for fiscal year 26 because of the hurricane.

[8:22] So there's several different kind of a La Orchard areas

[8:27] that you can use these firms for.

[8:29] In the past, we have utilized James Moore when they were

[8:32] our auditor for a lot of those non attest services,

[8:37] helping with fixed assets, helping with the GASB

[8:40] pronouncements and implementations,

[8:43] helping with our schedule of expenditures of federal awards.

[8:48] And so there would be an appetite,

[8:51] I would say, to continue just based on the size of our finance

[8:56] department, to continue with some

[8:57] of those non-attached services.

[9:00] And then you touched on one of my next questions

[9:03] is one question off of that one before you leave it just

[9:07] I noticed one of the firms talked about bonding

[9:10] as being an area of expertise.

[9:12] So just where does that fall in with the.

[9:16] Is that something that they could be considered to working

[9:19] with us on, or do you want me to tell you

[9:22] the specific vendor that I saw them highlighting

[9:26] that on I saw that you did too.

[9:28] Yeah and so I know that that's a strategy that will be explored.

[9:33] So I just didn't know if that was.

[9:35] No, we already have some company that

[9:37] would be working with us on something like that

[9:39] or even sorting out assessments.

[9:43] And Maldon and Jacobs.

[9:45] Yes exactly correct.

[9:46] That's who I saw it with.

[9:47] Is that something that this type of a firm

[9:50] we would consider partnering or I guess, contracting to do that,

[9:54] as long as they can maintain independent review

[9:58] of our financials, we could absolutely do that.

[10:01] One of the things that we had talked about putting out to bid

[10:06] is a financial advisor.

[10:09] And so we will be looking to put out a financial advisor.

[10:12] And typically they're helping with some of that bonding.

[10:15] And then from what I understand we

[10:16] typically work with a separate legal entity

[10:20] called neighbor Givens.

[10:22] Is that correct Ralph.

[10:23] Yep they call them like Redbook bond counsel.

[10:26] And there's a few different firms

[10:27] around the state that do that, and Nabers is one of them.

[10:31] So it's kind of a partnership between your financial advisor.

[10:34] But you might have another contract anyways on that topic.

[10:39] So that would not necessarily make a difference to us.

[10:44] OK yeah.

[10:46] How strategically important, though, is this type

[10:49] of an audit on bonding.

[10:51] Is there a connection of value and insights

[10:54] that they would have in order to.

[10:56] Or is that just that's the two cannot have that

[11:02] kind of same conversation in the room, so to speak, I don't know.

[11:05] In my experience, I haven't seen the auditors

[11:09] be the ones that are making bond recommendations.

[11:12] That's typically your financial advisor

[11:14] providing the information necessary to enable bonding.

[11:20] So they could provide the information.

[11:22] That's what I was thinking.

[11:23] Yeah, absolutely.

[11:24] They could provide the information.

[11:25] They could help us put together all of the information

[11:29] that you might need to show that good ratings.

[11:34] So they could certainly help having that intelligence could

[11:37] be strategically valuable.

[11:38] Yeah for an audit firm to have that capability.

[11:42] OK thank you.

[11:43] Absolutely sorry.

[11:44] Back to you, Kathy.

[11:44] Obviously, the hurricane was top of mind for a lot of these.

[11:50] The review that I did, and there were a couple firms that

[11:52] actually had Hurricane experience

[11:55] and/or had worked with barrier island type budgets.

[11:59] Is that important from your perspective.

[12:02] Because it seemed pretty complex with all the

[12:04] FEMA stuff that we had to deal with.

[12:06] It's very complex, and I think it's

[12:08] very important when we're dealing with public assistance,

[12:11] funding.

[12:12] The regulations that are inlaid on top of that funding

[12:16] are quite enormous.

[12:18] And so for a firm to have that level

[12:21] of experience, especially with a barrier island,

[12:24] is a very good plus.

[12:27] So absolutely, that's a good call out.

[12:29] When I did the review I don't know if you saw this.

[12:32] Also, Kathy, growl and associates really stood out

[12:36] as having been the auditing firm for a couple of the beaches

[12:41] and having dealt with FEMA and they kind of

[12:46] stood out with their proposal.

[12:48] And I'm wondering, is that fortunate.

[12:54] Did others miss that or something.

[12:56] They highlighted it in their proposal,

[12:59] whereas others might not have highlighted it

[13:01] but could also have that experience.

[13:03] Purvis and gray had a lot of cities

[13:06] that had Hurricane impact, I think when I looked at that one.

[13:12] But I don't want to speak for you.

[13:13] Devin oh, yeah.

[13:14] No, no, absolutely I think.

[13:18] And John can help me out with this too.

[13:20] But I think it's apparent that the two firms that did list

[13:24] experience with FEMA obviously did some research into our city,

[13:29] and they put together a proposal that

[13:31] was thoughtful in some of the areas that we might need.

[13:35] So I think if it was omitted by some of the other firms.

[13:42] I think it just shows that they did their due diligence.

[13:45] A lot of the firms, they tend to do something very generic,

[13:50] while other ones while other ones

[13:52] tailor them to a smaller municipality such as ours.

[13:58] I noticed that one, and I don't know which one it was.

[14:01] The front cover was a picture of ST Petersburg.

[14:04] Well, that's not us.

[14:06] Yeah, so it's things like that mean that they took

[14:09] the extra step and the extra effort

[14:11] that you take into consideration, when they've

[14:15] got a big the front pages.

[14:18] ST Pete Beach versus a picture of the skyline of ST Petersburg.

[14:22] It goes a long way for me anyway.

[14:25] Well, and Mauldin and Jenkins.

[14:27] Jenkins had the city of Madeira Beach as one of their.

[14:33] They also have Marco Island.

[14:36] Isla morada.

[14:37] Yeah Longboat Key.

[14:39] Kiawah island.

[14:42] That's kind of what caught my eye.

[14:45] Yeah obviously, those three were in my priority.

[14:50] Yeah And then Rivero.

[14:55] Gordimer is that how you say it.

[14:57] Gordimer and company or.

[14:59] We don't know.

[15:00] But I know who you're saying.

[15:01] We know who you're talking about.

[15:02] If you pronounce it that way, we don't know.

[15:04]

[15:06] They had some.

[15:08] And I was impressed with the model and Jenkins,

[15:11] as small, relatively small as Madeira Beach is.

[15:15] Yeah and then to see on the flip side, Atlanta and Savannah.

[15:22] Yeah, that's a pretty broad swath right there.

[15:26] Absolutely so but that they were served out

[15:29] of probably a different office.

[15:31] Yeah And then the team that they put together,

[15:34] at least for the referrals, you've

[15:38] got two principals sansbury with 30 years and Anderson with 18.

[15:42] That's what I said.

[15:42] Great team partners.

[15:44] Yeah, I think that's a really good call out that you both had.

[15:48] When you are looking at selecting an auditor,

[15:51] you want to look at the partner specifically

[15:54] and how many partner hours they're

[15:55] going to give you, because you're going to come

[15:58] back with a better audit.

[15:59] What the city wants and any audit is we want it.

[16:03] We want a difficult, strong audit,

[16:05] and we want them to come in and turn over every stone

[16:07] and really show that we are doing

[16:10] our due diligence in finance.

[16:11] So for us, that's a big important factor.

[16:15] They were fixed fee, if I recall,

[16:18] and then they had a decent rate for the hourly 350

[16:22] to 110 depending.

[16:26] I wish that we heard some of this.

[16:29] I'll just say for next year in advance of maybe some of what

[16:35] do you think has made the previous firm hopefully

[16:37] very successful or what.

[16:39] Some of the things are that now that we're

[16:41] looking at it with fresh eyes, what could

[16:43] we be seeking for improvement.

[16:45] So then we can put that lens on, because I did

[16:49] look into the pricing part with respect to what's all inclusive

[16:54] and what would be more a La Orchard,

[16:56] but I didn't look at specifically what you were

[16:59] just highlighting of partners.

[17:01] So maybe if you have that off the top of your head, John,

[17:04] you could let us know if there were any that stood out.

[17:08] Or we could quickly look at that together because I

[17:12] didn't as far as partner hours.

[17:14] Yeah specifically committed partner.

[17:16] All of them reported that.

[17:18] Yeah they just went over the team.

[17:20] Yeah OK.

[17:21] Yeah OK.

[17:22] Some of them had lower level.

[17:24] I just some of them had maudlin reported

[17:28] and I'm looking at my notes a total

[17:30] of 50 partner hours with the engagement total being

[17:33] 300 hours.

[17:35] That's a pretty healthy number.

[17:39] So it's not a bunch of staff CPAs.

[17:43] It's the guys with the collective 48 years experience.

[17:46] Yep well, and some of them had different timelines.

[17:50] Some of them had different of how long

[17:53] it would take them to do it.

[17:54] Some of them had hourly rates.

[17:57] Some of them, I mean, it's just they were all over the map.

[17:59] Some of them had all these awards.

[18:02] One of them had all these awards,

[18:03] but yet felt like there was no substance.

[18:06] So I did want to ask you in this on the spreadsheet, one

[18:10] of the things you all said is.

[18:14] Consider the impact on the staff.

[18:17] And I was looking at last year's audit report.

[18:21] It's really huge.

[18:22] And it looks to me like a lot of the work

[18:24] was done by Devin, you and your team.

[18:28] And I wonder if you haven't met any of these candidates

[18:33] or anyone from them.

[18:35] Can you describe a little bit about the workload on your team

[18:38] and what you would ideally like.

[18:44] Because I think some of these gave more than others

[18:47] in the research.

[18:49] Absolutely yeah.

[18:50] So when we're thinking about because I

[18:52] was talking to Bill about this before everybody walked in.

[18:55] So we go from budget season straight into audit season.

[18:59] So we kick off the audit on October 1

[19:02] for the prior fiscal year, what my staff does

[19:07] is we do what's called the MD&A, which is that management

[19:11] discussion and analysis.

[19:12] We do the transmittal letter.

[19:14] We work with public services to pull together

[19:16] all of the capital assets.

[19:18] So whether it's work in process, whether we're

[19:20] depreciating that asset, whether we're fully

[19:25] writing that off the books.

[19:26] So we work in conjunction with the auditors,

[19:29] but we're sending that out to our public services department

[19:31] to say, where did this project land is Should we

[19:35] capitalize this as an expense.

[19:37] We also in years past with the financial system that we had,

[19:42] because it was an on prem type server

[19:46] where auditors couldn't log in without being on a city network.

[19:51] We had to pull all of the invoices,

[19:53] backup documentation, contracts, anything

[19:55] that they're looking for.

[19:57] Since we've switched to a cloud based platform

[19:59] with our enterprise resource planning or ERP,

[20:04] we have the ability now where we could

[20:05] just give the auditors a login.

[20:07] They could go in and start pulling information

[20:10] and putting it together.

[20:12] The other piece that we have, since we are using James more

[20:15] for accounting services, is that they put together since they are

[20:21] doing the books, they are CPAs where our prior auditor,

[20:25] they're going to put together what they call kind

[20:27] of a nice packaged bow at the end of the year

[20:30] to give that audit team.

[20:32] So we do have some nice play when we're looking at how

[20:37] we're pulling this together.

[20:38] But when we think about what would be a big lift on our team

[20:43] is if we had an audit firm that wasn't maybe comfortable

[20:47] going into the system, pulling the information,

[20:50] and was still requesting us to do it in that older fashion give

[20:55] me paper, because paper invoices,

[20:57] I mean, you will have some audit firms that still practice

[21:00] that way, where they are wanting to see everything in paper

[21:04] and we're printing stuff, and that's where that workload

[21:07] really elevates, if you will.

[21:09] So it seems like most of these had some sort of technology

[21:15] or technology combination, a portal, a secure link

[21:19] and Thomas Reuters.

[21:21] Yep, that's what we utilize with James Morris,

[21:26] we had an audit portal where we would go

[21:28] and just import items up to them.

[21:30] And then they would give comments back

[21:32] and we would converse.

[21:34] That's also how we do our audit planning.

[21:36] So we kind of back into what that entire schedule is.

[21:38] We know what we need to have by what date to keep us on track.

[21:43] And so I think that with that too, the timeline is important.

[21:48] Ideally, we'd want to be done by April 30 because some of them

[21:52] went on till June, June, which that is the state deadline.

[21:56] It just helps set us up for our budget process

[21:59] if we're done by April 30.

[22:01] But June is when we concluded this year,

[22:04] which was the first time we've been

[22:05] on time and quite a few years.

[22:08] So that's saying something with the hurricane impact.

[22:11] Yeah, absolutely.

[22:12] So just a testament to the staff that worked on it.

[22:15] But I think April 30 is ideal.

[22:21] But June 30 is OK too, if that makes sense.

[22:26] Just to pick up Kathy on that topic too, unless you just.

[22:31] How about the view of.

[22:36] Departmental approaches versus a dedicated team being called out.

[22:41] Is that something that you feel like has a weight of impact

[22:50] or importance to the effectiveness of how

[22:53] you can collaborate with them.

[22:54] Because I know some were much more generic about a department

[22:59] that you would have access to versus here's

[23:03] named people, or just that we will name people, if you will.

[23:08] Is there a particular approach that you feel like works more

[23:13] effectively for us in that.

[23:18] Because we're such a small team right now,

[23:21] we have the finance director and one of our senior

[23:25] your financial analysts that work on the audit in conjunction

[23:29] with the James Moore side of things.

[23:32] So it is a very small team.

[23:34] We will if we have questions about either P cards

[23:38] or if they have a question about a contract or a bid,

[23:41] we will pull in procurement.

[23:43] If you have questions about invoicing,

[23:44] we may pull in accounts payable.

[23:46] But since we are such a small team,

[23:48] it is really that they're working with named individuals.

[23:52] Yeah, I only maybe I missed it, but I

[23:55] only noted one that actually specifically

[23:58] outlined the named team.

[24:00] But then there was at least another one that was very broad.

[24:05] And just saying we'll have a department approach.

[24:08] That was purpose.

[24:10] And I think sometimes, especially if they're

[24:13] going to name a team, it helps year over year with the audit

[24:18] because they become more familiar with our funds,

[24:20] with our transactions.

[24:21] And so then year over year, they're

[24:23] able to take a deeper dive into different areas

[24:27] when they're doing that audit.

[24:29] So it is beneficial one, to have one of these contracts

[24:32] last about five years is kind of a best practice,

[24:35] but two, having that name team, they get familiar

[24:39] with all of our transactions, all of our funds

[24:42] and everything in that nature.

[24:44] Instead of we might have this partner one year

[24:47] and another partner another year,

[24:49] or we might have this person that's managing the audit

[24:53] this year, but then it changes.

[24:55] Usually if you have that continuity with who you're

[24:58] at least your manager is.

[24:59] The partners will change because they

[25:02] need to because they're doing different independent reviews.

[25:05] And it helps provide a good oversight.

[25:08] But that manager is pretty critical

[25:10] that they stay with the team as long as possible.

[25:14] And then from your engagement with the I mean,

[25:17] whether they called it out or not,

[25:19] do you expect that would be what we would ask of all of them

[25:25] separately.

[25:26] I mean, and sorry, just to step back.

[25:28] I mean, I think there is a deadline of when we need

[25:31] to have this decision made.

[25:34] Could we be clear what that date is.

[25:37] So the goal would be that if we're

[25:39] able to and if we need more information,

[25:41] like Mr. Taylor said, we could certainly

[25:44] reconvene with you all.

[25:46] The goal would be to have an engagement in place

[25:49] by October 1, so we can hit the ground running with the audit.

[25:52] And is there another step after today.

[25:56] Does this have to go to the commission.

[25:57] It does.

[25:58] So what I would ask is if this board made a decision that we

[26:05] could send you a templated letter that you could write

[26:08] and say, our recommendation is that we hire such and such audit

[26:11] firm based on.

[26:13] And then we would provide the scoring

[26:15] and then it has to go to commission for approval

[26:16] because of the dollar amount.

[26:18] And they're technically the ones who hire the auditors.

[26:22] So which one of the funds does this come out of the general.

[26:27] So it does come out of the general fund.

[26:29] We do have a cost allocation methodology, however,

[26:32] where since our enterprise funds operate like a business,

[26:37] they do pay a cost allocation into the general fund for things

[26:42] like auditing, payroll, human resources,

[26:45] all of those different areas.

[26:47] So it is offset by all of our enterprise funds as well.

[26:52] How are you hoping to get our recommendation before we close

[26:56] the meeting today is that if we're able to understand

[26:59] if we're not.

[27:00] I mean, I think Kathy made some really good points about how do

[27:04] you even evaluate these things.

[27:06] So if we're able to that would be fantastic.

[27:08] If not, then I would recommend that we try to get something

[27:11] scheduled so that we could put this on the commission agenda

[27:14] for the 21st of September.

[27:16] Can you give us a high level overview of audit approach.

[27:21]

[27:24] What is that.

[27:24] What do you mean by that.

[27:25] Because they all spelled them out in here.

[27:27] So I'm just curious where you're going with that bill.

[27:29] The good, the bad, and the ugly from your standpoint.

[27:32] I have limited I don't have any experience with that or John

[27:36] from yours.

[27:37] If you're the one that should I mean

[27:39] I don't know who to translate what you have done a lot.

[27:44] Yeah OK.

[27:45] Well, I mean, for me, I mean, because I

[27:49] come out of corporate America originally.

[27:53] Anytime auditors and I've dealt with auditors

[27:55] my entire career because they were always wanting contracts.

[27:59] They want to see scoring sheets.

[28:01] They delve deep into the information.

[28:06] And I mean, for me that's extremely important because then

[28:10] it's sort of like a check to make sure

[28:13] that we in especially in procurement,

[28:16] that I'm doing things correctly and above board and everything

[28:19] is black and white.

[28:20] I don't want any gray ever.

[28:25] And that my job is to protect the city with the contracts

[28:28] and things like that.

[28:29] And I want them to sit there and go check that's what he's doing.

[28:34] In the finance side, they want to make sure that we're dotting

[28:38] our I's, crossing our T's.

[28:39] And, when they do a deep delve into the financials,

[28:44] that everything is how it should be.

[28:47] We don't want any of those murky areas.

[28:51] We want it very clear so that there's

[28:56] never any doubt that things are being done correctly.

[29:00] Some auditing firms I found in the past gloss over things.

[29:05] And for me personally, I don't like that.

[29:08] I like when they really delve deep.

[29:11] I know that James Moore, when I first started here,

[29:14] they would contact me directly for things like contracts

[29:17] and things like that.

[29:18] They were doing more paper at that point in time,

[29:20] which was only three years ago.

[29:24] Since that point, Chris Tarkenton,

[29:27] who works in our department, he's

[29:28] our senior financial analyst, worked

[29:31] very, very closely with them.

[29:33] And so Chris would reach out to me and/or I would give

[29:35] him access to different things.

[29:37] So he could go in and pull any information he

[29:39] needed to send to the auditor.

[29:41] So it's changed a little bit, but they still

[29:43] want the same information.

[29:46] And that's what we for me, that's what

[29:47] I want to see in an audit firm.

[29:50] Anytime that I want to make sure that they're delving deep

[29:54] and they're looking at everything

[29:56] that we've done to make sure that everything

[29:57] has been done correctly.

[29:59] That's really helpful because some of these

[30:01] were very detailed and very thorough

[30:05] versus others that were more just high level.

[30:07] Hey, we scope it out and then we do it and then we in the field

[30:11] and then we write the report and have

[30:14] you either one of you worked with any

[30:16] of these firms in the past.

[30:19] I have not.

[30:21] I don't know if John has, but I would

[30:25] say, just to elaborate a little bit on what Mr. Taylor said to I

[30:31] think when you're thinking about an audit engagement

[30:34] and what that looks want to have a planning kickoff meeting that

[30:39] starts before October 1, typically,

[30:42] so that you're already thinking, what can we pull together.

[30:46] Because ideally, when we get to a very stable point

[30:50] as an organization, we should really have the books

[30:54] reconciled through August.

[30:57] And then we're looking at that last month

[30:59] and those closing entries and things of that nature.

[31:01] But I think from a standpoint of what that approach looks like, I

[31:06] mean, you want to understand that they have clients

[31:09] that are similar size to us.

[31:11] So they're used to working with a small team.

[31:14] You want to make sure that they have that federal background

[31:18] and experience that we've talked about.

[31:20] You want to make sure that they have that technology experience,

[31:23] like we said, and so that it's not putting on a big lift

[31:27] onto staff.

[31:29] And so when we're thinking about that whole planning timeline,

[31:33] those are different areas that I think are

[31:35] really important to consider.

[31:37]

[31:41] Well, I am so impressed with how you've

[31:45] redone a lot of the organization of our finances and stuff.

[31:48] Devin one of the things I learned about cherry

[31:54] is that they were doing Vero Beach

[31:58] and they had a massive overrun on charges.

[32:03] Part of it was because of the practices at the city

[32:06] that it had to be to your point, deep deep dived into

[32:11] and course corrected.

[32:14] So they had this huge overrun.

[32:15] And that to me was a big alert.

[32:19] They're a big company.

[32:22] But that's why I put them at the bottom of my list.

[32:27] Mike because I was just really uncomfortable with that.

[32:34] That was like something you just researched.

[32:36] Separate yeah, yeah.

[32:38] The city paid nearly $82,000 to cherry.

[32:41] More than double the 38,000 budgeted for audit assistance

[32:45] from September 23 to 24.

[32:48] The audit was significantly delayed, triggering state

[32:51] penalties and a late filing.

[32:53] And auditors identified a material

[32:54] weakness in the city's internal control

[32:57] over financial reporting.

[32:59] Yeah, the only thing I noted with them around the cost part

[33:03] was they want incremental for their startups.

[33:06] Yeah that was different than most of the others.

[33:09] And I think the thing that stood out for me though with them was

[33:12] technology, and that was another topic I just

[33:15] wanted to get feedback on because there

[33:17] was varying degrees of conversation around technology.

[33:22] Cherry was actually the most it looked comprehensive to me

[33:25] about what technology they were using, from AI tools

[33:29] to data sniper for, I don't there's different

[33:32] cybersecurity, type of tools.

[33:36] And then some were just yeah, we use Neuralink to make sure

[33:40] probably, I'm guessing passed documents back and forth

[33:44] in an encrypted, safe way.

[33:46] But with technology, it could mean

[33:49] so much more to the effectiveness

[33:51] of what we're doing.

[33:52] Some kind of threw out the word AI, it's a thing, of course,

[33:57] but so everybody uses it.

[33:59] We use it on our phone, I mean, and we but how we want to see I

[34:06] guess the technology is there.

[34:08] Are there intelligence that you all have from the work

[34:12] that we've either been doing from the past audit

[34:14] that we're like, if we're going to pour into something

[34:17] for the next five years, because it's always

[34:19] going to be some type of an integration effort,

[34:21] and teaming with somebody new that we

[34:24] know strategically is a must have

[34:27] from a technology capability.

[34:29] And we need to maybe figure out, of course,

[34:32] maybe we can narrow it down to a few.

[34:34] But just to say, maybe you didn't touch on this,

[34:37] but we need to hear about what is the technology that you would

[34:40] be absolutely committed to incorporating into this strategy

[34:43] for the way we're going to collaborate for the next year

[34:46] to potentially five.

[34:47] Any of those questions that you may have for any of the firms.

[34:51] We can go back to the firms and ask those questions

[34:54] and get the answers for us.

[34:56] And maybe my question is also, though, to you

[34:58] all what are there some did you put it in a bid that required

[35:05] any level of technology or integration capabilities

[35:08] with us that I might have not seen.

[35:13] I wanted to add something to.

[35:14] Yeah OK.

[35:15] The Florida auditor general has a guidance manual for audit

[35:19] selection, and they had a section here

[35:23] where they cite to the GFOA handbook, which is a government

[35:27] finance Officers Association.

[35:30] And part of that answer is Bill's question.

[35:32] And then part of it gets into your thing audit approach.

[35:36] You ask for a general overview of what that means or includes.

[35:40] It states the audit approach qualifications include,

[35:44] for example, adequacy of proposed staffing plan hours

[35:48] and level for various segments of the audit, engagement,

[35:52] adequacy of sampling techniques, and adequacy

[35:56] of analytical procedures.

[35:58] So they may address some of those in their proposals

[36:02] to varying degrees.

[36:03] That would help you assign points

[36:05] to that particular to a category, the audit approach.

[36:09] And the other one is the expertise

[36:12] and experience qualifications.

[36:14] The GFOA handbook indicates can include,

[36:19] for example, past experience and performance

[36:22] on comparable governments.

[36:25] Quality of the firm's professional personnel

[36:29] to be assigned to the engagement and quality of the firm's

[36:33] management support personnel.

[36:35] To be available for technical consultation

[36:38] experience with specific state and federal grant

[36:42] programs and then information technology expertise.

[36:48]

[36:52] Thanks for that, Ralph.

[36:53] Your two categories your two.

[36:55] And then I think in your scoring sheet you also have price.

[36:58] But you were supposed to really focus

[37:00] in the highly qualified ones.

[37:02] You don't want to pick the cheapest.

[37:04] Obviously you want to pick the best.

[37:07] Anywhere now that we can think about where there was

[37:10] a heavy emphasis on GFOA, then I think we would be able to assert

[37:15] that they have a rigor to the process,

[37:18] whether they chose to give us all the depth in the bid or not.

[37:22] Correct is that what I'm taking from your comment

[37:27] and connecting that with gfoa?

[37:28] No Did I take a leap too far.

[37:31] Yeah this is the GFOA.

[37:32] That's the formula for analysis and exploration

[37:36] of how well they do.

[37:37] What they do.

[37:38] Yeah this the adequacy of their I

[37:41] don't have the experience to know whether it's adequate

[37:45] or not, but it's nice to know what the formula is.

[37:47] That's why you have supporting staff who have expertise

[37:51] and that's why they're here.

[37:52] Those are the things you're supposed to look

[37:54] for when you're scoring.

[37:56] It's interesting you went to the GFOA

[37:59] and that's come up several times here.

[38:01] It's new for me.

[38:02] But Devin, during the roadshow, you

[38:04] brought it up on all four meetings and you said,

[38:07] we've had that compliance.

[38:09] And there was one of the eight that popped out at me,

[38:11] and it was the modeling folks, and they made a statement

[38:18] that they're 100% GFOA compliant with all

[38:22] of their comprehensive annual reviews or reviews.

[38:25] I just I captured it too, but I'm also like,

[38:27] it's how to Lie with Statistics.

[38:29] I'm just going to play devil's advocate

[38:30] and say, well, if you don't go for it,

[38:32] then you're not going to get it.

[38:34] So if they're smart enough, they know

[38:37] they will pursue and only and only the ones

[38:42] that they know they can get.

[38:44] So that's why I did see that note too.

[38:47] But I noticed it also with groww and with the Malden folks too.

[38:53] Now, they didn't claim that 100% but I just questioned the 100%

[38:57] without some data behind it.

[38:59] I think one way to look at it is the Florida statutes 218

[39:04] .39 and .391 only goes so far.

[39:11] But then the GFOA handbooks go a little more detail and more

[39:14] technical, and that's where you would go there to delve

[39:20] deeper into the technical.

[39:24] Yeah it's not a legal requirement,

[39:29] but it's a generally accepted accounting practices for

[39:32] government financial officers.

[39:36] Is it important that your team or you and John

[39:41] know the technology that they're using for managing the process,

[39:46] like Reuters.

[39:48] So sharelink is one of the big.

[39:51] I saw sharelink players in that.

[39:53] It's really a to Kathy's point.

[39:56] It's a secure way to pass documents back and forth,

[39:58] but it's also a project management tool.

[40:00] So we're able to put I have assigned this staff

[40:02] member to pull this information and work on this,

[40:05] and so they know who they're working with.

[40:07] A lot of audit firms will use sharelink.

[40:10] James Moore has the previous company that

[40:13] or the previous auditors I used in my past used sharelink

[40:16] as well.

[40:18] To Cathy's point to some of your firms

[40:20] that are utilizing some of the data analysis

[40:23] where they can take all of your expenditures,

[40:26] run it and look for trends, and then ask the questions

[40:29] as to hey, why did this swing this direction

[40:31] or that direction.

[40:34] Those tools are typically not something that we see,

[40:38] but we know they're using them.

[40:40] So those are areas that are helpful and beneficial

[40:44] in the audit process versus them doing manual calculations

[40:48] to say budgeted this.

[40:50] Why did you only spend that.

[40:52] And without utilizing some of those tools,

[40:55] it might speed up the process a little.

[40:57] Yep exactly.

[40:58] OK, I think I saw pro systems pop up a few times.

[41:02] Is Are you familiar with what that is.

[41:05] No OK.

[41:06] It's not one that I'm familiar with.

[41:07] So yeah, definitely saw that a number of times.

[41:10] Then we had the mind bridge, bridges, AI and data sniper pop

[41:15] up, only with cherry calling it out.

[41:17] And then the only other thing I saw with AI was

[41:20] under Maldini with their tech.

[41:22] They just sort of hand gave a hand wave we

[41:25] use AI and then 0 link, right.

[41:28] Yeah that's.

[41:30] Did you pick anything else up.

[41:31] Anyone else with the tech.

[41:33] Who is this guy.

[41:37] Oh, Purvis.

[41:38] Purvis uses trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion AI tech.

[41:46] I didn't see that one, but good.

[41:47] True, true.

[41:48] Leon I haven't heard, obviously.

[41:51] I know all these systems.

[41:52] Yeah I can't pronounce them.

[41:55] Just like I can't pronounce their names.

[41:57] OK well, some of the things that I

[42:00] picked up when I was looking at.

[42:04] Different aspects is Moss seems to be the best value.

[42:09] And like Ralph pointed out, we don't want to necessarily

[42:13] choose based on that.

[42:15] And I think that's why the matrix was pricing lowest.

[42:19] I saw that groww has the FEMA and the beach community

[42:23] experience, and they seem to be a very

[42:26] favorable match for our city based upon their experience.

[42:31] Mike Moss is the one that I put at the very bottom

[42:34] because they just kept talking about their awards

[42:37] in best company to work in.

[42:40] All the marketing things that you pay to play.

[42:44] And I just didn't see any substance in there.

[42:47] The cost comment to just real quick Mike on that I noted.

[42:50] And maybe I'm wrong, but I'll say

[42:52] I think what I noted with them was they were very hour based

[42:56] versus a project based.

[42:57] So it's kind of easy to maybe hit it, as long as you do not

[43:01] want another hour of our time and then

[43:03] it'll just start stacking.

[43:05] So I think you're right, they did appear very cost effective,

[43:08] but they were very contained in the fact

[43:11] that this is what we're going to get versus hey,

[43:15] it's all inclusive and you will get this product unless you

[43:19] choose to do another audit run.

[43:21] But keep going on your and their well their ratings,

[43:24] their hourly wasn't the highest, but it

[43:26] was significantly higher loss.

[43:30] Like they could do the job easier or with less time.

[43:33] And that might be due to their technicals and things like that.

[43:37] Yeah I saw maudlin and Jenkins.

[43:40] They seem to have they came out as my top

[43:45] based upon their experience, their expertise, their audit

[43:49] approach and their pricing.

[43:51] They were my top one.

[43:52] They were my top one as well.

[43:54] How about that.

[43:55] And their laundry list of cities.

[44:00] I have top three.

[44:01] I have top water districts.

[44:03] And it's just heavy in Georgia and Florida regional.

[44:11] So it was I kept coming back to maudlin.

[44:14] And the way the RFP was written, this is a heavy lift for us

[44:20] because we don't do accounting.

[44:22] It's a different language.

[44:25] It is.

[44:26] So I was looking at it through a different lens

[44:28] than what you look at it.

[44:30] But the model in RFP connected with me.

[44:34] I understood and then I looked at the list of the cities

[44:38] and I see Madeira Beach, Marco Island, Longboat

[44:41] Key to your point, Cathy.

[44:44] The barrier islands, the FEMA, the federal.

[44:48] So yeah, that was the one that bubbled up to the top.

[44:52] That was my top.

[44:53] And then Purvis was my second.

[44:56] And the statute says you have to pick

[44:57] no fewer than three firms rank and recommend

[45:00] no fewer than three firms.

[45:02] Groww is my third.

[45:03] Three crore would be my third so of the top three for me

[45:07] of the ones you've said, what I will do,

[45:10] I will take the bid sheets.

[45:12] I will tally all of them and give you the top three.

[45:17] And I'll have that probably later this afternoon

[45:19] or early this evening.

[45:23] I'm going to the doctor right after this,

[45:25] so after I get out of that, I will hope that goes well

[45:27] and get that all taken care of and get

[45:29] that out to Devon so that she can push it out to you folks.

[45:34] And that will be the top three.

[45:35] If you want any of those folks to come in,

[45:38] I will need to know that as soon as possible so we can try to get

[45:40] them scheduled and then get another session

[45:43] scheduled on their calendar.

[45:46] OK OK.

[45:47] My third was Carr, Riggs and Ingram.

[45:50] Believe it or not.

[45:53] John, is there possible to take my second take the top three

[45:57] and do it now at this meeting, or do we have to go away

[45:59] and do it.

[46:01] I don't think is it possible to do the rankings now,

[46:04] today, maybe take a 15 minute break and add them all up

[46:07] and then come back right now.

[46:08] Yeah, let's do that.

[46:09] That way, we won't have to come back.

[46:12] And if there's any issues that come up, we can address them.

[46:16] Good idea Ralph.

[46:16] Well, I'd like to hear maybe before we adjourn, though,

[46:19] on to do that all just brought up Karen Riggs,

[46:22] and we haven't talked about them at all.

[46:24] And I guess I was not as impressed as you all.

[46:29] It looked like a boilerplate, and we had a lot of fun.

[46:32] Well, I like that.

[46:33] They had like 50 counties.

[46:35] They'd been in Florida since 97.

[46:37] They know our space.

[46:38] They've got a Tampa office.

[46:40] There are other partners involved in the mix.

[46:46] They've had long term relationships

[46:48] with their customers and that was

[46:54] part of what led to my question to you earlier about

[46:57] are other services important because they

[46:58] had a whole bunch of other services that they offered.

[47:04] They had a very detailed program of how they would approach this

[47:07] with probably 10 to 15 steps under each

[47:11] of the three different categories of process.

[47:14] From an audit perspective, they did quality checks.

[47:19] They were concerned about our staff's workload

[47:22] and that I thought that was important because of what

[47:25] was in the spreadsheet and in terms of the importance

[47:28] of workload on your team.

[47:31] And then from a cost perspective,

[47:33] they were kind of middle of the road.

[47:36] There's some out of pocket extras,

[47:39] but that was why I went with them.

[47:42] And so sorry, the two that everyone was agreeing on which

[47:46] top two.

[47:47] And then this is for the maudlin and Jenkins

[47:49] and then car and rigs.

[47:52] And then the third I thought we had no rigs was

[47:55] a new addition just right now.

[47:57] Oh did you we talked about Purvis was one of the ones

[48:00] that you had.

[48:01] Purvis is where I differed.

[48:03] OK Purvis is where you're differing.

[48:05] So the Purvis grow and Maldini were the ones I had.

[48:08] But you're.

[48:09] You're saying no to purvis?

[48:11] Yes to CAR.

[48:12] And you're right.

[48:14] Well, no, I like Purvis.

[48:15] They were my number two.

[48:16] So what we need to do is I need to tally all the sheets,

[48:21] and then we can just.

[48:23] Cathy hasn't done your numbers.

[48:25] Now, if you want, before you turn them in.

[48:26] Based on the discussion you just had.

[48:28] Sure right.

[48:29] I just wanted to hear some of the other things.

[48:31] So we're with Grow, I guess.

[48:34] Have we talked about grow.

[48:37] I had grow as number 6 and the Reason being is just price OK.

[48:45] And that's the last thing I'm looking at right now.

[48:47] But I hear what you're saying on the price.

[48:51] But there I gave them a 50 and a 30 on the experience.

[48:56] Got it.

[48:56] So that's why it's all falling apart for you is on the price.

[48:58] Got it.

[48:59] From a contractual basis.

[49:01] Is this a five year contract or is this a one year with right

[49:04] to revisit second and third.

[49:06] So with auditors it every year is a separate engagement letter.

[49:11] So they operate differently where yes, we are looking

[49:15] at a five year engagement.

[49:16] But every year we bring a new engagement

[49:19] letter to the city commission for them to say, yep.

[49:22] Great so it doesn't hold for the whole five years,

[49:25] if that makes sense.

[49:26] So if the first year goes fine.

[49:30] John, you're not putting an RFP out for the second year.

[49:32] Correct Correct.

[49:34] You can extend each year.

[49:35] OK want to.

[49:36] Or you can go out again.

[49:37] You can go no longer than five years.

[49:39] And Mike, did you want to add any other color

[49:44] to any of the other ones we did or didn't talk.

[49:46] The thing that stood out with Purvis gray

[49:49] is a lot of four municipalities once again.

[49:53]

[49:56] Florida governmental auditing and regulatory requirements

[49:59] stood out in what they were saying there.

[50:03] And they're also the GFOA and ACE for reporting compliant.

[50:11] Again, can you buy that qualification.

[50:16] I don't believe you can.

[50:17] I think that's something that you have to earn.

[50:20] You do have to earn that.

[50:21] Another component is if any of them

[50:24] serve on any of the GASB boards, that's usually a good sign, too.

[50:28] Oh, somebody did that.

[50:29] Who was that.

[50:31] Because of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board is

[50:33] who puts out all of the different pronouncements

[50:35] and says that's really the governing

[50:38] agency that you cannot buy.

[50:40] That is, they come out and they say,

[50:43] here's the rule and the regulation around that.

[50:45] Implement it.

[50:46] So it's a positive if there's any

[50:48] of them that were on a Gatsby board

[50:51] or if they referenced Gatsby.

[50:56] And just to throw this at some of my notes,

[50:58] I'm looking at my notes here on the modeling of Jenkins.

[51:03] I'm kind of a nerd, so I made a note

[51:06] on a free continuing education.

[51:09] Is that important to you and staff.

[51:11] Absolutely anytime we can get free education

[51:13] is the firm puts on the educational moments

[51:20] that they do it themselves, which I thought

[51:22] which one was that modeling.

[51:24] And Kathy, to your point, the Muni bonds

[51:32] that experience with Muni bonds, which I thought was a nice plus.

[51:36] Yeah and their total hours for the engagement.

[51:42] 300 hours.

[51:43] Partner hours at 50-50 hours and the partner rate is 350 an hour,

[51:48] which is not the highest at all.

[51:51] Yeah, that was very reasonable.

[51:52] And the manager rates 275.

[51:55] So the partner rate.

[51:57] Manager rate it's not.

[51:59] It's more like reality check going on here right.

[52:02] Yeah absolutely.

[52:04] And then finally on that note, it's

[52:07] really interesting because we say growth

[52:09] is so much higher on the price.

[52:11] But their partner and manager rates are significantly lower.

[52:16] So it made me question whether or not

[52:20] we have apples to apples with the hours

[52:23] that they're really committing to this contract.

[52:25] And maybe some of this is.

[52:29] Yeah anyhow because we look at the total all in value.

[52:32] And I think it is just a question of I guess,

[52:35] is this truly all inclusive.

[52:39] Yeah the liability insurance not to pick nits here

[52:42] but the liability insurance coverage for modeling

[52:45] is $2 million per incident, where

[52:47] everyone else is at 1 million.

[52:48] Hopefully won't have to use that but so.

[52:52]

[52:55] Well that was the top three that stood out to me

[52:57] were modeling Jenkins car and rig and Purvis and gray.

[53:02] Those were my top three.

[53:04]

[53:07] Well, do we want to give our papers.

[53:09] Yeah do you want to crunch the numbers there

[53:13] in a room full of auditors.

[53:14] I need a minute.

[53:16] All right.

[53:18] Thank you.

[53:19] We're taking a recess.

[53:22] How's 10 minutes.

[53:23] Sure thank you 10 minute recess.

[53:26] Thank you.

[53:28] I know John does have a hard.

[53:29]

[1:07:04] With a total of 345.

[1:07:07] That's a cumulative score for experience

[1:07:10] and expertise, audit approach and pricing

[1:07:12] from four individuals.

[1:07:15] The second is modeling and Jenkins with 3:44.

[1:07:19] There's only a point difference.

[1:07:21] And the third is groww and associates with 307.

[1:07:28] So it's 3:45 to three 44 to 307.

[1:07:33] From there they go.

[1:07:36] Cherry Burke.

[1:07:37] Burke Burkardt.

[1:07:39]

[1:07:42] C biz and Carr.

[1:07:43] Riggs and Ingram are both tied at 5:00 o'clock at 294.

[1:07:49] Rivero, gordimer and company 292 ranked sixth,

[1:07:54] and Moss, Cruz and associates are ranked seventh at 206.

[1:08:00] What was Purvis's number.

[1:08:02] Purvis's number.

[1:08:03] 345 one was number one.

[1:08:06] They were ranked first at 345.

[1:08:09] And there's one point between the 21.

[1:08:11] Yes that's funny.

[1:08:14] Pretty much.

[1:08:14] And I will go back and verify all

[1:08:16] these just to make sure because I don't have my actual keypad.

[1:08:23] I don't have my keypad.

[1:08:24] It messes with me.

[1:08:25] So I'll go back and make sure everything.

[1:08:27] But right now, that's the ranking that I've

[1:08:28] got at this point in time and could

[1:08:30] we suggest and as a discussion, should

[1:08:35] we look at this given the start goal is less than a month away.

[1:08:39] This does go before commission.

[1:08:43] It would maybe seem wise to create,

[1:08:48] like we talked about, maybe that brief summary of those top two.

[1:08:52] And I guess if you're saying by law or requirement is you have

[1:08:55] to talk about three, you have to rank

[1:08:58] and recommend at least three, but you have

[1:08:59] rankings now for all of them.

[1:09:01] So we'll probably OK.

[1:09:02] So if we have three, I just thought maybe

[1:09:04] for the Commission's sake they should actually

[1:09:07] hear from them versus maybe insert

[1:09:09] another meeting with us to hear from them because they

[1:09:13] really have to hire them.

[1:09:14] I don't how did especially between the top two.

[1:09:19] Yeah, the top two.

[1:09:20] Right Yes, John.

[1:09:21] But before you have to leave for your appointment.

[1:09:24] So we've got one and two that are pretty much the same.

[1:09:28] And then the next highest is about 10% lower.

[1:09:34] Yes, sir.

[1:09:36] Because you've got three 4345 and then the third place.

[1:09:42] 307 I think you said.

[1:09:45] So that's about a 10% gap.

[1:09:50] So there's a fairly good separation between one 2

[1:09:53] and the rest of the.

[1:09:55] I just feel for the commissioners

[1:09:57] having to do what we did.

[1:10:00] Yeah, I do too.

[1:10:00] That's a lot of work.

[1:10:02] Yeah and they're already they've got all these other things

[1:10:04] they have to focus on.

[1:10:05] So I wonder if there's a way for us to put

[1:10:07] the why we ranked those three.

[1:10:11] Yeah in summary for them.

[1:10:13] Yeah Ralph, why don't we come up with AI think it's

[1:10:17] a great idea as to why I chose who I chose.

[1:10:21] Oh, sorry.

[1:10:22] Ralph was just saying, if we wanted to,

[1:10:24] we could invite the top 2 to a interview with you all.

[1:10:29] They could make presentations.

[1:10:31] You could ask them questions, and you

[1:10:32] can make your final decision.

[1:10:33] Is there time to do that.

[1:10:36] If you guys are willing to do a special meeting, we're willing.

[1:10:40] I don't see a need for it.

[1:10:42] I don't either their proposals were so thorough.

[1:10:46] They're both a good option is what I'm hearing.

[1:10:48] If the commission has to be presented three.

[1:10:52] Yes then we have identified, I think clearly three.

[1:10:57] It's a shame we don't have one.

[1:10:58] That's a 10% gap to the rest of them.

[1:11:00] Yeah, I mean, I don't to me that the 1, 2,

[1:11:05] 3 with the point scores.

[1:11:06] So the commission can see how close 1 and 2 were

[1:11:08] and maybe with their comments and narrative

[1:11:10] of how we landed here.

[1:11:12] Sure, we could just do the note list of what each of us

[1:11:15] like with one or the other, and just how much of that

[1:11:19] is captured in the notes.

[1:11:20] Yeah of our discussion.

[1:11:23] That's a Jenny question.

[1:11:24] Like could we get could we just give them that

[1:11:26] and then they can read it or.

[1:11:28] Reading transcript is recorded.

[1:11:30] Yeah versus spending a lot of time building a document.

[1:11:36] I could pull a summary from the meeting transcript

[1:11:39] if that would work.

[1:11:39] And then can we review it or is that allowed as I think

[1:11:45] as long as you don't reply all.

[1:11:47] Is that correct, Jenny.

[1:11:49] I'm sorry, what was the question.

[1:11:50] If I sent out, here's what I captured from the meeting minute

[1:11:53] or from the meeting transcripts to this group.

[1:11:56] And then they could just reply directly to me

[1:11:58] with any feedback individually.

[1:12:00] Individually OK.

[1:12:01] So we can do that.

[1:12:02] OK perfect.

[1:12:03] OK that'd be great.

[1:12:04] Why don't we move ahead.

[1:12:05] By doing that, you'll give us something.

[1:12:07] What time frame would you like.

[1:12:11] I will probably have something maybe for you

[1:12:13] all to react to tomorrow.

[1:12:16] And then if everybody wants to review those comments,

[1:12:21] take a few days.

[1:12:22] And let's have something back to Devin

[1:12:25] by Monday because I'm targeting the 21,

[1:12:29] September 21 for that meeting for them to make a decision.

[1:12:32] So for the commission for that one.

[1:12:35] Jenny, what's the agenda deadline for the 21st

[1:12:38] commission meeting.

[1:12:39] Or like the agenda memo and back up.

[1:12:43] I'd have to look that up.

[1:12:44] I'm pulling it up.

[1:12:45] Hold on.

[1:12:45] It's typically a week and a half.

[1:12:48] I think 9, 10.

[1:12:51] So that's next Friday.

[1:12:53] Thursday, Thursday.

[1:12:54] Next Thursday.

[1:12:55] So that's plenty.

[1:12:55] Yeah, that.

[1:12:56] That should work.

[1:12:57] OK Monday is Labor Day.

[1:13:00] Yeah Tuesday.

[1:13:01] So maybe end of day Tuesday.

[1:13:02] Yeah you guys could do Tuesday.

[1:13:03] That's fine.

[1:13:04] OK yeah.

[1:13:05] Thanks for the.

[1:13:06] Thanks for the homework assignment, dad.

[1:13:08] Enjoy your holiday weekend.

[1:13:09] But do some work, too.

[1:13:11] Yeah All right, so let's get those.

[1:13:14] Just all we're looking for is we're just

[1:13:17] going to summarize the minutes.

[1:13:19] Yes and the top three for just the top three

[1:13:21] I mean you can add some commentary for the

[1:13:24] below the line I guess kind of.

[1:13:25] But we're really focusing on why the top three were OK.

[1:13:28] We cared about that.

[1:13:30] We kind of coalesced around two.

[1:13:32] Yes, that's good.

[1:13:34] That is good.

[1:13:35] Yeah you guys did a great job.

[1:13:37] All right.

[1:13:37] It was fun I agree actually.

[1:13:40] It really was and maybe feedback for the next year's process

[1:13:45] if we could get some sense of these

[1:13:48] are staff priorities for things.

[1:13:52] As we look into this I don't something

[1:13:54] that lets us look at this through a little bit of a lens.

[1:13:58] We were going at it kind of blind.

[1:13:59] Not that we won't still look at it independently,

[1:14:02] but would we be looking at this annually.

[1:14:04] No, no.

[1:14:06] All right.

[1:14:06] Well that's helpful.

[1:14:07] So five years from now then.

[1:14:09] Yeah there you go.

[1:14:10] I mean, unless something's falling apart.

[1:14:12] I suppose we should put a pin in this just to say,

[1:14:14] do we continue.

[1:14:15] Because all of these were on a one year

[1:14:17] with the renewal of up to five years.

[1:14:19] It's a five year with a possibility of five year,

[1:14:22] an additional five year.

[1:14:24] But each year, they have to give a letter to the commission

[1:14:28] stating a letter of engagement.

[1:14:31] It's a letter of engagement.

[1:14:32] So we don't follow the typical contract

[1:14:35] standards with auditors.

[1:14:36] They give us their engagement letter,

[1:14:37] we present it to the commission, the commission signs it,

[1:14:40] and we and that's how we operate with them for that fiscal year.

[1:14:43] And when we negotiate the contract,

[1:14:46] we typically write some provisions in there

[1:14:48] where the city commission can change

[1:14:50] auditors really at any time.

[1:14:54] Yeah OK.

[1:14:55] We're not going to bind future commissions.

[1:14:57] OK well, so then let's just put a pin in it that we

[1:15:00] are saying it is possible then.

[1:15:02] And when we discuss this again, I

[1:15:05] would say if there's significant deviation from the contract,

[1:15:08] that's when it would come up where we might want

[1:15:11] to engage again on the topic to provide input to the commission.

[1:15:16] Yeah and I'm just saying, how could we

[1:15:18] be more attuned to assessing these types of contracts

[1:15:23] with the staff based on oh, technology I is super important.

[1:15:28] Things that maybe emerging that we know we

[1:15:31] want to integrate differently into our next five

[1:15:35] years or what.

[1:15:36] That's what I was thinking like that would be helpful.

[1:15:39] And yeah, and this is the first time this has been put out now.

[1:15:44] And I believe it's 10 years.

[1:15:46] So a long time.

[1:15:47] It's going back to.

[1:15:49] Yeah procurement dark ages for the city.

[1:15:54] So this was something sort of new for all.

[1:15:57] Lucky us.

[1:15:58] Yeah and I know you probably have to hop but I'm channeling

[1:16:04] some of the conversations we've been hearing as we're going

[1:16:07] through the budget discussion or even over the years,

[1:16:10] like with the new city team, to say we have some.

[1:16:14] There are some express concerns about way money may or may not

[1:16:18] have been handled from previous administrations,

[1:16:20] where this audit team can help us to provide more

[1:16:27] of a community communication, call it the 30,000 foot view,

[1:16:34] summaries.

[1:16:35] I think that would be something that I think

[1:16:38] our community would value.

[1:16:41] And I don't know where that lines up with what

[1:16:43] we're asking of them, because there's a level of density

[1:16:46] here that we know or we take responsibility

[1:16:50] with as part of the committee and with your team.

[1:16:52] But how do we maybe help think about ways

[1:16:55] to communicate this kind of information, to go back out,

[1:16:59] to bid this at any other time.

[1:17:02] One takeaway for me would be to engage age.

[1:17:07] All of you here to give any input on what

[1:17:12] you would like to see as well.

[1:17:15] At that point in time.

[1:17:16] OK OK.

[1:17:17] Thank you.

[1:17:18] Which would be a help for me.

[1:17:20] More information for me is just that much better.

[1:17:23] It's easier to make informed decisions.

[1:17:25] Well, you can see we're not quiet people.

[1:17:29] All right.

[1:17:30] Do we have any other comments for the official record.

[1:17:34] Yes well, I note that the GFOA best practice

[1:17:37] is to do a multi-year agreement of at least five years

[1:17:40] in duration to allow for greater continuity

[1:17:43] and help minimize the potential for disruption

[1:17:46] in connection with the independent audit.

[1:17:48] And can help reduce audit costs by allowing auditors to recover

[1:17:52] a certain start up costs over several years,

[1:17:54] rather than in a single year.

[1:17:57] So we can do that five year.

[1:17:58] It's permissible.

[1:18:00] OK, that's good information.

[1:18:03] Anybody else see the audits.

[1:18:05] So you'll see if you like them at the end

[1:18:07] to as they're getting prepared they'll be

[1:18:09] coming back to this committee.

[1:18:11] So every year you'll see that the prior year's audit

[1:18:15] and see if you think they were prepared.

[1:18:18] Well thank you.

[1:18:20] Thank you John.

[1:18:21] Thank you John.

[1:18:21] Thank you.

[1:18:22] You're welcome.

[1:18:22] Yeah unrelated to the audit conversation,

[1:18:24] maybe we could touch on next steps in general

[1:18:28] with the budget process.

[1:18:30] Sure and timeline.

[1:18:32] So September 9 will be the first public hearing

[1:18:35] at o'clock PM here.

[1:18:37] And so we will go over the commission

[1:18:41] will make a decision about millage.

[1:18:43] I thought that was the 21st.

[1:18:46] I was told they will get the results of the survey then.

[1:18:50] But decision was supposed to be the 21st.

[1:18:52] So let me check the we got budget and then millage right.

[1:18:55] So the budget yeah the ninth that's a Wednesday.

[1:18:59] That's tentative I think it was 9 8 at six.

[1:19:04]

[1:19:08] Hi, John.

[1:19:08] Thank you.

[1:19:09] You're welcome.

[1:19:09] Thank you.

[1:19:11] I have it on Wednesday.

[1:19:13] The budget commission meeting.

[1:19:14] The ninth.

[1:19:16] Yeah we have tentative and then finals and then we have budget

[1:19:18] and then we have millage.

[1:19:19] So they will.

[1:19:21] So it'll be first reading of the ordinance

[1:19:23] to establish the millage rate for the fiscal year.

[1:19:26] And then what we do when they establish that is we

[1:19:28] advertise that and then we'll have second hearing.

[1:19:31] So first hearing is September 9, o'clock PM here.

[1:19:34] We had to move it to a Wednesday because we

[1:19:35] can't be on the same day as the school district or the County.

[1:19:39] So we'll do first reading of adopting

[1:19:43] the budget and first reading of establishing the millage rate.

[1:19:46] So they will get all of the survey information

[1:19:49] and the budget road exercise content

[1:19:53] at that meeting to help make their decision.

[1:19:55] So the 9 will be when millage decision is made.

[1:20:01] Yep we'll prepare the millage rate to be

[1:20:05] what the trim notices said.

[1:20:07] So the 3.6175 and then the commission

[1:20:10] has the opportunity to they can't

[1:20:13] go up but they can come down.

[1:20:16] And then what's the difference on the 21st.

[1:20:18] What is that.

[1:20:19] That's just second.

[1:20:20] That's second reading and final adoption.

[1:20:21] That's usually a faster process through the ordinance where

[1:20:25] unless there is any changes that occurred at the first reading,

[1:20:29] then it just rolls through pretty seamlessly.

[1:20:32] Unless Ralph has anything else to add on the ordinance process

[1:20:35] change the second reading.

[1:20:36] So it's important to go to both, right.

[1:20:38]

[1:20:41] Before we adjourn.

[1:20:42] Is that all you had, Cathy.

[1:20:44] Yeah other than I mean, I thought they were great.

[1:20:47] Yeah great to do these roadshows.

[1:20:49] Thank you to the team.

[1:20:51] Overall, I thought however, this turns out

[1:20:55] I just hope that this is maybe becomes

[1:20:57] AI don't know we might career called it a best known method.

[1:21:01] For the way that you just engage a community on a conversation.

[1:21:06] And I don't know what the I'm going to call it.

[1:21:09] The next steps are from that, but I would think that we've

[1:21:13] got some traction and conversations

[1:21:16] around the importance of how we're unpeeling the onion

[1:21:20] or climbing the mountain, as you guys shared.

[1:21:23] And I think this type of whether however you use this committee

[1:21:28] going forward, I would in talking with Camden

[1:21:32] to love to make sure we keep a fresh in our minds how we are

[1:21:39] tackling, especially the critical capital

[1:21:45] improvement projects and an understanding of appreciation

[1:21:47] of assets as a constant dialogue that keeps

[1:21:52] a drumbeat throughout the year.

[1:21:54] And it shouldn't just be a once a year thing, because first

[1:21:57] of all, it doesn't.

[1:21:58] It isn't a once a year thing.

[1:21:59] It's happening and we're learning and growing.

[1:22:01] So I just I don't know what the answer is to that,

[1:22:04] but I guess I just put a plea to say like, can we create

[1:22:07] some type if you all agree, like a quarterly cadence or something

[1:22:11] on this type of dialogue, and with Camden and your team on how

[1:22:14] things are evolving and getting healthier where we see

[1:22:18] some unhealthiness, I think just having that good dialogue would

[1:22:20] be useful around budget spend about our budget

[1:22:27] and how we're tracking like the 30% 36, whatever,

[1:22:30] the gray and the blue bars.

[1:22:31] I think it's about how we've got this mountain of I don't 200

[1:22:37] million and we're tackling it or we've got solutions

[1:22:41] to addressing some of this.

[1:22:43] But new things came on that we're going

[1:22:44] to be looking at next year.

[1:22:46] I mean, let's just not wait until June of next year

[1:22:49] to notice some of these things.

[1:22:50] And if we do increase the mileage, what.

[1:22:54] And we know where we're going to focus it, what are we spending.

[1:22:59] How are we doing.

[1:22:59] Yeah, that's the next question.

[1:23:01] If there is any increase.

[1:23:02] Yeah, yeah.

[1:23:03] And you guys did a great job putting the road show on.

[1:23:05] You really did.

[1:23:06] You had a very short amount of time.

[1:23:09] There was a lot of education.

[1:23:12] I noticed there was a lot of head folks were like OK.

[1:23:15] And they were starting to get it.

[1:23:16] Yeah I think that was you did a great job with that.

[1:23:18] All of you guys did that.

[1:23:19] So thank you.

[1:23:21] What we could do to Cathy's point,

[1:23:24] typically, I think our meeting in November

[1:23:26] is an after action of the budget.

[1:23:27] But we could maybe put together staff,

[1:23:30] could put together a calendar of things

[1:23:32] that you might want to work on for the next fiscal year,

[1:23:35] whether it's our financial reserve policies,

[1:23:39] quarterly redoing the budget to actuals

[1:23:41] income statements, balance sheets coming to you

[1:23:45] so I can put something together to give

[1:23:46] you something to react to.

[1:23:48] And then if there's other items on there,

[1:23:50] let's add asset management.

[1:23:52] Let's add other items for discussion.

[1:23:55] We can try to calendar that out so

[1:23:57] that you know what the plan is.

[1:24:00] Throughout throughout the next year.

[1:24:03] One other piece that we have to comply with starting January

[1:24:07] 1 from the state office, is we will have to do a 10%

[1:24:12] budget cut exercise every year.

[1:24:15] We have to post all salaries, titles, names and positions

[1:24:21] on a quarterly basis, and we have

[1:24:23] to publish our documents sooner than we ever have

[1:24:28] had to for our budget process.

[1:24:30] So I think those will be critical areas that we work

[1:24:32] with you all in this group.

[1:24:34] But as far as the education campaign, I mean,

[1:24:36] I loved getting out there and talking with the residents.

[1:24:39] So any way we can increase that, shore it up and hear from them,

[1:24:43] I think it's wonderful to do that.

[1:24:46] So thanks.

[1:24:48] And if I can borrow your budget audit cycle

[1:24:52] and for us look at spending saving.

[1:24:57] We're about to close the spending cycle.

[1:25:00] I'd like for us to open the saving cycle to your point,

[1:25:05] there's been a lot on social media about where

[1:25:08] are we cutting costs.

[1:25:10] If there's nothing else to cut, so be it.

[1:25:13] But let us know that you've tried.

[1:25:15] And here's where you looked.

[1:25:17] And that's a preamble to the 10% Absolutely and for January.

[1:25:24] So I would like to see that savings

[1:25:27] like to rotate out of the spending,

[1:25:30] rotate into the savings.

[1:25:32] Sure so.

[1:25:35] All right.

[1:25:36] If there's nothing else.

[1:25:38] Meeting adjourned.

[1:25:39] Thank you.

[1:25:40] Thank you.

[1:25:42]

Finance & Budget Review Committee Special Meeting

Agenda

Transcript