[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]