Fresno Logo
File #: ID#15-459    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Action Item Status: Passed
File created: 5/22/2015 In control: City Council
On agenda: 6/11/2015 Final action: 6/11/2015
Title: Award Independent Audit Contract to Brown Armstrong and authorize the Finance Director/Controller to negotiate and execute the contract for services
Sponsors: Finance Department
Attachments: 1. BidEval.pdf, 2. Audit 2016 RFP Evaluation Matrix ml.pdf, 3. Audit Committee Report ml kj.pdf, 4. Sample Contract.pdf
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL



June 11, 2015

FROM: MICHAEL LIMA, Finance Director/Controller
Finance Department

BY: KAREN M. BRADLEY, Assistant City Finance Director/Controller
Finance Department

SUBJECT
Title
Award Independent Audit Contract to Brown Armstrong and authorize the Finance Director/Controller to negotiate and execute the contract for services

Body
RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends that the City of Fresno engage Brown Armstrong as the City's independent outside auditor to audit various City financial documents for the fiscal years 2015 through and including fiscal year 2018 (four years) at a not to exceed fee (inclusive of indirect expenses, i.e. lodging and subsistence) in the total amount of $700,995.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Section 1216 of the City of Fresno's Charter requires the City to employ a public accountant who shall perform an independent audit of the City's books, public records, inventories, and reports. It is City policy to periodically seek Request for Proposals (RFP) with respect to ongoing professional contracts. On February 2, 2015 an RFP was prepared. It was directed to seven specific public accounting firms, as well as published on the City of Fresno's website through Planet Bids. Thirteen proposals were disseminated, with five firms responding to the RFP.

Each of the responding firms was evaluated on responsiveness to the criteria outlined in the RFP, qualifications and experience with similar municipal engagements, detail audit plan presented and proposed fees.

The Audit RFP Evaluation Committee (Committee) determined that two proposals were non-responsive as they did not adhere to the RFP's requirements. The three remaining responding firms were selected by the Committee for live interviews and formal presentations. Based upon the results of the RFP process and the results of the live interviews, the Committee made the decision to request Last, Best and Final (LBF) fee solicitations ...

Click here for full text