Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/15/1994, C-2 - AWARD OF AUDITING SERVICES CONTRACT IIIyAII� m�I IpI�III MEETING DATE: lul ��IIIII APNI VIII city Or San LUIS OBI SPO II COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT ITEM NUM13ER:/1_� FROM: William C. Statler, Director of Finance 1V c;�f Prepared by: Carolyn Dominguez, Accounting Manager C SUBJECT: AWARD OF AUDITING SERVICES CONTRACT CAO RECOMMENDATION Award the auditing services contract to KPMG Peat Marwick and authorize the Mayor to execute the agreement. OVERVIEW After an extensive evaluation process, we are recommending that Peat Marwick be retained as the City's independent auditors. This recommendation is based on three key factors: ■ Exceptionally well qualified ■ History of quality service to the City ■ Competitive fees - of the three finalists, they quoted the lowest fees. This type of selection is very difficult, especially when all of the firms considered possess the minimum qualifications necessary to perform the audit work required, and when each of them would bring unique strengths and weaknesses to the audit work. In balancing these factors,when fees are competitive and past service has been good, we believe that the City's best interests are served when continuity is maintained with its auditors. DISCUSSION With Council approval on January 18, 1994, the City issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for auditing services which was sent to all "Big Six" accounting firms as well as any other firm expressing an interest in providing auditing services to the City. In addition, a notice requesting proposals was published in the Telegram Tribune. Key elements of the workscope and selection process include: ■ Scope of services Audit work will include: - City general purpose financial statements - Single Audit Act financial and compliance report - Transportation Development Act (TDA) financial and compliance report - Whale Rock Commission annual financial statements - Central Coast Cities Self-Insurance Fund (CCCSIF) annual financial statements ■ Review process. Eight proposals were received, which were extensively reviewed and rated by a committee composed of the Assistant CAO, Director of Finance, and Accounting Manager. Provided in Exhibit A is a summary of the proposals received. Bidders were evaluated for general and technical qualifications, experience and expertise, their approach to performing the audit, and price. Provided in Exhibit B is the checklist used by the raters in performing this review. Oral interviews were c a- � ������►b�i►���IIIIIIIII�p1acity of san Luis oBispo annind COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT conducted for three finalists by a panel composed of the President of the CCCSIF, the Assistant CAO, the Director of Finance, the Accounting Manager, the Revenue Manager; and the Accounting Supervisor. The finalists were asked to discuss their recent experience and performance on comparable government engagements and their resource capability and qualifications to serve as the auditors for both the City and the CCCSIF. ■ Evaluation results As summarized below, Peat Marwick rated as the best overall candidate based on the following evaluation factors: I Municipal government experience and expertise. Peat Marwick is the largest public sector auditing and consulting firm in the country. The Los Angeles office serves over 30 California cities as clients, most of whom are GFOA and CSMFO award winners. In addition to San Luis Obispo, they also audit two other central coast cities. Insurance experience and expertise. With extensive insurance industry experience, Peat Marwick is the candidate most qualified to audit and provide consulting services to the Central Coast Cities Self Insurance Fund. They have an actuary on staff to provide the necessary review of actuarial assumptions which are critical to a fairly presented financial statements of an insurance pool. The CCCSIF has often relied upon Peat Marwick's expertise related to insurance matters and emerging insurance pool issues. i Technical resources. In addition to their vast auditing staff, Peat Marwick has specialized technical groups available as a resource to the City in the areas of retirement and employee benefits, information systems management, and securities offerings. I Service. We have been satisfied with the level of service Peat Marwick has provided in the past. They have been responsive to our needs, staffed the audit with knowledgeable professionals,and successfully met our audit completion requirements. Bond market. Peat Marwick's Los Angeles office assisted over 40 governmental entities in issuing bonds or certificates of participation during the past year. Financial statements audited by a "Big Six" firm are often viewed more favorably by rating agencies. Competitive fees. Of the three finalists interviewed, Peat Marwick quoted the lowest fees as summarized below: General Fund All Services Services Peat Marwick $35,000 $54,600 Glenn, Burdette, Phillips & Bryson 37,000 55,100 Maze and Associates 43,825 58,445 Current Fees $38,000 $59,500 0-a- ��������nu►�illllllllli°�u���i�lll My Of San L.AIS OBISpO Mrw COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT CONCURRENCES The President of the Central Coast Cities Self Insurance Fund (Margaret Vicars, Director of Finance/City of Pismo Beach) concurs with this recommendation. . FISCAL IMPACT Audit services for 1993-94 total $54,600 compared with previous fees of$ 59,500 as follows: General Fund 1993-94 1992-93 City general purpose financial statements $31,000 34,000 Single Audit Act financial and compliance report 4,000 4,000 Transportation Development Act (TDA) financial and compliance report 4,500 5,000 Whale Rock Commission annual financial statements 3,000 3,000 Central Coast Cities Self Insurance Fund annual financial statements 12.100 13.50 Total $54,600 $59,500 ALTERNATIVES As noted when we requested authorization to request proposals, the City does not have a formal policy encouraging the rotation of auditors. Through the internal rotation of audit staff and the use of concurring partner review, the legitimate desire for a "fresh look" can still be achieved while maintaining auditor continuity. In fact from an internal control perspective, it has been the industry experience that problem areas are more frequently uncovered by auditors when there has been continuity rather than changeover. Overall, in considering auditor services, technical competence, service, and fees should be the determining factors in making this decision, not the desire to make a change for change's sake. Nevertheless, in the event that the Council prefers to see a change in the City's audit firm, we recommend the firm that finished second in the evaluation process, Maze and Associates, be awarded the contract. Maze and Associates is a highly qualified firm that has developed a special niche in the municipal auditing market. The majority of their clients are California cities (25) and risk pools (4). In the ratings, Maze and Associates were very competitive with Peat Marwick in technical ability and expertise; it was primarily the price of their bid that resulted in their second place ranking. SUMMARY Upon expiration of the current contract for auditing services, the City issued an RFP and received eight proposals. After extensive review, three firms were selected to participate in an oral interview. Peat Marwick emerged from the evaluation process as the firm we believe will provide the highest quality of professional services required at the best competitive price. Attachment. Agreement for auditing services with KPMG Peat Marwick A. Summa1y of audit proposals B. Audit proposal evaluation checklist c-a- AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into in the City of San Luis Obispo on this day of . by and between the CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, a municipal corporation, hereinafter referred to as City, and KPMG PEAT MARWICK, hereinafter referred to as Contractor. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, on January 19, 1994, City requested proposals for auditing services per Specification No. 93-68. WHEREAS,pursuant to said request,Contractor submitted a proposal which was accepted by City for said services. NOW THEREFORE,in consideration of their mutual promises,obligations,and covenants hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall be from the date this Agreement is made and entered, as first written above, until acceptance or completion of the annual audit for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1996. 2. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE. City Specification No.93-68 and Contractor's proposal dated February 11, 1994 are hereby incorporated in and made a part of this Agreement. 3. CITY'S OBLIGATIONS. For providing auditing services as specified in this Agreement, City will pay and Contractor.shall receive the amounts stated in the proposal hereto and incorporated into this Agreement. 4. CONTRACTOR'S OBLIGATIONS. For and in consideration of the payments and agreements hereinbefore mentioned to be made and performed by City, Contractor agrees with City to do everything required by this Agreement and said specifications. 5. AMENDMENTS. Any amendment,modification,or variation from the terms of this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be effective only upon approval by the Council of the City. 6. COMPLETE AGREEMENT. This written Agreement, including all writings specifically incorporated herein by reference, shall constitute the complete agreement between the parties hereto. No oral agreement, understanding,or representation not reduced to writing and specifically incorporated herein shall be of any force or effect, nor shall any such oral agreement, understanding, or representation be binding upon the parties hereto. 7. NOTICE. All written notices to the parties hereto shall be sent by United States mail,postage prepaid by registered or certified mail addressed as follows: City City Clerk City of San Luis Obispo P.O. Box 8100 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Contractor KPMG Peat Marwick 725 South Figueroa Street Los Angeles, CA 90017 8. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE AGREEMENT. Both City and Contractor do covenant that each individual executing this agreement on behalf of each party is a person duly authorized and empowered to execute Agreements for such party. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this instrument to be executed the day and year first above written. ATTEST: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO, A Municipal Corporation By: Diane Gladwell, City Clerk Peg Pinard, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: r e y G or ity Attorney CONTRACTOR By: By: �-a-s Summary of Audit Proposals Exhibit A General Information 1993-94 Audit Fees General Fund All Firm Location Services Services Finalists KMPG Peat Marwick* Los Angeles 35,500 54,600 Glenn Burdette Phillips & Bryson San Luis Obispo 37,000 55,100 Maze & Associates Walnut Creek 43,825 58,445 Other Proposals Coopers & Lybrand* Los Angeles 39,950 62,500 Brown Armstrong Randall & Reyes Bakersfield 32,145 48,629 Daniels Phillips Vaughn & Bock Bakersfield 43,350 59,950 Macias and Miranda Sacramento 30,000 51,500 RJM Miranda & Company Santa Ana 33,500 52,000 "Big S&'accounting firm Current Audit Services KMPG Peat Marwick Los Angeles 38,0001 59,500 Summary of Audit Services General Fund Services • General purpose financial statements • Single audit act financial and compliance reports Other Services • Whale Rock Commission financial statements • Transportation development act financial and compliance reports • Central Coast Cities Self Insurance Fund financial statements gmuditsum �-a-0 Exhibit B AUDIT PROPOSAL EVALUATIOI. _rIEET Firm Name Total Score Possible General Qualifications 1. A statement that the firm is independent and licensed to practice in California 1 2. The firm's professional personnel have received adequate continuing education within the preceding two years,focusing on local government auditing. j 3 3. The bidder has no conflict of interest with regard to any other work performed by the firm for the City. 1 4. The bidder included a copy of its last external quality control review report. 2 5. The bidder followed the instructions in the RFP: — Limited the proposal to 30 pages 1 — Included the Proposal Submittal Summary form 2 — Included one Schedule of Professional Fees and Expenses for each Financial Report required 5 Total Score — General Qualifications 15' Expertise and Experience 6. The bidder demonstrates recent experience and performance on comparable government engagements(instructions limited to 5 engagements) 2 — Bidder should have included audits conducted within the last 5 years 1 — Recent experience performing city audits 5 — Recent experience performing audits of self—insurance pools(7PA's) 5 — Recent experience performing TDA audits 3 — Recent experience performing Single Audits 2 — For each engagement bidder should have included: Total staff hours 1 Total Partner hours 1 Date of engagement 1 Scope of work 1 Contact name and phone number i 7. Statements supporting the quality of the professional personnel assigned to this engagement.(For each individual indicate if licensed to practice as a CPA in California,government auditing experience,local government continuing education, and membership in professional organization relavant to the performance of this audit. 4 8. A statement on the quality of the firm's management support personnel available for technical consultation. 1 9. A statement indicating how the firm will assure the quality of the staff over the term of the contract. 2 Total Score — Expertise and Experience 30' Firm Name Page 2 Total Score Possible Audit Approach 10. The bid should contain the following information on audit approach: (Is the item included, 1 point — is the approach reasonable,preferable,2 points?) — Proposed segmentation of the engagement 3 — Level of staff and number of hours assigned to each segment 3 — Extent of statistical sampling 3 — Proposed use of on—site automated systems 3 — Type and extent of analytical procedures 3 — Approach to document an understanding of City's internal control structure (Preferred approach is prior to June 30, 1994,not during fieldwork) 3 — Approach taken to determine laws and regulations that will be subject to audit test work 3 — Approach taken to drawing samples for tests of compliance. 3 — A statement indicating how the firm will be able to staff and service the City in light of their other client obligations 3 — An indication that they can meet our completion date of November 1st each year 3 Total Score — Audit Approach 30 Price 11. The maximum score for price will be assigned to the firm offering the lowest total all—inclusive maximum price,over the three year contract.Appropriate fractional scores will be assigned to other proposers.(ie.If the bid is 10%n higher than the lowest proposal,the firm would receive a score 10% lower than 25,or a 22) TOTAL CUMULATIVE SCORE 100 C r� MEETINP, AGENDA DAT&. r' ITEM # M.N• a2 COMMUNICATION ITEM March 15, 1994 TO: Council Colleagues FROM: Peg Pinard, Mayo6 .Q, SUBJECT: Campaign Regulations Committee Five members of the Campaign Regulations Committee have indicated they could continue to serve and make recommendations pertaining to a possible lobbying ordinance: GlennaDeane Dovey, Chair Richard Kransdorf, Vice Chair Dominic Perello Carla Sanders Richard Schmidt On February 1st Council directed, "Ask the Campaign Regulations Committee to continue to review and make recommendations regarding a municipal lobbying ordinance;if members do not wish to continue, Council Members are to submit names to the Mayor for appointment recommendations." Since no other Council Members have submitted additional recommendations for appointment, I believe our earlier direction will allow the committee to now commence researching and making their recommendations to Council on this issue. /drg COUNCIL 13CDD DIR ICAO ❑ FIN DIR f/AO ❑ FIRE CHIEF AiTTORNEY ❑ PWDIR W CLEP.WORIG ❑ POLICE CHF ❑ MGMT TEAM ❑ REC DIR ❑ C READ FILE 0 UTiL DiR 0 FERS DIR