Laserfiche WebLink
• Commitment to municipal auditing <br />a) Does the proposal reflect participation in government finance organizations <br />p -Z such as the Governmental Finance Officers Association (GFOA), California <br />Society of Municipal Finance Officers ( CSMFO) or California Municipal <br />Treasurers Association (CM <br />b) Are any members of the prt� ,Dosed audit team reviewers for the GFOA or <br />CSMFO financial report review programs? <br />c) Does the firm indicate a commitment to training its staff in municipal finance <br />matters? <br />Responsiveness to the City's Request for Proposal (RFP) <br />a) Did the firm adequately respond to all items solicited in the RFP? <br />b) Does the proposal indicate an ability to meet the time deadlines requested by <br />the City? <br />c) Was the proposal easy to read and free from errors? <br />d) Cost? <br />The Audit Committee then directed the Finance Director to arrange for an interview with <br />the partners from Caporicci & Larson who will be overseeing the City's audit. On March <br />19, 2003, the Audit Committee interviewed the audit firm of Caporicci & Larson. After <br />review of the proposals, and the interview of the recommended audit firm, the City <br />Council Audit Committee recommends engaging Caporicci & Larson for the following <br />reasons: <br />• Caporicci & Larson clearly met all areas outlined by the proposal and utilized by staff in <br />the evaluation process. Based upon the foregoing criteria the proposal from Caporicci <br />& Larson received the highest rating. <br />Caporicci & Larson has committed to providing all of the auditing services outlined in <br />the proposal at a discounted cost of $45,175 for the first year base services (excluding <br />bid alternates) compared with the second ranked firm Maze & Associates at $70,810 <br />and third ranked firm Moreland & Associates at $51,000. Caporicci & Larson's cost <br />proposal was the lowest of all six responsive proposals. <br />The audit proposal also includes bid alternates totaling $9,000 for preparation of the State <br />Controller's Reports for the City and the Redevelopment Agency, and the Annual Street <br />Report. Given the uncertainty of the 2003 -04 budget, the City Council Audit Committee is <br />not proposing the acceptance of these services at this time. <br />Copies of the audit proposals are available in the Council Study for your review. <br />Alternative <br />The City Council may reject the recommendation and select another audit firm from the <br />remaining five proposals. <br />Fiscal Impact <br />Approval of the agreement with Caporicci & Larson will result in savings of $31,000 in the <br />