Laserfiche WebLink
REQUEST FOR <br />COUNCIL ACTION <br />CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: <br />MAY 1, 2006 <br />TITLE: <br />AWARD CONTRACT TO MORELAND & <br />ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR <br />COMPREHENSIVE FINANCIAL AUDIT <br />r~ ~~ <br />Qdyntion tar <br />CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: <br />SERVICES <br />CITY MANAGER <br />RECOMMENDED ACTION <br />APPROVED <br />^ As Recommended <br />^ As Amended <br />^ Ordinance on 1~' Reading <br />^ Ordinance on 2ntl Reading <br />^ Implementing Resolution <br />^ Set Public Hearing For <br />CONTINUED TO <br />FILE NUMBER <br />Direct the City Attorney to prepare and authorize the City Manager -and the <br />Clerk of the Council to execute a four-year agreement with Moreland & <br />Associates, Inc. for comprehensive financial audit services, and other <br />related auditing services in a total aggregate amount not to exceed <br />$469,500. <br />DISCUSSION <br />Annually, the City of Santa Ana retains the services of a certified public <br />accounting firm to conduct the annual audit of the City's financial <br />statements. The audits are conducted in accordance with auditing standards <br />generally accepted in the United States and applicable under the Government <br />Auditing Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. <br />In addition, the audit firm will issue separate financial reports on the <br />Redevelopment Agency and the Housing Authority, as well as provide the <br />necessary compliance reports on redevelopment agency activities and federal <br />grants. The City will also be requesting assistance with implementing new <br />Governmental Accounting Standards Board pronouncements. <br />In February 2006, the City conducted a formal Reguest for Proposal (RFP) to <br />select a certified public accounting firm to serve as the City's <br />independent auditor for the next four fiscal years. Proposals were sent to <br />six established accounting firms with strong governmental experience. Four <br />of the six accounting firms responded. The remaining two firms did not <br />respond to the RFP indicating a lack of adequate staff to conduct the <br />audit. <br />A five-member selection committee evaluated the four proposals submitted. <br />The evaluation was based on several factors, including the firms' technical <br />qualifications, thoroughness of auditors proposed scope of work, experience <br />with similarly sized governmental agencies, ability to meet clearly defined <br />work schedules, and reasonableness and competitiveness of the audit fee. <br />Based on the RFP criteria, the companies received the following ratings: <br />251-1 <br />