Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 07/17/2018 - FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 101, 2018, AMENDINGAgenda Item 11 Item # 11 Page 1 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY July 17, 2018 City Council STAFF Travis Storin, Accounting Director Gerry Paul, Director of Purchasing & Risk Management John Duval, Legal SUBJECT First Reading of Ordinance No. 101, 2018, Amending Section 8-158 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins Pertaining to the City's Procurement of Services for an Annual Independent Audit of the City's Financial Records. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to amend the City Code to accommodate the roles of the Council Finance Committee and the City Council in procuring external audit services for the City. An important element of auditor independence is that the selection of the external auditor is made by a governing body rather than by the staff of the auditee. The proposed Code section would (1) allow the selection process of an external audit services to take place at publicly held meetings and (2) define the maximum service period of an incumbent auditor. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance on First Reading. BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION Audit Requirements and Best Practices in Selection An annual, external audit by an independent CPA firm is required by Colorado Statute, City Charter, City debt covenants on outstanding bonds and leases, and the majority of grant agreements for which the City is a recipient. The current audit contract is in its fifth and final year, necessitating a competitive selection per City Code. Historically, the Council Finance Committee has served as the interview panel for audit services and made a recommendation to the Council for selection via resolution. Staff recommends that the Finance Committee continue to perform this function. Properly performed audits play a vital role in the public sector by helping to preserve the integrity of the public finance functions and by maintaining citizens’ confidence in their local government. Best practices published by the Government Finance Officers Association and the American Institute of CPAs strongly recommend for the selection of auditing services be conducted by governing and oversight bodies (rather than by employees of the auditee) as an important measure to preserve auditor independence. It is also ideal for auditor independence to require auditors be replaced after a defined contract term, as is often the case in the private sector. As a comparison, SEC-regulated publicly traded companies are required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 to delegate to an audit committee the responsibility for appointment, compensation, and oversight of audits. Agenda Item 11 Item # 11 Page 2 Sarbanes further requires that the high-ranking personnel within the selected firm be rotated every 5 years, although there is not a requirement that the firm itself be rotated. Holding Supplier Interviews in a Public Meeting Any meeting of three or more Councilmembers is required to be held in public with sufficient advance notice of the time, location, and meeting agenda. Further, Code Section 2-31 and Article II Section 11 of the City Charter specifically limit when the Council and its committees can go into executive session and there is no exception that authorizes an executive session to interview prospective auditors. Therefore, Finance Committee interviews of prospective auditors are required to be conducted in a public meeting. Current City Code pertaining to supplier/vendor procurement precludes the public disclosure of proposal, offeror, and evaluation information during the competitive selection process. Given the limitations this places on the selection process of an auditor, staff recommends the Code be amended to allow the Finance Committee and Council to conduct its interview and selection of qualified candidates in a public meeting. If this Ordinance is adopted, interviews will proceed at the September meeting of the Finance Committee. Auditor Rotation Many private-sector business enterprises and not-for-profits mandate that a new audit firm be selected periodically, in an effort for fresh procedures and greater independence from management. In highly-regulated environments such as publicly traded companies, it is often required that personnel rotate from their clients in 5-year increments. The City does not currently have a policy or Code requirement to rotate auditors. At the June 18 Finance Committee, the matter was discussed and the Committee supported a codified rotation requirement. Staff was asked to research and recommend a practice for the City to adopt. Staff contacted Front Range peer organizations, the results of which are below: City Selection method Rotation Boulder Public selection by Finance Committee Not mandatory Loveland Staff run, staff selected Not mandatory Aurora Staff run, Council adopted 5-year partner rotation; no mandatory firm rotation Larimer County One commissioner participates with staff committee Not mandatory, like to rotate every 10 years CO Springs Finance/Audit Committee decides Have in practice rotated every 5 years, but not codified Staff recommends to Council a 10-year rotation requirement for accounting firms (2 consecutively awarded 5- year periods), with a mandatory rotation of the lead partner after the first 5-year period concludes. This recommendation allows efficiencies and continuity to be gained throughout the contract term between audit staff and City staff while also ensuring fresh perspectives are introduced at regular intervals. CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS Staff sees no direct financial impact from the proposed amendments and additions. BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Finance Committee supported adoption at its June 18, 2018 meeting. ATTACHMENTS 1. Council Finance Committee minutes, June 18, 2018 (draft) (PDF) COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE June 18, 2018 Minutes Excerpt (draft) E. CFC Auditor Selection - Selection of independent auditor for City, PFA, and Library Travis Storin, Accounting Director John Voss, Controller EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is to solicit consensus from the Committee regarding: • The process for selecting an independent auditor for an up-to five-year period • Potential Code modifications to resolve public disclosure limitations and increase transparency with respect to audit selection • Perspective on the candidacy of incumbent firms A Request for Proposal (RFP) will be issued this summer for audit services. The process is designed to ensure that the selected firm meets the City’s requirements and has the knowledge, experience, and reputation in auditing similar entities. An annual external audit by an independent CPA firm is required by Statute, Charter, debt covenants, and virtually all grant agreements. GENERAL DIRECTION SOUGHT AND SPECIFIC QUESTIONS TO BE ANSWERED Staff seeks input on: • Evaluation criteria for selection of the independent auditor • Desired modification to historical processes for selection, if any • Support for Code amendment to allow Committee participation in an open public meeting BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Code Amendment Current City Code precludes the Committee from holding a meeting to interview service providers. Code Section 8-158(f) limits public disclosure of interview information, while City Charter Article II, Section 11 and Code Section 2-31 preclude the use of executive session for this purpose. In order to allow the interview process to remain with the Committee, Staff recommends modifying Section 8-158(f) for audit services specifically to allow the interviews to be conducted in public before the Committee. Auditor Rotation Multi-year contracts are limited to 5 years by City Code. The City does not have a mandatory auditor rotation policy and would allow evaluation of the incumbent. GFOA best practice guidance acknowledges that private sector and publicly-traded, SEC filing entities have rotation practices mandated by regulatory authorities or their own bylaws. In the public sector, GFOA cautions that sometimes it is difficult to get enough qualified responses if the incumbent is disallowed. ATTACHMENT 1 COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE June 18, 2018 Minutes Excerpt (draft) The below table shows a 30-year history of audit firms the City has engaged. 1983 Ericson, Hunt, Spelman 1995 Bondi 2007 Bondi 1984 Ericson, Hunt, Spelman 1996 Bondi 2008 McGladrey & Pullen 1985 KPMG 1997 Bondi 2009 McGladrey & Pullen 1986 KPMG 1998 Bondi 2010 McGladrey 1987 KPMG 1999 Bondi 2011 McGladrey 1988 Price Waterhouse 2000 Bondi 2012 McGladrey 1989 Price Waterhouse 2001 Bondi 2013 McGladrey 1990 Price Waterhouse 2002 Bondi 2014 McGladrey 1991 Price Waterhouse 2003 Bondi 2015 McGladrey 1992 Price Waterhouse 2004 Bondi 2016 RSM (McGladrey) 1993 Bondi 2005 Bondi 2017 RSM (McGladrey) 1994 Bondi 2006 Bondi Timeline and Process Staff proposes to release a Request for Proposal (RFP) in July. The proposed evaluation criteria, all to be equally weighed at 25% and in no particular order, would be: • Scope of proposal • Assigned personnel qualifications • Cost and work hours • Firm capability & reputation A staff committee, including staff members from City, Library and PFA would evaluate written proposals and recommend the top 2-3 firms for presentation to the Finance Committee. Interviews would be conducted at the September Finance Committee meeting with the City Purchasing Director serving as Purchasing Agent and facilitator. The Committee’s recommendation would be presented to the full Council for adoption via Resolution, thereby authorizing the Purchasing Agent to enter into an agreement with the awarded firm for the 2018 fiscal year audit, renewable annually through the 2022 audit. Discussion / Next Steps: Ken S: does the same team do the audit each year? Travis: The management team from the company is the same and the staff rotates by about 50%. There are 4 Auditors, 2 of the Auditors are returning and 2 are new. We have no concern with RSM’s quality of work. We just want to ensure the best possible Audit and that we satisfy independence in fact and appearance. Ross: Yes to question 1. I agree with doing a rotation, whether it be every 5 years or 10 years. Yes, I support the timeline. COUNCIL FINANCE COMMITTEE June 18, 2018 Minutes Excerpt (draft) Ken S: I agree with Ross. I’m not sure if I’m comfortable with a proposal by the incumbent (RSM)? Since we are looking at enforcing turn-over, that might not be appropriate. Mayor Troxell: I am supportive of what needs to be done. Travis: I should mention that the URA, Library and PFA use our Auditor selection, so this would affect them as well. -1- ORDINANCE NO. 101, 2018 OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS AMENDING SECTION 8-158 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS PERTAINING TO THE CITY’S PROCUREMENT OF SERVICES FOR AN ANNUAL INDEPENDENT AUDIT OF THE CITY’S FINANCIAL RECORDS WHEREAS, the City Council is required by Section 17 in City Charter Article II to provide an annual independent audit of the City’s books and accounts conducted by a public accounting firm; and WHEREAS, City Code Section 8-158 sets out the process by which such accounting services, as well as similar professional services, are procured by the City through competitive sealed proposals; and WHEREAS, this procurement process is typically conducted administratively by the City’s Purchasing Agent and other City staff, but because of the requirements in Section 17 of Charter Article II that the City Council provide for an annual independent audit, this process has historically been conducted, with assistance from the Purchasing Agent, by the Council Finance Committee reviewing the proposals and conducting the interviews of the offerors in a public meeting and making a recommendation to City Council, with the Council then making the final decision in a public meeting to select the firm; and WHEREAS, this Ordinance amends Code Section 8-158 to take into account that this process will occur in public meetings because it is being conducted by the Council Finance Committee and the City Council; and WHEREAS, this Ordinance is necessary for the public’s health, safety and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS as follows: Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and findings contained in the recitals set forth above. Section 2. That Section 8-158 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is hereby amended to read: Sec. 8-158. - Competitive sealed proposals. (a) Procurements for the following are eligible for award by competitive sealed proposals: (1) Materials and services when the Purchasing Agent determines in writing that the use of competitive sealed bidding is either not practicable or not advantageous to the City; -2- (2) Professional services; and (3) City improvements when the Purchasing Agent determines that the use of alternative delivery methods will provide substantial benefit to the City while retaining sufficient competitive pricing and/or performance. (b) Procurements accomplished pursuant to this Section shall be solicited through a request for proposals. (c) Public notice shall be given and shall include the proposal title, place, date and time of proposal opening. (d) Except as provided in paragraph (m) of this Section, Pproposals shall be opened so as to avoid disclosure of contents to competing offerors during the process of negotiation. (e) A register of proposals shall be maintained containing the name of each offeror and shall be open for public inspection after the award of the contract in the office of the Purchasing Agent in the same manner as are other public records. (ef) The request for proposals shall state evaluation factors and their relative importance. (fg) After proposal opening, interviews may be conducted with the highest ranked responsible offeror or offerors for the purpose of clarification and to assure full understanding of, and responsiveness to, solicitation requirements. Offerors selected for interview shall be accorded fair and equal treatment with respect to any opportunity for discussion and revision of proposals. Revisions may be permitted after submissions and prior to award in order to reflect clarifications in the proposal's scope of work or contract amount. (h) Except as provided in paragraph (m) of this Section, Iin conducting interviews, there shall be no disclosure by the City or any officer, employee or committee thereof, of any information derived from proposals submitted by competing offerors, nor shall there be any disclosure of information discussed by the evaluation committee in selecting the highest ranked offeror(s). (i) After the contract has been awarded and a written contract executed with the selected offeror(s), the total points of the evaluation committee will be retained by the Purchasing Agent for a period of time consistent with the City's record retention policy. (j) Except as provided in paragraph (m) of this Section, Iindividual rating sheets and notes prepared or utilized by members of the evaluation committee shall not be made available for public inspection. (gk) The contract shall be awarded with reasonable promptness by written notice to the responsible offeror whose proposal is determined in writing to be the most advantageous -3- to the City, taking into consideration the evaluation factors set forth in the request for proposals. No other factors or criteria shall be used in the evaluation. (hl) The Purchasing Agent is authorized to negotiate the final price and precise scope of work with the selected offeror. (m) If the proposals are for the services of a public accounting firm to conduct the annual independent audit of the City’s books and accounts as required in Section 17 of Charter Article II, those proposals shall be reviewed and the interviews conducted by the City Council or a committee of the Council in a public meeting and the selection by Council shall be conducted in a public meeting. In conducting such review, interviews and selection, the City Council and committees of the Council shall not be subject to the provisions in paragraphs (d), (h) and (j) of this Section. (n) No public accounting firm selected to conduct the City’s annual independent audit shall be eligible to be selected under this Section to conduct that audit for more than two (2) consecutive five (5) year terms. In addition, any firm conducting the audit for five (5) consecutive years shall not be eligible to participate in a new competitive sealed proposal and be selected unless the firm assigns a new lead partner to conduct the audit under the new contract with a term of one (1) to five (5) years. Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 17th day of July, A.D. 2018, and to be presented for final passage on the 21st day of August, A.D. 2018. __________________________________ Mayor Pro Tem ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk Passed and adopted on final reading on the 21st day of August, A.D. 2018. __________________________________ Mayor ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk