Let's get this meeting rolling. Good evening, everyone. I call to order the April 30th, 2025 special meeting of the audit committee. The time now is 6.01 PM. Mr. Clerk, will you, Ms. Clerk, will you please call the roll? Alderman Barbosa. Present. Alderman Connors. Present. Alderman McNamara. Here. Alderman Smedley. Alderman Saavedra. You have three present you have a quorum also seated is Alderman Iris Sanchez. Public participation. Are there any members of the public that wish to speak regarding the agenda items during public participation. Any speakers once. Any speakers twice. Any speakers? Three times. No one on the line? Okay. Seeing no speakers, we will move on to the special meeting. The first item on the agenda is the discussion of the fiscal year 24 annual comprehension report, FY 24 federal single order report, and FY 24 state single order report submitted by the finance department. John. John. Madam Chair I make a motion to accept the audit reports and send to the full council with a neutral recommendation. All right motion to accept and refer to full council made by Alderman McNamara and seconded by Alderman Connors. At this time I would like to call up Jonathan Perugini and Leslie Zoll of Clifton Larson Allen to make presentation and to answer any questions. Okay, thank you. Is that your computer or is that the city's computer? It's the city's computer. It's the city's computer? Okay. Do you want to talk on the phone? No, thank you everyone for allowing me to come tonight. Jonathan, if maybe you can just move the slides for me, that would be great. Yeah, to the agenda, please. Um so my agenda tonight is to briefly go over the terms of our engagement as auditors for the city. A high level audit you know high level um summary of the audit results. Some financial highlights then I'll go over the federal and state single audit. Some required communication um and then some new um standards that will be applicable for fiscal year 25. Some of you may have heard this speech when I came for the 23 audit but just to reiterate we render opinion on the city's financial statements. We are not responsible for the financial statements. It's management's responsibility to create those financial statements. We come in and review those and render the opinion on those statements. We also render an in relation to opinion on the schedule of expenditures of federal awards and state financial assistance in relation to the financial statements as a whole. We also express an opinion on compliance with state and federal programs that we test throughout the audit. I think it's important to note that we do not opine on internal controls. However, we are responsible for letting you know if there's any material weaknesses or significant deficiencies that we find during the course of our audit. And we will communicate those to you tonight. And those findings are required to be communicated either on the financial statements as a whole, or in relation to the federal and state single audit programs that we test. So high level summary of our audit results. The financial statements, the annual comprehensive financial report that you were given by Jonathan, the opinion is an unmodified opinion. That's what you would want to receive. It means that the financial statements are materially stated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Um, there's also unmodified reports on both the federal and state award major programs that we tested throughout the audit. On the internal control side, like I said, we do not opine on internal control, um, but we do, um, we are required to communicate any issues that we found. So with that I want to just kind of backtrack to fiscal year 23 so you guys have some background as to how the city is now doing throughout the next fiscal year. So if you recall last year there was a material weakness on bank reconciliations that they were not done timely. This has been resolved. The finding has been removed. The finance office and Danielle as the cash person in the finance office has implemented controls and has gotten the city back on track with timing of those bank recs. The other finding that was removed from the audit report from fiscal year 23 is in regards to compliance over uniform guidance reporting requirements. You're required to submit to the clearinghouse the audited federal single audit nine months after fiscal year end. We were able to issue our audit report and submit the data collection form before that time frame so that finding has also been removed. The last material weakness that was in the audit report for fiscal year 2023 was in regards to fiscal year end close procedures. We have downgraded that finding, although it still exists and there's some improvements that need to be made. We did find that there was no material audit adjustments that needed to be made and they did, we issued in June last year, it's now March. So there was improvements made to that particular finding. So instead of having it be a material weakness, it's now a significant deficiency. And we can talk about that one finding later in my presentation. As far as internal control issues on the federal awards or state financial assistance, we have no findings to report to you on those particular programs. In the interest of time, I wasn't going to go through every single basic financial statements in the ACFER, although there will be time for any questions if you had gone through the report and have any questions on specific statements. Right now I just wanted to highlight a few things. If you see on this chart, it's showing you the net position of the government-wide statements, which are exhibit one in your ACFR, the first basic financial statement that you see. And you'll see here that there was an increase in net position from last year. In the governmental activities column of the financial statements which includes all of the funds of the town on a full accrual basis of accounting your net position is 4.5 million. That's an increase of 12 million from the previous fiscal year. The second column in 2024 is your business type activities which is your water fund. Net position in the water fund at 630 2024 was 54.9 million. and that's an increase of 842,000 from the previous fiscal year. Total net position of the city is 59.4 million. And then I did want to just show the progression of the general fund for the city for the last three years. In 2024 it's hard to see that blue column on the chart. But that's, it's assigned fund balance of 9.9 million. You have unassigned of 25 million. Total fund balance is 34.9 million. Total fund balance increased by 9.8 from the previous fiscal year. Property tax collection remains strong at 96 percent. From a budgetary standpoint, Um, on the revenue side, um, you received $425,000 more than budgeted. That's what you, you obviously want, have more than, more revenues. Um, expenditures were $9.3 million less than budgeted. And I do want to point out on your city's pension plan, market in 24 was very good. Um, so your net pension liabilities actually were down on all four, um, Pension plans, your police pension plan is 57% funded right now, FIRE is 68% funded, and MERS, which is administered by the state, is at 69% funded. And then your pay as you go, total pension liability for elected officials is now at $880,000. And then the net pension, the other imposed employment benefit liability, of 57.6 million is 18.8 percent funded. So I'm going to circle back on the significant deficiency and I encourage anybody to ask questions if you have any. I just want to kind of high level explain the levels of findings in an audit in accordance with government account or auditing standards. So there's essentially three levels of findings. The first the most severe finding is a material weakness. And like I said the city has now rectified both of those. The second tier if you will is a significant deficiency. It requires conversation with those charged with governance and the board that improvements need to be made but we felt it was not a material item. And then that last tier is what we call management letter comments. And that's a separate document that we deliver to our clients. And that's more of dotting your I's, crossing your T's, more best practice type recommendations that we found throughout the audit. So the one significant deficiency that we did still have in fiscal year 24 is related to fiscal year and closed procedures. When we received the trial balance in December, we came out to the field in December of 24, the city had said, okay, we're going to start the audit. Here's the trial balance. There was some funds still not yet completed due to, you know, the lack of staff and things that were going on within the finance department. Water was not yet done. I would say basically the city needs to just make sure that you review the balance sheets. I think that you know cash is done now timely, revenues and expenditures are posted on a daily basis, but it's that fiscal year end close where you're making accrual entries, receivables, payables, recognizing grant activity that needs to be improved. So time to really look at each of the funds. You have significant funds in the city of New Britain, so it is time-consuming. But I believe that if those balance sheets are reviewed prior to the TB being sent to the auditors, the audit will be smoother, and you're going to see more timely results. Do you have any questions so far? Madam Chair. Well, thanks. I think the, in the highlights that accompany the, at the front end of the audit, the comparative, I appreciate the comparison. The, the fund balances are up considerably, and one, it would be helpful to define assigned and unassigned for me since I only do 1040As on my tax return. And as well, my guess is that's attributable to a revaluation year where there was considerable more taxes collected from one year to the next. But Jonathan commented that, but do you have a comment on that, of both things? You were talking about assigned fund balance, right? Assigned and unassigned for the layman among us, John. For why it increased, it wouldn't be off the reval. What happened is revenues were higher than anticipated, but the main part on those were we took the material weakness in banking and turned it into one where we watched the cash flow. And instead of leaving the money in our operating fund, now we put it in interest-bearing accounts. And that shot up our revenue exponentially. The other one is revenues for, like, police special billing. We got $4 million. We caught up on old billing. And you saw the – and the other one would be closing out old school projects from before I even started, projects from the early 2000s that had – retainage still open and the money finally came in. Reimbursement from the state for school bonds? Yes, for old school projects that were never fully closed out. The work had been done. The state never got the final paperwork on it, and we finally did. And so by having more revenues, the expenses were around on track. And because the revenues were so much higher, that's how you got a bigger fund balance on it. And probably you can define for us signed and unassigned. Is that like a checking and a savings account? So unassigned fund balance is basically what you have to spend that's not designated for a certain thing. Assigned fund balance is things that could be assigned already, like say you're going to use a certain amount of fund balance to – fund next year's budget or there's encumbrances and POs still open on some of those transactions and that would that would be considered assigned. If you guys have page 97 it shows fund to balance and it spells it out and what's assigned so if you want to turn to page 97 otherwise I'll talk about it the first one's public safety of a 1.3 million that's for our pensions and to match our arc for the adjustment on fiscal year 24 plus 25. that was 1.3 million the next one's tax stabilization at the snapshot of june 30th 2024 we had 7.9 million for that purpose and then the last piece was board of ed 628 000 and that's the the new britain high i thought it was like the athletic room plus the musical instruments were the 628. And that's what makes up the total of, was it nine something? Nine point nine. Nine point nine. And that's what makes up the assigned fund balance. As I recall, we did a transfer resolution with those funds transferred into this year, is that correct? Into fiscal year 25? Yeah. What happens is, For the September 25th, 2024 meeting, we set them to be assigned. So how 24's results ended, we hit the expense and then we moved it over to assigned fund balance. And so it's sitting there to be used. And I don't believe the Board of Ed has used it yet. But they went out for POs in that for the two pieces. Any other question? That's it on the fund balances for me. Thank you. I'm going to move on to the management letter comments. Again, that's the third tier in terms of level of findings. I don't know if you can pull up that slide again. There's one current year recommendation that's new this year that we want to bring to your attention on construction and progress. In terms of capital assets for the city, the old system that the city was using was not supported anymore. So the city finance office decided to go out to RFP for a new software and they, implemented a new software in fiscal year 24. I want to commend Agata for doing a great job in transferring all that data, reviewing all that data, and getting it into the new system so it can run effectively moving forward. However, construction in progress didn't quite make it there before the audit started, so there's still some work to be done on construction in progress. We do recommend that procedures be implemented um to help the finance office out in terms of department heads letting the finance office know when projects are going to be placed in service where the funding is so that the finance office can can reconcile what's um being assets that are being put in service with the gl activity for the year because it it it does impact our full accrual um of accounting and the financial statements that you see in the ACFER. The other recommendations that you see here have been repeated from prior years. Grant accounting, revenue recognition is very critical for a city that has a lot of funds with grants, making sure those receivables are put in. and the revenue recognition is done properly because that ties into the state and federal expenditure reports that we then take that information to audit programs. Things like LOCEP reimbursement requests, any grant requests that need to be done and recognized in the financial statements because that stuff tends to hold up the audit. Um, as far as internal control procedure, um, improvements, allowance, undoubtful accounts for taxes should be adjusted and analyzed annually. If there's taxes that are not collected, we should, um, the city should decide whether or not that should be suspensed in accordance with, um, state statute. All internal controls should have a reviewer, a preparer, and a reviewer. That includes capital asset review. tax revenue reconciliation should be done monthly. The city's tax office is on a subsidiary software QDS. It then gets journal entry into one solution and a reconciliation monthly should be prepared to reconcile that cash. Currently it's only done at the end of the year. So these new applications software are recent that accounts for progress, although it's noted in the management letter in terms of things have gotten better because in terms of the final audit. Are you referring to the capital asset software? I think so. I know things have improved with the state reimbursing the city within the last couple of years. Are you talking about the school construction program? Yeah, or is this just the city? Yes. Okay. Because on that one, that's improved, but we don't use the software for that one. So what Leslie's referring to is we had this really old fixed asset program called FACS Plus, which hasn't been supported in quite some time. and it ended up just giving us too many problems, so we had to go with a newer one because we were doing too many handwritten entries. And so now we have a new system, AssetMax, and that allows us to depreciate things and keep better tabs on everything. The last three, general liability reserves. This should be... ANALYZED ANNUALLY. THIS IS ONE OF THE BALANCE SHEET ITEMS THAT I'M REFERRING TO, JUST TO REVIEW THAT THE RESERVE THAT'S IN PLACE ON THE INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS ARE ACCURATE. IT IS AN ESTIMATE, HOWEVER, WE WANT THE ESTIMATE TO BE REASONABLE. SO IT NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED EVERY YEAR. IN TERMS OF FUND STRUCTURE, WE HAVE CONSISTENTLY RECOMMENDED THAT the city close out some of the old grant funds that are no longer being used or consolidate them on the ACFER. If you see in the back of the ACFER, the city has a lot of smaller funds that need to be analyzed separately every year. So something to think about in terms of efficiencies to be gained if you consolidate those funds or close out ones that are not used. And then finally, As a board, you should always think of looking at items of fraud, where the risks is in your entity and your organization. You can do this in a number of ways. You could have someone come in from the outside to review what you may think are riskier departments and do a deeper dive than what we would do in an audit. You can have an internal auditor come in and just look at specific things. Um, you can have in-house prepare some of those reviews, um, from a department level. So there's different areas in which, um, you could handle this, but it's always good to always have those open discussions and make sure that you are doing your due diligence in terms of, of assessing fraud within your organization. I'm going to move on now to the federal and state single audits. In terms of your federal single audit, you expended $67 million for the year. We tested four programs in accordance with our uniform guidance standards. Education Stabilization Fund, Coronavirus, which is your ARPA fund, Child Nutrition, and then CDBG. Again, there was no findings on compliance. There was no issues in internal control related to the administration of those grants. On the state side, the city expended $169.1 million in state financial assistance. And we tested three programs on the state side, Alliance District and Commissioner's Network related to the Board of Ed, and then our LOTSIP grants on the city side for the Department of Transportation. Again, no findings to report to you on those. We're required every year to have some communication on the financial statements to those charged with governance. You did get a letter as one of your deliverables that lists all these out. As far as new standards that were applicable this year, GASB 100 was applicable for 6-30-24. That is only related to accounting changes and errors that are material. It did not apply to the City of New Britain. There was no difficulties in working with management during the course of the audit. Within the ACFRA, within the financial statements, there are significant estimates that you should be aware of. Net pension liability and net OPEB liability are one of those estimates because the numbers are driven by actuarial valuations. So if the assumptions change, so does those liabilities. The other thing that is considered a significant estimate is incurred but reported liability. Those are in your internal service funds, health insurance funds, workers' comp, items that might be, so they're claims that are incurred but yet not processed yet. And we try and estimate that dollar amount so that we make sure that the risks are reported in the financial statements. Um, uncorrected misstatements, there was nothing of material nature. They were under our, um, clearly trivial amount. So there's, there was no attachment, um, in our deliverables. There is an attachment on audit adjustments just to show what we have changed once we got the TV from the client. Um again there was no disagreements with management we don't think that they opinion shopped or anything. Um and within that document we are just stating the delays in the audit and what caused those delays um again is related to the significant deficiency that we reported to you. And lastly I just really want to go over at least one of the standards that are applicable to 2025 because it is going to be somewhat of a lift for the finance office this year. It's related to compensated absences. The GASB has now included a more likely than not scenario in terms of estimating the liability for In the past, in the previous GASB, GASB 16, we were only required to record a liability on sick leave if it was going to get paid out when they retired. So if they were vested, they had time accrued on 630, we would post that liability of what was going to be physically paid out if they retired on that day. GASB, in their infinite wisdom, has now instructed us that we need to also look at unvested employees and time that may be used before they retire. So this liability for compensated absences may significantly increase based on what we've previously had to record as a liability. And there's a historical trend that needs to be looked at So you're going to have to go back and look at at least three years of data on PTO and kind of calculate the estimate of what people are likely to use of their PTO before they retire and then what balance remains when they do retire and get paid out. That's the short version of Gatsby 101. Is that a big deal change with fast food issues? It's going to be, yeah, on the front end it's going to be. It's not going to be something that is going to cost more time on the disclosure side, on the financial statement side, but it is going to be a lift for the finance office to calculate that more likely than not percentage. Usually on the spreadsheets we do now, we list it, but we just zero it out and don't do a calculation for the people that were hired after the 90s. who are not eligible for sick leave payout. But now we'll just have to put the calculation in and then come up with and go back two years, right? You were saying three years? And then come up with some kind of estimate on the unpaid side. It's doable if you can get the reports from HR. It's just once you do the historical trend, it's just math. to get to calculate the liability. The other couple GASBs that are coming are risk disclosures for GASB 102 which is not going to be a significant lift at all and we will help the city with those disclosures and then 103 coming down the pike in fiscal year 26 will change the look and feel of some of the basic financial statements in the ACFER specifically in the business type activities and the water fund. Does anybody have any other questions for me? Well thanks for the presentation. I just want to note for the record that the city's come a good distance in two years, three years with the 23 having noncompliance and material weakness down to one deficiency that I'll ask about how that's going to be rectified. How many audits in New Britain have you been through? Can I ask you that? I've been a principal for five, six years, roughly. So about that time. Okay. So good times and bad times, huh? Yes. And I asked you, I think, that with our first meeting over the receipt of the last audit, last, I guess, summer or something, you know, we got $56 million in coronavirus funds. I assume the Fed's put down guidelines with that reporting if that's been sent to the U.S. Treasury, if there's anybody left working at the U.S. Treasury at this point. But... Did that have an impact either one of you on the audit handling was it 56 million coronavirus? I know the council will be looking for a final accounting of that from your planning. As of 6-30-20-24. In total I believe it was 56 million. You had 22 million left at 6-30. You were obligated to at least commit those funds, right, by December, and then you have until 2026 to actually spend them. But those were part of the major programs that we tested. We do test ARPA. I have a question. Is there a report breakdown for that ARPA spending? That would be under planning and development. They would have that because they have a running spreadsheet. I do not. I did receive an interim report a few months ago on the ARPA money, but we'll be looking for a final accounting of that. Yeah, they'd be able to provide it because I know that office has a running total on it. And just for the record, if I could, Madam Chair, I thought it was important to reestablish the Audit Committee after a number of years to – comply with state statute in terms of the oversight role of our council. And I'm sure you're familiar with doing these exit interviews here and elsewhere. So I appreciate that. And I'll note the progress that has been made from 23 or 22, actually. Yeah, 22. 22, 23 to this point. So that's... Something that maybe a couple of questions for Jonathan in terms of that, but thank you. Thank you. Yeah, I just want to do a brief overview. The 22 audit is when we lost everyone, the person who handled the audits. She left, as well as the banking individual left. That's why you see those significant material weaknesses at the time. The June 30th, 2022 audit ended up getting issued December of 23, right? That makes sense, or I believe it was. I believe it was December of 23 it got issued. Then we had to work to get the 23 audit done by June 30th of 24, and then we just got the 24 audit done. March 27th of 25, and now we're actually current on everything. Yeah, through three years, it's gone from a year or more to six months to three months, March 31. Yeah, because it started in December is when the auditors came out, and we finished in March. I wanted to mention, Jonathan, there's just one weakness here. And I know you may have hired the assistant director or restaffed. Yeah. We have in order to. What are you doing to, I'm sorry, to get it by 1231, which is the due date? For 1231 of 25 for this year? Yeah. We're looking to actually get the significant deficiency removed. And the process on that is right now we're cleaning up our liability accounts that haven't been touched in quite a few years. Those are the balance sheet accounts that Leslie was talking about. But in addition to that, we're coming up, we're working with the auditors to come up with a timeline. They started interviews with half of my staff that I wanted interviewed. And then after this is all done, they're going to interview the final piece with myself and Cheryl and you already did a got it, right? And that will be the final piece. And then we're going to put together a timeline on when we need stuff. so that we can have all the entries done before we send the trial balance to the auditors, and that's how we'll remove the final significant deficiency. And to you, Madam Chair, that's the one remaining deficiency in getting the information that the auditors need to do their work? Yes, to do it in a timely manner without having extra hours for them to do. Alderman Connors? Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to thank Jonathan and the department for getting the audit together. There's been progress. When I spoke earlier with you at a similar hearing, I asked about monthly reconciliations. And I'm familiar with QuickBooks myself. But just confirming that going forward, each department has a monthly reconciliation process in place now. And that's being performed. Each department, I don't know on that part. I think the conversation was with the bank recs originally. And yes, we have that under control. As Leslie had mentioned, Danielle, who handles the banking function, is on top of it. We have a spreadsheet. We divvy it up to the accounting assistants and all the finance staff, and we're on top of it. And that's how we were able to take the material weakness and in turn remove it completely. So that piece is fine. We're working on doing the tax reconciliations, and I told Cheryl we have to put something in place so we're not doing it at year end, and we're doing it monthly. So she's aware. I shared with her this slide, and I told her council's going to be aware, so you need to work on this. So I just wanted to reiterate that if she's watching. If not, I'll have her watch. Thank you again. I'm glad those – PROCEDURES ARE IN PLACE WITH REGARD TO THE BANK RECS. AND WELL DONE. THANKS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SEEING NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, THE MOTION IS TO REFER WITH A NEUTRAL RECOMMENDATION. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED, SAY NAY. MOTION CARRIES. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ON THIS BECAUSE NOW WE'RE GOING THROUGH THE AUDIT COMMITTEE. IN THE PAST, I WOULD DO A REPORT TO THE COUNCIL FOR THE AUDIT. And I didn't know if this item is going to council, so then I don't need to do this or do it anyways? I would do what you. Do it anyways normally? I would do it anyway just to draw out all the I's and cross all the T's. But again, we haven't had an audit committee in eight or nine, I don't know. But this is about. the council being in touch with the auditors and hearing about their diligent work and ensuring that we pay attention to any deficiencies that have occurred. In fact, the state law two years ago was strengthened in terms of requiring a public hearing on any weakness. It is in the Municipal Audit Act that Connecticut goes by we all go by so so I yeah I would do what you've done in the past but the probably the contract came to the council before but the approval of the firm needs to come to the council as well oh that part definitely it was more just to say that the council is aware that we issued the audit And I'm throwing in another paragraph to talk about how it went before the audit subcommittee. So I just wanted to make sure if I send it in that I wasn't duplicating anything. I'm good. The more paperwork the better. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Leslie and Grace I don't know if you want to stay for the next part. They're welcome to talk about the actual RFQ. The RFP is the next one. Yeah, actually, if you could stay a few more minutes because we had scheduled interviews with about a dozen audit firms, but apparently there's fewer than that. It's just you guys. So that's why I didn't want you to run away because we're not doing the meeting. Yeah, so whenever you're ready. All right the next item on the agenda the discussion of the request for proposal RFP process for auditing services. Alderman McNamara. Hey Madam Chairwoman make a motion to suspend Rule 9 regarding motions and amendments of our standing rules to allow for just an open discussion on the RFP process for auditing services. Second. A second by. Motion to suspend the rules made by Alderman McNamara seconded by Alderman O'Connor. All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed say nay. Motion carries. At this time I would like to call back Jonathan Perugini for discussion and to answer questions. Hello again. So do you want me to talk about the RFP process, what we did? Yes. Can you please give an overview? Sure. I'll give an overview. So we issued an RFP. We went through – I believe you guys have a copy of it. We went through and we sent out to a handful of firms that focus with municipal account – municipal audits. So I was thinking that was part of the presentation, but that's for tomorrow. Went through and we reached out to at least six different auditing firms that handle municipal audits. And I'm familiar with them from GFOA, Government Finance Officers of Connecticut. And so I reached out to a couple of them, and another firm was interested, but due to staffing issues, constraints and they were reaching out for another audit at the same time, they weren't able to put in for it. And so the only one that put in was CLA, which is our current auditors. I think it would, through you, I think it would be helpful for you to... To go through the timeline, I think that is in the RFP. Oh, yeah, sure. I'm sorry. Let me get to that page. The timeline and when we have to be fired up and ready to go via the OPM in the state. Thank you. From the beginning of the time period for bidding, so on and so forth. Okay. So the first part, we sent out the request for proposal April 7th. And the due date was April 25th. This past Friday at 11 o'clock, we had the sealed bid opening. And during that time, we sent emails specifically to the partners that I know from the accounting firms that do municipal audits, as well as I made a few phone calls. And on that, off the bidding only CLA put in, the next piece off that was we had to go before the audit committee. because you guys wanted to meet with the auditors, the prospective ones. So we were going to do the interviews. And we would need the audit committee to appoint sometime from May 8th to May 20th, or if you can do that today or tomorrow. And then that way it goes to the Common Council to appoint the auditors so that by OPM and state statutes, we need to appoint our fiscal year 25 auditors by June 1st. So that's why you sort of have like a... condensed timeline on it. But those are the bigger dates that we need to have everything done by June 1st to the state OPM to appoint our auditors. So point of information, you need to report by June 1. The bid process started earlier in April? Yes, April 7th is when it got issued. April 7th. And then the bids were closed on April? 25th. 25th? Mm-hmm. Okay. And is there certification by OPM with CLA and others, or do they? Yeah, they certify it. We have to go through their portal, the Fiscal Health Management System, and do a certification to say we awarded our auditors for fiscal year 25 our CLA, and then I believe CLA verifies it, and then I believe OPM verifies that. They are indeed our auditors so it's a three part process. The city certifies then then CLA certifies and then OPM certifies and then it becomes official and we need it by June 1st. Okay. And I'm going to the general fund budget. I like to read it on the weekends fall asleep. Don't we all. But. What you've been budgeted for by the mayor seems to me I've seen the proposal response that seems to be in line with the annual cost of this audit. You have the... I don't have the book with me, but it was a slight increase over last year, but it's enough in that line item to cover it. But it's not – I think it was at 150 or something like along those lines. I want to say 130. Yeah. Does that sound right? 130, 100. Oh, for the 25, right? Yes. Yeah. Yeah, 137 to 139. Yeah. And how long – this is a bid responded to for how many years? It'd be two years with the – With a three-single-year extension to each year if we wanted to continue in fiscal year 27, 28, and 29. But we could opt out in the event we didn't have – things weren't working out. But usually we don't have any issues. I haven't had any issues with Leslie and CLI. The only point of order for those who succeed me or if I'm still here is – I think it would have been good to have a audit committee to review the RFP ahead of this week, as I mentioned in January when you sent me the letter from CLA saying it would be done on or about March 31, which it was, just to vet the RFP. I know an RFP is you give the scope of your operations and the bidder – responds about how they can complete the job. I know they're pretty standard, but I think we have to keep that in mind in terms of the fullest role for the Audit, Council Audit Subcommittee. The one point I did want to make on that is that I spoke with Leslie before this. Usually you don't want to post an RFP until you finish that year before that because most Most auditors don't want to put in if you haven't finished a prior one. So that's why the RFP didn't go out until we finished the fiscal year 23. Because the auditors looking to put in, they're going to go to the state website to see if we've done our audit. And if you're missing the prior year, they're not really inclined to want to put in to the next year. So that's why the timeline was condensed. We needed to focus all our efforts to get the fiscal year 24 audit out by March 31st, and then we hit the ground running with the RFP. Okay, and I think that's – unless you have anything else to say about the RFP, I'm sure the – The prior auditors, except for one exception, had been Bloom Shapiro, which was acquired by CLA, which was a longstanding relationship. Yes. And now the CLA, with one interruption, you said is... No, CLA hasn't been the... Oh, back then it was Bloom at the time. Bloom Shapiro. Yeah, Bloom Shapiro. Two years we had him on Gladry, but... That did not work out well and so we went back to Bloom Shapiro and and we've had them ever since. I want to say that was fiscal year 12 and 13 that we had McGladrey and then after that it's been Bloom Shapiro until they were acquired by CLA. Just a point of order for the Corp Council. We've accepted and sent the audit to the council for acceptance, the completed audit. Should this go to committee or can it go to full council in terms of selection of the new auditor? Typically it would be a recommendation wouldn't it be a recommendation from the committee to the AFL. I think it could go to the I don't know why it couldn't go to the council. I mean I'd have to take a look at that. The audit. Well actually the audit is a subcommittee of AFL. You have to take a look at that. Do you want an answer right now. Let me just look at the section. Just take a couple minutes. I think we're appreciated, but I want to clarify moving this process forward. Of course. Actually we've suspended the rules, so should we end suspension of the rules? All right. our schedule. We have an AFL meeting coming up. Okay, so section 2-44 states that it's the duties of the audit subcommittee to review all items related to the selection of the independent auditor including but not limited to the request for proposals. So And that you should hold a meeting to discuss the selection process for the independent order and report to the council your recommendation. The only issue is that you just really had discussion on this topic. You didn't have a motion in front of you. So and you've suspended the rules. So can you. So the. The recommendation comes from the audit subcommittee, so another audit meeting with that on the agenda would be in order, would be my guess. Well, I don't know. I mean, you suspended the rules, but what prevents you from making a motion? Back in, right, a recommendation. Correct. And now that I think of it, your first item went directly back to the council as well. It didn't go to your AFL, so I mean, I don't think. I think you can go straight to the council. It's just a matter of now if you can make a motion to refer you know to make a recommendation on the selection of the auditor to the council. I just ask any other members wish to weigh in on that or Alderman Santiago has joined us. Well I'm thinking to. make the inevitable inevitable to move the recommendation tonight that would we are burdened with three meetings next week and not that I'd love to have another meeting but if it seems to be appropriate I'd like to in this meeting make the recommendation that isn't formalized till it gets to the full council. So with that said, I will move that we recommend approval of the response from CLA to be the auditor for the next two fiscal years. Second. Recommendation for- Can I just, a point of order, who seconded that motion? Okay, thank you. So the recommendation approval of CLA for the next fiscal year? That would be right. The next two years here? Do you have to do it where the next two plus the possible three single year extensions? Let me, let me amend the resolution, RECOMMENDATION PER THE RESPONSE TO THE BID THAT THE RECOMMENDATION FOR CLA GOES FOR THE NEXT TWO FISCAL YEARS WITH THREE ONE-YEAR RENEWALS. THANK YOU. PER THE TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT. MOTION FOR RECOMMENDATION OF THE CLA FOR THE NEXT TWO YEARS WITH Just to point on that revised motion, it comes back to the council for renewal after two years, correct? It could, if you guys would like it. Well, of course I'd like it, yeah. So what's the verbiage? So let me withdraw this recommendation and make a new one. On advice of counsel. I move to recommend CLA to be the independent auditor for the next two years with consideration by the council to be renewed in the following year and in, boy, I'm With consideration by the council for one year renewals over the next three. That's it. Second. All right motion made by Alderman McNamara seconded by Alderman Connors. Any discussion or questions. Seeing no further discussion I will entertain a motion to adjourn. Oh all in favor say aye. Aye. Motion to adjourn Madam Chair. Meeting adjourned 7 p.m.