My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/11/2005 Regular
Public Access
>
City Council Minutes
>
2005
>
04/11/2005 Regular
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/8/2005 3:55:56 PM
Creation date
6/8/2005 3:54:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Meeting
Supplemental fields
Minutes - Date
4/11/2005
SESSIONNUM
1960
TYPE
REGULAR
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
21
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Regular Meeting <br />April 11, 2005 <br /> <br />Firm 2005 2006 2007 Grand Total <br /> <br />**Hochschild, Bloom & Company, LLP $32,700 $33,700 $34,700 $101,100.00 <br /> <br />**Women Business Enterprise <br /> <br />The company has provided excellent service therefore, I recommend that award of this <br />extension to the contract be made to Hochschild, Bloom & Company, LLP in the sum of <br />$32,700 for 2005 fiscal year. <br /> <br />Then he commented that he proposed accepting the three-year bid from the current <br />auditor, but reported that various Councilmembers had thoughts about that, so he would <br />answer any of their questions or do whatever further work was needed. <br /> <br />Mr. Sharpe moved to accept the contract for the annual audit, and Ms. Welsch <br />seconded the motion. <br /> <br />Ms. Brot reported that three of the City Council attended the all day St. Louis County <br />Municipal League seminar with experts and in particularly, a financial one that was <br />designed to protect ourselves and the cities we serve. We heard that it is a good idea to <br />change auditor teams, even if they’re terrific, because sometimes we see things from a <br />different perspective which might protect the city better. Ms. Brot had asked the city <br />manager if a one year or two year contract could be considered versus a five year <br />contract, since they have already been our auditors for a five year period. She said that <br />Mr. Ollendorff had indicated that this could be done; however that if we could guarantee <br />them three years we could guarantee the prices for the next three years. I think what is <br />important is that we make sure that we as a Council really know what is going on in the <br />budget and what the auditors are trying to tell us, because we are liable. She would like <br />it if we approved something lesser than three, so that we could ask for bids from other <br />companies and consult with other cities. We might pay a little bit more over three years <br />but she believes it would be very worthwhile. <br /> <br />Mr. Wagner said that he thinks that an alternative to passing or not passing this would <br />be for this issue to be tabled and ask the City Manager to look into alternatives from <br />other cities and from other companies for what they might charge. <br />Page 4 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.