HomeMy WebLinkAboutDocumentation_Regular_Tab 4A_11/8/2001 OCT.26.2001 11:19AM JONES FOSTER JOHNSTON & STUBBS NU.G4D r c'a
Tom 4
FOSTER FI ler Center Tower,Suite 1100 Mailing Addmss
PENSION 505 South Flagler Drive Post Office Box 3475 l
STUBBS PA. West Palm Beach,Florida 33401 West Palm Beach.Florida 33402-3475
Telephone(561)659-3000 Facsimile(561)832-1454
Attorneys and Counselors
John C.Randolph,Esquire '
Direct Dial: 561-650-045B
Direct Fax 561-650-0435
E-Mail: jrandolph@jones-foster.com
October 25, 2001
Mr. Michael R. Couzzo, Jr.
Village Manager
Village of Tequesta
Post Office Box 3273
Tequesta, Florida 33469
Re: Village of Tequesta
Our File No. 13153.1
Dear Mike:
A question has been raised as to whether the auditor selected at the last regular
meeting of the Council was properly selected according to the requirements of Florida
law. Although some might argue whether the statutory requirement was specifically
followed, we believe that the intent and purpose of the statute was met. Section
11.45(3)(a)(6), Florida Statutes, provides as follows:
The governing body of a municipality, special district, or charter school
must establish an auditor selection committee and competitive auditor
selection procedures. The governing board may elect to use its own
competitive auditor selection procedures or the procedures outlined in
subparagraph (7).
I have been advised of the following facts. The following individuals served as an
auditor selection committee: the Finance Director, her assistant, the Police Chief.
Additionally, the auditor selection committee followed the following procedures: RFP's
were put out with specific guidelines. The RFP's were advertised in the Palm Beach
Post, advertised on the FGOA website, posted at the recreational center where Village
Council meetings are held, and mailed to accounting firms that had requested to be put
on the list for RFP's in the past. Only three firms responded in time. These firms were
reviewed by all three members of the auditor selection committee using criteria they
established for the review. All three members of the committee chose, as their first
choice, the same accounting firm as their recommendation to the Village Council. As
there were only three responsesecommendatFon, all three of the auditorre selectionted to the committeei!lags
Council,which chose the first
. 1 \ I I• t ,
OCT.26.2001 11:18AM JONES FOSTER JOHNSTON & STUBBS NO.245 P.3/3
Mr. Michael R. Couzzo, Jr.
October 25, 2001
Page 2
It appears, therefore, that the auditor selection committee followed the procedures
which it set in place. Further, because the Council ratified the selection of the auditor
recommended by the committee, it appears that the process was effectively in
compliance with statutory requirements. Out of an abundance of caution, however, we
would recommend that the Village Council, at its next meeting, ratify the selection and
establishment of the auditor selection committee used, as well as the selection
procedures undertaken by the committee.
Sincerely,
JONES, FOSTER, JOHNSTON &STUBBS, PA
John C. Randolph
JCRlssm
N:WCR113153811COUZzo Michael Letter3.doc