HomeMy WebLinkAbout4.08 Auditors Renewal of Understanding6.~
~
CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
MEETING DATE: August 12, 1991
SUBJECT :Renewal of understanding with City Auditors.
Report prepared by Phillip S. Molina, CPA
EXHIBITS ATTACHED :Maze and Associates audit proposal.
RECOMMENDATION :Continue with `Maze and Associates an
Accountancy Corporation' for independent
auditing services for four more years.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:For the audit of fiscal year 1991-92 the
costs for providing Dublin with the audit is
estimated at $19,063 and includes the
following costs:
Basic audit $11,065
TDA Audit 1,660
Single audit report 2,142
Prep. for CAFR 3,394
Gann Limit Review 802
$19,063
Sufficient money has been budgeted in the
fiscal year 1991-92 budget for the audit.
For the other three years the estimated audit
costs are:
1992-93 $20,016
1993-94 $21,017
1994-95 $22,068
DESCRIPTION: The Council's Audit Committee met once in June and
once in July to review the six audit proposals that were
submitted in response to the City'~s request for proposals.
At the first meeting in June the C+~mmittee used an initial set of
criteria to determine which firm ~hould participate in the final
interview process. The criteria included concerns about each
firm's staff size, the number of prior audits prepared for
California cities of comparable size to Dublin, the firm's staff
qualifications, cost of the audit, their ability to assist the
Council with special audit task:s, the firm's commitment to
complete the audit by the end of N~vembe'r, and the clarity of the
proposal submitted. `
-----------=----------------------------------------------------------
COPIES TO:
I'~ENd NO . , ~'~-~(xJ ~/ ~ - .20 ~~
~
~
The Audit Committee identified three firms that had the
attributes the Committee wanted most in an independent auditor.
The three firms interviewed were:
Bartig, Basler and Ray
CG Uhlenberg & Co., and
Maze and Associates.
On July 9th, the oral interview process took place, and consisted
of a presentation by each firm, followed by answers to questions
from the Audit Committee members. The Committee interviewed one
firm at a time. Each firm was asked to bring the
partner-in-charge, the audit manager, and the audit supervisor to
the interview to participate in the process.
The questions from the Committee attempted to solicit answers
that would identify the qualities of the audit firm, which would
best assist the Staff in preparing the annual audit report for
the Council. Some of the questions included:
1. The overall staff size of the firm,
2. The number of professionals included in the firms' staff,
2. Whether the audit team has the experience needed to
perform special tasks, such as a determination of whether
the City's insurance coverage is sufficient,
3. The ability to schedule the audit work around the City's
timetables, and
4. The methods used to interface with the Staff during the
audit work.
The Committee was initially concerned that a series of audits
that are conducted by the same auditors could, over time result
in a less stringent review of the accounting processes used and
documents maintained by the City's accounting staff. During the
interview the representatives from the firm of Maze and
Associates explained that because of both the size of the firm
and the need to cross train existing staff, there has always been
a rotation of staff each year that audit work was conducted for
Dublin. An audit team consists of the Principle-in-charge, the
audit manager, the supervisor and the field auditors. The field
auditors have changed each year for purposes of rotating auditing
staff; likewise the audit supervisor has rotated three times in
the four years that Maze and Associates conducted Dublin's audit.
For continuity, however, the firm has not rotated the audit
manager, although it was suggested that this too could be done if
the Committee so directed.
After the Committee completed all of the interviews, it was
determined that the firm of Maze and Associates, which is
currently preparing the City's audits, fits best the expectations
of the Committee for an independent auditor.
RECOMMENDATION: The Council's Audit Committee recommends that the
Council approve the continuation of the use of the auditing firm
of Maze and Associates to prepare the City's annual audits for
the periods 1991-92, 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95.
' ~ •
~
..~
_~
~
I i
L~
,\
'
~~
~
_~
~-~
. .~
~
~
PROPOSAL
To Become
Independent Accountants
For The
City of Dublin
Submitted By
NAZE ~ ASSOCIATES
1670 Riviera Avenue, Suite 100
Aalnut Creek, CA. 94596
(415) 930-0902
Contact Person
Scott Haze
Ju1y 3, 1991
19Tf~L°hl/~?2~T ~
v~
'
,.,
_,,'
~
,~
~
--~
~
.'
,~
~
~
~ •
CITY OF DUBLIN
AUDIT PROPOSAL
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page Number
PROPOSAL:
Transmittal Letter 1
Particular Concerns 4
Auditor Rotation 4
Our Accomplishments 5
Profile of Proposer 5
Our Organization 5
Location and Resources 6
Municipal Audit Clients 6
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report 7
Single Audit Act Experience ~
Transportation Development Act Experience 8
Redevelopment Agency Experience 8
Measure B Compliance Experience $
Authority Experience 8
Fixed Asset Work 9
Other Pertinent Experience 9
Mandatory Criteria 10
Summary of Proposer's Qualifications 10
Audit Team 10
i
~
,
_.,
~_'
~,
'
~~r
~
.~
,`
~
~
'
~ ~
CITY OF DUBLIN
Ai1DIT PROPOSAL
TABLE OF COKlENTS (continued)
Resumes of Those Individuals Conducting the Audit
References
Proposer's Approach to the Examination
Audit Approach
Statements and Reports
Gann Limit Review
Computer Audit Capabilities
Audit Scope
Compensation
Hourly Rates
Additional Data
Continuing Education
Quality Assurance
Personnel Policies
EXHIBITS:
Color Graphs
Gann Limit Compliance Letter
Auditor's Report Drafts
Municipal Clients
Other Available Staff
Proposed Audit Fees and Hours
ii
Page Number
10
13
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
17
17
17
18
18
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit C
Exhibit D
Exhibit E
Exhibit F
~
~1
'
r
~
~
~,
,
855 Main Street - Suite 206
P/easanton, California 94566
(415) 462-0518 '
We appreciate this opportunity to submit our proposal to you. We are a
relatively new firm but we have already proven we have the capability to
provide you with superior service. Ve offer you aore local municipal audit
experience than the national accounting firns, conbined with the personal
attention, responsiveness and lower costs of a local accounting firm.
We want to review the last four years with you and, we hope, build on them in
the future. We have been the City's independent accountants since 1987. What
have we accomplished in that time? Plenty. We have performed solid, in-depth
audits of the City. We have completely redesigned the City's financial
statements, making them much more complete and informative. We have added an
extensive statistical section and helped the City develop a Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report which was submitted for an award by the Government
Finance Officers Association. Less than three percent of U.S. cities are able
to produce such a Report, which can help a City's credit rating and its efforts
to attract new employers.
l~Je have tested internal controls and compliance with laws, rules and
reguiations under the Single Audit Act. We have developed recommendations
which have improved the City's internal controls. We have also tested and
reported on internal controls over specific.areas of concern to the Council.
We are a year-round accounting resource which you can count on to help.you with
your accounting needs. Our ~unicipal clients couprise over tvo-thirds of our
total practice, so as you can see, you are a very important client for us. We
will continue to make every effort to see that you are more than satisfied with
.our work.
ile are in business to help our clients succeed. Our people are experienced,.
proven individuals who are committed to excellence in client service. We-pride
ourselves on our ability to maintain strict standards of independence and'; ~
objectivity while providing you with helpful and productive audit services. '
Our aim is to be a positive factor in your environment and we strive to~~
establish close working relationships with you and your staff. The level of ~
client satisfaction we have achieved indicates the outstanding success we have
had in this area.
1
'
a ~ ~ i
Q~C~ ~
Q~~Oo C~~Q~C~~
ACCOUiVTAIVCY CORPORATION
i670 Riviera Avenue - Suite 100
July 5, 1991 N!/alnut Creek, California 94596
(415) 930-0902 ~ (916) 972-7333
Fi4X (415) 930-0135
Audit Committee, City Council
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin, California 94568
Dear People:
A Professional Corporation
(
~.
, • •
As chief executive officer, I am authorized to bind the firm for contract
"' negotiations. My address and telephone number are listed on the title page of
our proposal.
-:' Yours very truly,
Sc~
' J. Scott Ma e
~ JSM:sg
.'
~'
.~~
r~
'
'
3
'
, • •
_~
PARTICQIAR CONCERNS
AUDITOR ROTATION
'
~
,
.~
~
~
~
'
'
~
The reason most often given by municipal governments in requesting proposals
from auditors is that it's time to "rotate". Commercial businesses, on the
other hand, do not rotate their accountants any more that they rotate their
attorneys or other consultants and advisors. Business people recognize full
well the value of a skilled accountant with a well-grounded depth of knowledge
of their operation and its history. They also know the hidden costs and staff
disruption which can be caused by changing accountants, as well as the risks
involved in such a change.
Why then, do some municipalities rotate accountants? Many say they want a"new
look" by new people. But this new look can be costly, as the new accountant
spends time and money learning about the client and the municipality's staff
spends extra time answering more questions and preparing schedules in new
formats for new auditors. There is also the chance that the people actually
assigned to the work will be so new they won't have the proper level of
experience or expertise in municipal accounting. Many municipalities end up
trying to rotate away from such problems.
We have a policy which we believe combines the best elements of rotation and
continuity. Our policy is to rotate people at'the staff and supervisor level
frequently enough that there is a new look every year, but not so often that
there is no continuity. Staff people and supervisors are really the most
important people on the audit, particularly when fresh insights and ideas are
involved. These people are on the front lines inspecting documents and actual
records, talking first-hand to the people involved and gathering the true
facts. The audit managers and I are one step removed from this process and it
is at our level that continuity becomes more important. Many things which are
new or unusual to a staff person may be familiar to us and~we can help staff
people understand these things with a minimum of inefficiency and disruption to
the City's staff. On the other hand, since the managers and I are not doing
the detail audit work, there is no danger that we will gloss over unusual items
because we are too familiar with the City.
In the years we have performed the City's audit, we have rotated at least one
staff person or supervisor, sometimes more, at least annually. With a staff of
over twenty people, we are able to follow this policy with all our clients.
Then there is cost. Some believe that rotation keeps costs down by forcing the
accountant to go through the proposal process periodically - even annually in
some cases. If the only measure here is dollars paid to the accountant,
rotation can minimize that number, because there is always someone hungry
enough to do the work for less than cost.
But why isn't below cost a good deal? Because we're dealing with a service and
with people, not with a tangible product. A tangible product remains the same
regardless of the price paid. Service does not and people do not. The level
4
' . •
=~ AUDITOR ROTATION (Continued)
of service very quickly drops and the enthusiasm of the people providing the
-,~ service disappears as the discovery is made that the job is a money loser. So
while the report may be completed, the work will not be of the same quality and
may not even be adequate. Alternatively, you may be forced to renegotiate the
price in the middle of the job.
~ In this age of litigation, the Council can ill afford the risks involved in
choosing someone as important as their independent accountant solely on the
'~ basis of lowest possible cost.
OUR ACCOI~IPLISI~IIiII~]'PS
-~ While we have been auditors of the City we have provided solid, in depth audits
every year. In our first audit we performed a study and evaluation of the
City's internal control system, the result of which were nine recommendations.
-~ All of them were implemented. During the 1989 audit we expanded our audit
scope as requested by the Audit Committee, to include a review procedure
performed by the Finance Director and issued a recommendation based on our
work.
~ d w v
In a dition, e ha e expanded our audit scope to include compliance procedures
in accordance with Transportation Development Act laws, rules, and regulations
' and have delivered all reports within six weeks of the close of the books.
During 1990 we were requested by CALTRANS to provide the State Controller's
~ office with access to the City's Single Audit Act workpapers. Not only was our
work accepted, but due to its completeness and level of detail, the State
Controller's Office issued its report based solely on its review of our work
and did not visit the City's offices or use up City staff time. The State
Controller's office stated they normally expand on auditors work by visiting
the City's office prior to issuing their reports.
Since we began as auditors, we have expanded the City's financial statements
~ to include disclosures of interfund receivables and payables, interfund
transfers, joint ventures, and deficit fund balances. In addition, we expanded
existing disclosures of pensions and long term debt. All the changes were made
~ to bring the City's financial statements into compliance with generally
accepted accounting principles and to make them more informative and more
' understandable to the reader.
PROFILE OF PROPOSER
I OUR ORGANIZATION
~ Maze & Associates is a local firm with a surprising depth of experience in
municipal audit work. We offer a full range of accounting and auditing
services including governmental and commercial work. Our government work
' includes cities, redevelopment agencies, park districts and other special
districts, joint powers authorities, and school districts as well as federal
and State grantees. We are familiar with the financial and reporting
requirements you must meet and we have also dealt extensively with the
, requirements of the Single Audit Act of 1984.
' S
' ~ •
' OUR ORGANIZATION (Continued)
We are a professional services corporation, with one chief executive officer,
, two audit managers, one information systems manager, one tax manager, three
supervisors, seven staff accountants and four office staff. Several of our
professional staff have national accounting firm experience, which we have
blended with the more personal approach of a smaller firm.
' We are structured somewhat differently than most accounting firms. We have a
more fluid organization, with teams assembling to accomplish specific tasks
`' and recombining for other purposes. All of us are responsible for seeing work
through to its completion and all of us do what is necessary - whether it's
our responsibility or not - to accomplish this task.
' Our management style borrows heavily from the thinking of Mr. Tom Peters,
author of "In Search of Excellence", among others. All our people are
involved in making us better, all participate in management decisions and all
' realize we are here to help our client, first and foremost. We are in
business to help our clients succeed.
, IACATION AND RESOURCES
We occupy offices of three thousand square feet in Walnut Creek. We have
' twelve computers, including several laptops, three laser printers, a large
Pitney-Bowes copier and a FAX machine. We subscribe to the GAAFR Review,
Single Audit Information Service, and various Practitioners Publishing Company
~' municipal audit publications. We receive copies of discussion memoranda,
exposure drafts, opinions and interpretations issued by both the Government
Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and the Financial Accounting Standards Board
' (FASB). We also subscribe to the Commerce Clearing House and Research
Institute of America tax service. Lastly, we use modems to access the Lexus,
Nexus and NAARS national electronic libraries, giving us research resources
equal to any accounting firm.
' MUNICIPAL AUDIT CLIENTS
~~ We have included a complete list of our municipal clients at Exhibit D. Our
'~- experience in managing municipal audits similar to your own includes the
following, all of which are current clients:
' General Fund Client
Client Expenditures Number of Funds Since
' City of Alameda $28,125,584 66 1990
City of Albany 6,743,000 36 1990
City of Antioch 15,945,903 75 1987
~ City of Livermore 23,517,748 41 1987
City of Manteca 9,919,739 26 1986
Town of Danville 6,452,953 21 1990
' Town of Hillsborough 5,254,802 11 1990
City of Pleasant Hill 6,413,746 42 1987
City of Pinole 5,170,627 12 1987
,
6
'
, ' . ~
; ' MUNICIPAL AUDIT CLIIIITS (Continued)
City of Saratoga 6,730,548 20 1990
' East Bay Regional Park District 32,329,398 26 1988
Petaluma Schools 25,485,285 20 1986
Tamalpais Union High School
District 14,956,200 11 1986
' As you can see, we have considerable experience auditing cities. We have
assisted these cities with the accounting for a variety of debt restructurings,
1 including defeasances and advance refundings. As noted below, we have also
performed a variety of consulting services for our city clients.
1 COMPREHENSIVE ANNiJAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR)
In 1990 we assisted the City in producing its first Comprehensive Annual
1 Financial Report (CAFR). This CAFR includes a transmittal letter prepared by
the Finance Director covering the City's operations, events and
accomplishments, financial statement analysis, risk management and cash
, management. This CAFR also includes statistical information about the City
from the date of its incorporation. These schedules include a history of
revenues, expenditures, assessed valuation of taxable property, property tax
' rates, demographic statistics, the level of construction and bank deposits and
others. This data represents a significant addition to the amount of
information provided by the City to its constituents, credit granting agencies
and others.
' Less than 900 of the 36,000 cities in the U.S. have the resources to prepare
CAFRs. But these cities understand that CAFRs reduce interest costs by
' improving credit ratings. They also understand that CAFRs can help convince
prospective employers that their city has a good financial environment and will
be a good place to establish a new operation.
, As you can see, the mark of excellence in municipal financial reporting is a
CAFR which wins an.award from the California Society of Municipal Finance
Officers or the Government Finance Officers Association. Half our city clients
' issue CAFRS and all our clients' CAFRS either win CSMFO or GFOA awards. In
1989, three clients won CSMFO awards and three won GFOA awards. In 1990, five
clients won CSMFO awards and we expect all to win GFOA awards as well. Many of
' these awards were earned by CAFR's on their initial submission, when they
receive special scrutiny. Exhibit D lists our relevant experience with CAFRs.
' SINGLE AUDIT ACT ERPIItIENCE
We have extensive Single Audit Act experience as a result of our work on the
, following, among others:
City of Manteca:
' Environmental Protection Agency Construction Grant
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Community Development Block Entitlement
' Federal Highway Administration Federal Aid Urban
~ 7
' . ~
'
'
,
,
'
,
'
,
,
,
,
'
SINGLE AUDIT AGT ERPIItIENCE (Continued)
City of Livermore:
Federal Aviation Administration Airport
Improvement Program
Department of Education Federal Literacy Grant
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Community Development Block Entitlement
Federal Emergency Management Agency Disaster
Assistance Program
City of Dublin:
Department of Transportation Urban Mass Transportation
Capital Improvement Grant
Department of Housing and Urban Development Community
Development Block Entitlement
Town of Danville:
Department of Transportation Urban Mass Transportation
Capital Improvement Grant
Federal Emergency Management Agency Disaster
Assistance Program
TRANSPORTATION DEVEIAPMII~IT AGT EXPIItIENCE
Several of our municipal audit clients receive transportation Development Act
grants which require separate audits and reports. We have been involved with
this type of audit for several years, have established contacts at the State
and regional level and are fully familiar with the required reporting and
compliance procedures.
REDEVELUPMII~IT AGENCY EXPIIZIENCE
Eight of the municipal audit clients listed above have redevelopment or
community development agencies. We prepare and issue audit and compliance
reports for our clients which have active redevelopment or community
development agencies.
1~IFASURE B CONPLIANCE ERPERIENCE
'
,
'
'
t
'
We have previously performed audits for Alameda County Measure B funds, which
are received by two of our clients. We have already established a contact with
the Alameda County Transportation Authority and are familiar with the
reporting, accounting and compliance requix'ements of this program.
AUTHORITY EXPERIENCE
Several of our municipal audit clients have separate authorities which require
separate audits and reports. Our audits include reviewing compliance with debt
covenants and trustee a~reement reQUirements.
8
~ r . •
' ~ ~S~s ~o~ -
We have a variet af ex erience dealing with fixed
Y P assets, including:
'~ Fixed Asset Appraisal Evaluations. As part of our work on the Cities of
Manteca, Livermore and Saratoga, we reviewed and evaluated fixed asset studies
performed by outside appraisers. In all instances the appr aisal reports were
revised before adjusting City records; however, none of the appraisals resulted
' in an exception in our opinion.
'
t
~
~
~J
,
'
~
'
'
'
'
'
'
Fixed Asset Iirventory. We have assisted the Hayward Area Recreation and Park
District in planning and taking fixed asset inventories and recording the
resulting adjustments .
Fixed Asset Systen Selection and Implementation. We have assisted the City of
Albany in selecting and implementing a complete fixed assets accounting system
which will be integrated with their existing general ledger system.
OTHER PERTINENT EXPERIENCE
We performed a Cost Allocation Study for the City of Manteca which.identified
nearly $2 million in costs which could be recovered through increases in user
fees. The Study covered every City department and activity and included the
development of Lotus-based cost allocation and user fee measurement system which
can be operated by City personnel on personal computers.
During the course of this Study we gained considerable experience in determining
the internal functions performed by City employees in each department. We
interviewed employees, reviewed duties performed by specific departments and
evaluated each department's overall contribution to the cost of providing each
service rendered by the City.
We have projected different municipal revenue growth curves based on planned
growth rates and based on lower growth rates proposed by initiative. We have
prepared an accounting of costs incurred by a developer who defaulted on a
municipally guaranteed loan. We performed a study of the financial effect of
higher municipal refuse collection rates. We performed a study of costs incurred
by a joint powers authority in a major relocation project funded by CALTRANS;
this study resulted in our client being able to reclaim over $30,000 in costs
from CALTRANS.
We have computed whether or not rebates are required under Section 148(f)(2) of
the Internal Revenue Code, which deals with arbitrage relating to municipal
bonds.
We perform audits and reviews for a number of private corporations. We compile
financial statements on a monthly and annual basis using our computers. We
prepare income tax returns for corporate, partnership and individual clients as
well as providing tax planning and consulting services for these clients.
9
,
' ~ •
' OTHER PERTINENT EXPERIENCE (Continued)
We also have experience with litigation support, having worked with attorneys on
' several occasions.
IiANDATORY CRITERIA
' Scott Maze and Cory Biggs are Certified Public Accountants and are members of the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) and the California
Society of Certified Public Accountants.
, Al1 of our staff are subject to the code of ethics established by the AICPA and
are required to be independent of our clients and their employees.
' Our firm carries professional liability and workers compensation insurance of
$750,000 and $1,000,000 respectively. Proof of insurance has been provided to
the City.
i
SUMl~ARY OF PROPOSER'S QIIALIFICATIONS
' AUDIT TEAM
We are very conscious of the need to maintain continuity of personnel; both you
~ and we benefit from of continuity. At least two of aur staff will return each
year, barring unexpected resignations by the people on your work. At the same
time, we will endeavor to add a new person from time to time to keep our
' perspective fzesh and maintain a flow of new ideas. We are also interested in
your reactions to our people and their approach to your work: Any changes in
personnel will he reviewed with you in advance.
' Our people assigned to your work will include Scott Maze as engagement partner,
Cory Biggs as manager, Fred Marsh as supervisor, Kevin 0'Connell as staff
associate and Sandra McLuckie as information systems manager. The qualifications
~ and experience of the individual team members are outlined below.
We think you'll agree, after reviewing the resumes of our staff, that even our
~ newest staff have significant amounts of experience in municipal auditing and
accounting. This level of experience eliminates common problems cities have with
inexperienced auditors, such as lack of training and bad communications.
' RESUI~S OF THOSE INDYVIDUAIS CONDUCTING THE AUDIT
J. SCOTT MAZE, Engagement Partner
~ I am a graduate of Lehigh University, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, and hold CPA
certificates in Pennsylvania and California. I joined Price Waterhouse & Co. in
~ 1962 and served in the Pittsburgh, Sacramento and San Francisco offices of that.
firm. In 1977, I joined the Walnut Creek firm of Blanding, Boyer & Maze, later
returning to Sacramento to become managing partner of Porterfield & Co. On
January 1, 1986, I established Maze & Associates. My experience includes a
, broad range of municipal, commercial, manufacturing and other audit work. I am
a member of the AICPA, California Society of CPA's and NAA. My relevant ,
municipal audit experience includes:
~
10
'
1 • •
~
RESUI~S OF THOSE INDIVIDUAIS CONDUGTING THE AUDIT (Continued)
J. SCOTT MAZE, Engagement Partner (Continued)
' City of Alameda
City of Albany
City of Antioch
Town of Danville
' City of Dublin
East Bay Regional and Park District
Hayward Area Recreation and Park District
~ Town of Hillsborough
City of Saratoga
Livermore Area Recreation and Park District
~ City of Livermore
City of Manteca
City of Pinole
City of Pleasant Hill
~ Various School Districts
~
~
~
~
'
~
'
'
'
~
~
CORY BIGGS, Manager
Cory is a graduate of CSU Hayward with a B.S, in Business, emphasis in
Accounting. He is a California CPA with over eight years experience, three
with Deloitte, Haskins & Sells, three with Seiler & Company, a large Bay
Area local firm and three with us. He is a member of the AICPA and
California Society of CPA's. Cory's experience includes cities, school
districts, and a variety of high-tech and commercial for-profit
organizations. He is a CAFR reviewer for both CSMFO and the GFOA. His
relevant governmental audit experience includes:
City of Alameda
City of Albany
City of Danville
City of Dublin
Town of Hillsborough
Livermore Area Recreation and Park District
City of Livermore
City of Manteca
City of Pleasant Hill
City of Saratoga
South San Joaquin Irrigation District
Various School Districts
FRED MARSH, Staff Accountant
Fred graduated from CSU Hayward in 1989 with a B.S. in Business, emphasis
in Accounting. He passed the CPA examination on his first attempt while
still a student and joined us on graduation. Fred has gained experience on
the following governmental audits:
11
~
~ ~ s
~
~
,
~
1
1
'
RESUI~S OF THOSE INDIVIDUAIS CONDUGTING THE AUDIT (Continued)
FRED MARSH, Staff Accountant (Continued)
City of Albany
Town of Danville
Town of Hillsborough
City of Dublin
Larkspur Union School District
City of Manteca
City of Pleasant Hill
Petaluma Schools
Piedmont Unified School District
City of Saratoga
KEVIN O'CONNELL, Staff Accountant
Kevin is a graduate of Saint Mary's College with a B.S. in Accounting.
Kevin's experience includes one year at KPMG Pete Marwick as a staff
associate, and bookkeeping experience while in college. Kevin's municipal
audit experience includes:
City of Antioch
' City of Manteca
City of Pinole
Alameda Bureau of Electricity
~
SANDRA MCLUCKIE, Information Systems Manager'
~ Sandra is a graduate of the University of Toronto with an honors B.A.,
emphasis in accounting. She is a Canadian CPA with over ten years
experience, two with Deloitte, Haskins & Sells, eight with Hill & Co., a
' large Toronto accounting firm. She is a member of the Ontario Institute of
CPA's.
, New to our firm, Sandra brings with her extensive audit and accounting
experience as well as her expertise in the computer consulting field. As a
member of Maze & Associates, Sandra will assist in the EDP review phase of
~ our audits in addition to the computer consulting services that we offer.
In addition to Sandra's extensive corporate client experience, her relevant
municipal audit, EDP review and consulting experience includes: ,
i
'
1
'
Region of Durham, Province of Ontario, Canada
Town of Pickering, Province of Ontario, Canada
City of Whitby, Province of Ontario Canada
City of Saratoga, California
City of Pinole, California
East Bay Regional Park District
City of Alameda
Town of Hillsborough
City of Dublin
City of Livermore .
City of Manteca
12
r
' • ~
, RESUI~S OF THOSE INDIVIDUAIS CONDUCTING THE AUDIT (Continued)
Our other audit staff are listed in Exhibit E along with their pertinent
' experience. As you will see, we have considerable depth of experience in
municipal audits.
~
~
J
~
'
'
REFERENCES
We are proud of our references, so we have provided the following:
City of Pleasant Hill
Contact person: Rich Ricci, Director of Finance
(415) 671-3237
City of Antioch
Contact person: Ray Vignola, Assistant
City Manager
(415) 778-4531
City of Pinole
Contact Person: Joe Meneghini, Assistant City Manager
(415) 724-9000
PROPOSER'S APPROACH TO THE EXAl~IINATION
AUDIT APPROACH
'
i
'
,
~
,
'
~J
'
Our audit approach is different in 1991 in several respects. At interim we
prepare a type-written Pre-Audit Checklist for the finance department which,
details all the schedules and analyses we will need at year end. During our
interin work we review any prior year adjusting entries with an eye toward
naking these entries part of the closing process by including thea in your
Pre-Audit Checklist. We review the Checklist with the Finance Department at
interim so that the staff will know well in advance exactly what we need to
complete the year end audit and when we need it.
We have also developed a new approach to our year end work which we will use for
the first time at Dublin this year and which we expect to help us reduce next
year's audit costs. At year end we begin our work in our office well in advance
of the time we come to your office, using the information you provide us based
on the Checklist. We use this information to prepare preliminary financial
statement drafts, including notes, and we do a manager and partner-level
analysis of the financial statements and the other information you have
provided. {ihen our staff and supervisor arrive at your office they are
thoroughly briefed, armed with draft financial statements and pertinent
questions and they lrnow which areas need the most attention. The obvious
questions have already been addressed; partner and manager level questions have
already been resolved or reduced to writing for follow-up during the audit.
This approach is much more efficient, greatly reduces the impact on the Finance
Department's staff and speeds the preparation of the final financial
statements. We furnish both the Finance Director and the City Manager with
these draft financial statements, so that they have much more time to review the
financial statements and raise questions while we are still in the City's
offices.
13
~
~ . ~
, AUDIT APPROACH (Continued)
As you can see, our approach to auditing emphasizes finding practical, workable
answers to the questions which arise out of an audit and we work closely with
~ you to minimize the impact of the audit process on your workload.
We also rotate our audit emphasis from year-to-year, based in part on our
' planning meetings with you. We have been able to help our clients resolve areas
of concern or improve controls through this rotation, simply by knowing their
concerns before we begin our work.
' STATEMENTS AND REPORTS
~
~
,
'
'
'
~
Our approach to financial statement preparation emphasizes readability and
communication of useful information. We focus on reducing technical accounting
information to essentials which are understandable to the reader. At Exhibit B
we have included examples of financial statements, produced by our Lotus-based
financial statement program.
Some more colorful examples of our approach are included in Exhibit A. Color
graphs such as these were used in the statistical information sections of three
of our clients' Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports in 1990. As far as we
Irnow, these graphs are a first - no one has ever used color graphs or
color-keyed statistical information in CAFRs before.
We take a similar approach to making recommendations, looking for practical
ideas which will improve controls where necessary without unduly increasing
costs. We also look for potential cost-savings as we perform our work.
{~le will provide you with rough drafts of the financial statements as we begin
our year-end work in your offices if you give us your closing trial balances in
advance_ The refinement and finalization of the financial statements and
reports will take place as we complete our year-end work, so that we'll be able
to issue our final reports shortly after we complete our work in your offices.
GANN LIKIT REVIEL7
'
'
'
,
'
'
We will review the City of Dublin's compliance with the Appropriations Limit
restrictions imposed by Propositions 4 and 111; as you know, the law requires
only a review, not an audit, of the calculation of the current year increment to
the City's Gann Limit. We have attended the League of California Cities' seminar
and we have done our own research on the reporting requirements arising out of
passage of Proposition 111; Exhibit B is an example of our letter to clients on
the matter along with our proposed report format.
14
'
' • •
' COI~PUTER AUDIT CAPABILITIES
We use Lotus 1-2-3 and Allways to produce the financial and statistical reports
, required for your reports. We have developed a financial statement format
program which uses the computer to perform all the arithmetic functions required
after the raw numbers are input. We also use the computer to check its own
arithmetic and to cross-reference amounts between financial statements. This
, approach saves time and improves accuracy.
Our approach is to audit through the computer system. As part of the audit our
' Information Systems Manager will perform a separate review and evaluation of
your information system controls and procedures. This evaluation normally
results in additional recommendations concerning computer operations and
' security.
We use laptop computers in our field-work and, as noted above, we have
completely computerized the financial statement preparation process. However,
' our experience has been that computerized auditing systems packages are not
cost-effective and can disrupt our client's operations.
' AUDIT SCOPE
We will audit the general purpose financial statements of the City of Dublin as
of June 30, 1992, 1993, 1994, and 1995 for the years then ended. Our audits
' will be made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the
standards for financial and compliance audits contained in the Standards for
Audit of Governmental Organizations Programs, Activities, and Functions, issued
' by the U.S. General Accounting Office, the Single Audit Act of 1984, and the
provisions of OMB Circular A-128, Audits of State and Local Governments if a
single audit is required. Al1 of these standards are summarized in the
, Governmental Accounting Auditing and Financial Reporting publication.
As part of our audits, we will study and evaluate the internal accounting and
administrative control structure and make such tests of transactions and records
' and perform such other auditing procedures as we consider necessary to enable us
to express our opinion as to whether the financial statements present fairly the
financial position and results of operations of the City of Dublin in accordance
, with generally accepted accounting principles.
We will issue the following separate reports:
r 1) Audit report on the general purpose financial statements of the City of
Dublin.
' 2) Management and internal control report including our findings and
recommendations for improvements in internal control structure and
procedures, compliance with laws and regulations or other material matters.
' 3) Single Audit Act Opinions.
' 4) Transportation Development Act Opinion
5) Appropriations Limit Compliance Letter (see below).
'
15
~
I'J
'
,
~
I~J
'
'
'
'
1
,
• ~
AIIDIT SCOPE (Continued)
At Exhibit C we have included drafts of the above reports, with the exception of
the Appropriation Limit Compliance Letter, which is at Exhibit B.
We will review drafts of all the above reports with you and your staff before
they are issued in final form. We will issue all the above reports in November
of each year, assuming the City's books are closed six weeks before.
The purpose of our audits is to express opinions on the general purpose
financial statements or compliance with applicable standards. If we discover
material errors, defalcations, or other irregularities or other instances which
require extended services, we will consult with the City before proceeding.
As part of our Single Audit Act and Transportation Development Act audits, we
will select and test transactions for compliance with applicable laws, rules and
regulations. As part of complying with these regulations we will disclose
instances of noncompliance.
COMPENSATION
Our fees are based on the time and expenses required to successfully complete
the engagement. In determining our fees, we understand the City's records will
be in condition to be audited; that is, transactions will be properly recorded
in the general ledger and subsidiary records, these accounting records and the
original source documents will be readily available to us, we will be furnished
copies of bank reconciliations and,other reconciliations and analyses prepared
by the City and City personnel will be reasonably available to explain
procedures, prepare audit correspondence and obtain files and records. Our fee
also assumes the City's size and scope of operations will not change
significantly in future years.
The hours we plan to expend on the City's audit are presented below, by staff
classification:
Partner 12
'
Manager 54
Supervisor 121
Associates 143
,
Office staff ?8
358
'
'
'
'
1
,
Exhibit F is our preliminary working time budget by staff classification and audit
section; we have included it to give you more insight into how we plan to spend
the hours above.
In comparing our proposal with others, you may notice we plan to spend fewer hours
on the work. We have compared our time budget with our actual time based on our
history with the City. Gle are quite confident ve will be able to complete the
work in the hours budgeted, assuming the City meets its responsibilities, because
of our people's depth of training and experience combined with the proven
efficiencies of our Pre-Audit Checklist and year-end approach of preparing rough
draft financial statements before we begin our field-work. Note that we have
included the names and resimes of the supervisor and staff associates we have
assigned to your work; even our least experienced associate has been on several
city audits. This experience, especially at the staff level, translates into
fewer hours spent in your office, less disruption of your staff and a more
efficient audit.
16
, ~ •
~
'
1
'
C_1
HOURLY RATES
NAKE/FUNGTION HOURI.Y RATE
1. Scott Maze Partner $160
2. Cory Biggs Audit Manager 95
3. Fred Marsh Audit Supervisor 55
4. Kevin 0'Connell Associate 48
5. Sandra McLuckie Information Systems Manager 100
ADDITIONAL DATA
CONTINUING EDUCATION
'
,
'
~
'
,
~
We hold continuing education classes for clients as well as staff. This
February our Introductory Governmental Accounting, Auditing and Financial
Reporting course was attended by fifteen people from eight client cities or
districts in addition to the people from our audit staff. We hold these
courses in our office in Walnut Creek and informality is the key. The courses
are structured to maximize class discussion so that participants can learn from
their peers as well as from lectures. Dress is informal, meals are brought in
and client reaction is very enthusiastic!
Some of the subjects our clients have asked us to cover in the future include
Debt Refundings and Defeasances, Single Audit Act, Mello-Roos and Assessment
District accounting, Preparing for the Audit, and Joint Powers Authorities.
As part of our continuing education program, all professional staff receive at
least forty hours of education annually. Our program places heavy emphasis on
governmental accounting and auditing classes conducted by the California
Society of CPA's, the American Institute of CPA's and the Government Finance
Officers Association. Four of our staff attended the recent California Society
of Municipal Finance Officers convention and one of our Managers, Cory Biggs,
has served as a reviewer of CAFRS for the CSMFO and GFOA. All our auditors
receive at least 24 hours annually of education specifically related to
municipal auditing and accounting.
' Our Managers are specifically responsible for staying abreast of FASB, GASB and
tax developments which can affect our clients and for alerting our staff and
our clients to these developments. Cory Biggs and Maria Contreras share the
, responsibility for GASB developments, Cory also tracks FASB developments and
Tim Krisch is responsible for tax developments.
' We are members of the Government Finance Officers Association and the
California Society of Municipal Finance Officers.
,
'
' 17
'
'
'
,
'
~
1
~
'
~
'
i •
QUALITY ASSURANCE
We are a member of the Quality Review Program of the AICPA. As a relatively new
firm, our first peer review is scheduled for July, 1991. We have established a
formal quality assurance program administered by one of our audit managers which
meets or exceeds the standards now in effect. Our firm has never been the object
of any disciplinary action by the AICPA or any other professional or governmental
body.
Our municipal audit reports are subject to annual review by various branches of the
Office of the State Controller. City audit reports and school district audit
reports receive particular scrutiny. Of course, several of our clients reports are
also reviewed by CSMFO and GFOA for award consideration; every report submitted has
won an award from one of these organizations.
The State Controller's Office performed a review of our Single Audit Act work and
reported that our work is in substantial compliance with generally accepted
auditing standards and generally accepted governmental auditing standards, and is
on the same level as that of the large accounting firms.
PERSONNEL POLICIES
We are an equal opportunity employer. Our present staff includes five males and
fourteen females and both sexes are represented in every staff classification from
office staff to manager; there is only one owner. Three of our present staff are
of Asian descent, one is part American Indian. As a matter of practice our hiring,
management and personnel decisions are based solely on an individual's skills and
knowledge.
We are registered with the State as a small or minority owned business enterprise.
~~*~*~~~~t*~~**
, We firmly believe the skills, experience and dedication of the people we have
committed to work on your audit are superior to any combination which may be
offered by any other firm compering with us.
'
,
,
~~
'
1
'
We are confident we can serve you better. As a relatively new firm, we combine
the experience we gained in older firms with an enthusiasm for new approaches
to our clients' problems.
Most important, we are a client-centered firm; we are in business to help you
succeed.
We look forward to working with you!
~
18
,
'
'
~
'
~
~
'
,
,
'
~
'
~
'
'
'
t
'
• i Exhibit A
CITY OF DUBLIN
COIAR GRAPHS
In 1990 we introduced the use of color graphs in the statistical sections of
three of our clients CAFRs. Our purpose was to make the statistical sections
more readable, more informative and more interesting to all readers, including
readers who are not "numbers-oriented".
'
'
1
'
'
1
' ~..
~
~
0
~
t ..,
~
~
1
~
t
'
,
' FISCAL
YEAR
~ 1981
1982
1983
' ]yR4
i~R~
19R6
1987
' ]y43
198y
1990
1
i •
CITY OF EXAMPLE
CiENERAL REVENUES BY SC7URCE
ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
~ TA.XES ~ LICENSES/PERMITS ~ INTERGOVERNMENTAL
- USE OF MONEY/PROP. ~ SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS ~ FINES/FORFEITS/MISC
AXES LICENCES
PERMITS AND
SERVICE
CHARGES
IN"1'ERGOVERN-
MENTAL
$9,152,571 $2,070,898 $S,lOb,834
10,242,899 2,062,b05 4,200,440
11,408,336 Z,76b,516 4,747,671
12,869,524 2,253,202 4,308,322
18,333,611 2,866,756 9,344,068
21,573,543 3,010,281 8,878,689
?3,889,780 4,295,051 6,178,546
20,609,350 5,296,438 6,714,558
22,766,213 4,002,236 8,803,047
24,084,561 4,279,980 14,444,467
USE OF
MONEI'
AND
PROPERTY
SPECIAL.
ASSESSMENTS FINES
FORFEITS
AND MISC.
REVENUE
OTAL
$~50,440 $451,583 $17,332,326
1,R0'2,149 537,644 18,847,737
2,613,017 $797,759 999,516 23,337,R15
1,922,?74 825,499 1,005,068 ~,183,889
3,450,829 1,453,553 1,534,380 36,983,197
5,326,419 2,581,184 1,660,504 43,030,620
S,b79,557 6,025,679 3,549,464 49,618,077
4,22y,626 6,168,400 1,678,816 44,6y7,133
2,889,671 6,234,145 1,810,372 46,505,684
6,543,0?2 6,210,706 1,571,759 57,134,555
,
1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
,
'
'
'
'
,
,
'
'
'
'
'
1
1
,
'
'
'
,
~ •
CITY OF EXAMPLE
CALIF~RNIA PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMFNT SYSTEM
FUNDING ANALYSIS
LAST THREE FISCAL YEARS
$40
$35
$30
^ $25
~
~
~
'~ $20
~
~
~,
$15
$10
$5
$0
1987 1988 ~ 1989
~ NET ASSETS - PENSION BENEFIT ~ UNFUNDED ~ ANNUAL PAYROLL
PERCENT OF
UNFUNDED UNFUNDED PENSION
NE'T ASSEI'S PENSION PENSION ANNLTAL BENEFIT OBLIGATION
FISCAL AVAILABLE BENEFIT PERCENT BENEFIT COVERED TO ANNUAL COVERED
YEAR FOR BENEFITS nBLIGATION FtrNDED OBLIGATION PAYROLL PAYROLL
1987 $24,169,200 $32,167,800 75.13% $7,~8,6(~ $9,550,6()0 83.75%
1988 27,079,100 34,643,300 78.17~'0 7,564,2(m 10,796,500 70.UC%
1989 30,656,471 37,669,659 £~1.3£~ro 7,813,188 11,573,600 67.51°,~0
'
'
1
,
'
~
,
1
'
1
t
'
,
,
,
'
'
'
~ CIT~' OF EXAMPLE ~
PROPERT~' TAX RATES
ALL ~VERLAPPING GOVERNMENTS
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
,-.
~
~
~
b
~
~
x
~
a
.~
~OUNTY WIDE LEVY
~
_ BONDS
STRICT
FISCAL
YEAR BASIC COUNTY
WIDE LEVY
CITY ` SCHOOL
BONDS SCHOOL
DISTRICT
BART
COLLEGE
1981 $4.0000 $0.0175 $0.0971 N/A $0.0752 $0.0288
1982 1.0000 0.0175 0.0986 N/A 0.0697 0.0226
1983 1.0000 0.0175 0.1~4 N/A 0.062~ 0.0256
19&1 1.0000 0.0175 0.1017 N/A 0.0617 0.0184
1985 1.0000 0.0175 0.0155 $0.0777 0.0572 0.0184
198b 1.0000 0.0175 0.0130 0.0717 0.0508 0.0177
1987 1.0000 0.0175 0.~78 0.0656 0.0421 0.0159
19~8 1.0000 0.0175 0.0069 0.0579 0.0390 0.0163
19g9 1.0000 0.0175 0.4fl58 0.0492 0.0372 0.0131
1990 1.0000 0.0175 0.1595 0.0~18 0.0319 0.0126
'
1981 1982 1983 1984 19$S 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
' ~ '~
CIT~' OF EXAMPLE
' PR~PERTY VALUES, CONSTRUCTION AND BANK DEPOSITS
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
F
0
~
~
0
~
^ 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1956 1987 1988 1989 1990
- COMMERCIAL CONST. ~ BANK DEPOSITS
' COMMERCIAL CONSTRUC'I'ION RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
FISCAL PROPER'TY NtiMBER NUMBER
' YEAR VALUES OF LTNITS VALUE OF UNITS VALUE
1981 $277,356,375 N/A (1) $4,266 156 $12,649,527
, 1982 1,258,550,298 N/A (1j 8,219,000 107 7,756,459
1983 1,367,405,090 N/A (1) 22,711 138 10,5(i5,280
1984 1,421,354,864 'll 30,497,130 420 38,6~,754
' 1985 1,607,799,274 25 14,861,982 901 49,635,847
19i~h 1,846,010,373 42 33,601,272 1005 47,415,874
1987 2,059,914,491 23 4,423,534 932 36,732,357
1988 2,321,680,112 38 35,445,890 1442 89,530,702
' 1989 2,559,257,261 13 6,989,400 9?9 26,578,198
1990 2,944,471,191 110 20,828,525 3755 38,470,486
, (1) DATA NOT AVAILARLE
,
'
BANK DEPOSITS
N/A (1)
N/A (1)
N/A (1)
N/A (1)
$807,562,000
841,861,000
894,675,000
939,204,000
961,542,000
N/A (1)
1Y81 198Z IYBS 1Y84 lYBJ 1Y86 lY8! lY8!{ lY1~Y lYYU
~ RESIDENTIAL CONST.
~ PROPERTY VALUE
' • ~ Exhibit B
'
1
,
,
'
L
'
Honorable Members of the
City Council of the City of Dublin, California
We have applied the procedures enumerated below to the accompanying Appropriations
Limit worksheet #6 of the City of Dublin for the year ended June 30, 1992. These
procedures, which were suggested by the League of California Cities and presented in
their Article XIIIB Appropriations Limitation Uniform Guidelines, were performed
solely to assist you in meeting the requirements of Section 1.5 of Article XIIIB of
the California Constitution. This report is intended for the information of
management and the City Council; however, this restriction is not intended to limit
the distribution of this report, which is a matter of public record.
At your request, based on the League of California Cities' interpretation of
' Article %IIIB of the California Constitution, the scope of our vork egcluded anp
tests or other procedures regarding the accuracy of the 1978-79 or 1986-87 "base
year" appropriations limit calculations.
, The procedures you requested us to perform and our findings were as follows:
A. We obtained the completed worksheets (#1 through #7) presented in the Article
' XIIIB Appropriations Limitation Uniform Guidelines (or other alternative
computations), and determined that the limit and annual adjustment factors were
adopted by resolution of the City Council. We also determined that the
' population and inflation options were selected by a recorded vote of the City
Council.
' B. For the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet #6, we added line A, last
year's limit, to line E, total adjustments, and agreed the resulting amount to
line F, this year's limit.
' C. We agreed the current year information presented in the accompanying
Appropriations Limit worksheet #6 to the other worksheets described in #1 above.
' D. We agreed the prior year appropriations limit presented in the accompanying
Appropriations Limit worksheet #6 to the prior year appropriations limit adopted
by the City Council during the prior year.
' These agreed-upon procedures are substantially less in scope than an audit, the
objective of which is the expression of an opinion on the accompanying
Appropriations Limit worksheet #6. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.
,
'
,
' i ~ Exhibit B
' Based on the application of the procedures referred to above, nothing came
to our attention which caused us to believe that the accompanying
Appropriations Limit worksheet #6 was not computed in accordance with
' Article XIIIB of the California Constitution, as interpreted in the
California League of Cities Article XIIIB Appropriations Limit Uniform
Guidelines. Had we performed additional procedures or had we made an
, audit of the accompanying Appropriations Limit worksheet #6 and the other
completed worksheets described in #1 above, matters might have come to our
attention which would have been reported to you.
,
1
'
'
,
'
'
'
'
,
~
'
~
1
'
'
~
'
'
•
•
Exhibit C
AUDITOR'S REPORT ON THE GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEHENTS
~ Honorable Members of the
City Council of the City of Dublin, California
' We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Dublin as of
and for the years ended June 30, 1992 and 1991 as listed in the table of contents.
These financial statements are the responsibility of the City's management. Our
' responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our
audit.
~ We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards.
Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable
assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement.
An audit includes examining on a test basis evidence supporting the amounts and
~ disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit
' provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the general purpose financial statements referred to in the first
paragraph present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the
, City of Dublin at June 30, 1992 and 1991 the results of its operations and cash
flows of its proprietary fund types for the years then ended in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles.
~ Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the general purpose
financial statements taken as a whole. The combining and individual account group
~ financial statements listed in the table of contents are presented for purposes of
additional analysis and are not a required part of the general purpose financial
statements of the City of Dublin. Such information has been subjected to the
' auditing procedures applied in the audit of the general purpose financial statements
and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the
general purpose financial statements taken as a whole.
~ The statistical section listed in the Table of Contents was not audited by us and,
accordingly, we do not express an opinion on this information.
' November 30, 1992
'
'
r
~ i • Exhibit C
~
'
,
Honorable Members of the
~ City Council of the City of Dublin, California
' We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Dublin
for the year erided June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated
November 30, 1992. As part of our audit, we made a study and evaluation of the
system of internal accounting control to the extent we considered necessary to
' evaluate the system as required by generally accepted auditing standards. The
purpose of our study and evaluation was to determine the nature, timing, and
extent of the auditing procedures necessary for expressing an opinion on the
' financial statements. Our study and evaluation was more limited than would be
necessary to express an opinion on the system of internal accounting control
taken as a whole.
~
~
~
'
~
'
,
~
~
'
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining a system of internal
accounting control. In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments
by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of
control procedures. The objectives of a system are to provide management with
reasonable, but not absolute assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss
from unauthorized use or disposition, and that transactions are executed in
accordance with management's authorization and recorded properly to permit the
preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles.
Because of inherent limitations in any system of internal accounting control,
errors or irregularities may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also,
projections of any evaluation of the system to future periods is subject to the
risk that procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or
that the degree of compliance with the procedures may deteriorate.
Our study and evaluation made for the limited purpose described in the first
paragraph would not necessarily disclose all material weaknesses in the
system. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the system of internal
accounting control of the City of Dublin taken as a whole. Our study and
evaluation disclosed no condition that we believe to be a material weakness.
However, our study and evaluation disclosed the following areas in which
internal controls could be strengthened.
'
,
'
'
~
,
'
1
~
'
,
,
'
~
'
i
1
1
1
1
~
•
CZTY OF DUBLIN
RECOI~IYENDATIOXS FOR I?IPRODEI'lENTS IN INTERNAL CONTROLS
"RECOMMENDATIONS INSERTED HERE"
* * * ~ * * ~ * * * * ~
Exhibit C
We would be pleased to discuss our recommendations further with you at your
convenience. We also wish to express our appreciation for the excellent
courtesy and cooperation extended to us by Phil Molina and his staff
during our audit.
November 30, 1992
'
,
,
'
~
~
Exhibit C
AUDITOR'S REPORT ON SCHEDULE OF FEDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE
'
'
'
'
~
CJ
'
~~
~I
u
'
J
'
'
,
Honorable Members of the
City Council of the City of Dublin, California
We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Dublin,
California, for the year ended June 30, 1992 and have issued our report thereon
dated November 30, 1992. These general purpose financial statements are the
responsibility of the City's management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these general purpose financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards
and Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the
United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial
statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining on a
test basis evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the general
purpose financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Our audit was made for the purpose of forming an opinion on the general purpose
financial statements taken as a whole. The accompanying Schedule of Federal
Financial Assistance is presented for purposes of additional analysis and is
not a required part of the general purpose financial statements. The
information in that schedule has been subjected to the auditing procedures
applied in the audit of the general purpose financial statements and in our
opinion is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the general
purpose financial statements taken as a whole.
November 30, 1992
L_.J
' ~ • Exhibit C
'
I~
'
,
'
~
1
'
'
'
1
'
'
'
'
,
,
REPORT ON IKlERXAL CONTROLS
ACCOUIVTING AND ADNI1VISlRATIVE
BASED ON A SlUDY AND EVAIUATIOX HADE AS A
PART OF AN AUDIT OF THE GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
AND ADDITIOAIAL TESlS REQUIRED BY TAE SINGLE AIIDIT ACl
Honorable Members of the City Council of the
City of Dublin, California
We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Dublin
for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated
November 30, 1992. As part of our audit we made a study and evaluation of the
internal control systems including the applicable internal administrative
control used in administering federal financial assistance programs of the City
of Dublin, to the extent we considered necessary to evaluate the systems as
required by generally accepted auditing standards; Government Auditing
Standards issued by the Comptroller General of the United States, the Single
Audit Act of 1984; and the provisions of OMB Circular A-128, Audits of State
and Local Governments.
For the purpose of this report, we have classified the significant internal
accounting and administrative controls used in administering federal financial
assistance programs in the following categories:
ACCOUNTING CONTROLS:
Treasury or financing
Revenue and receipts
Purchases and disbursements
External financial reporting
ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS:
General Requirements
Political activity
Davis-Bacon Act
Civil rights
Cash management
Federal financial reports
Specific Requirements
Types of services
Eligibility
Matching level of effort
Reporting
Cost allocation
Special requirements.
Monitoring subrecipients
,
1
t
'
'
'
'
'
'
'
,
'
'
'
'
!
~
AUDITOR'S REPORT ON IINTERNAL CONTIaOIS (Continued)
Exhibit C
The management of the City of Dublin is responsible for establishing and
maintaining internal control systems used in administering federal financial
ass:istance programs. In fulfilling that responsibility, estimates and
jud~;ements by management are required to assess the expected benefits and
rel~3ted cost of control procedures. The objectives of internal control systems
useci in administering federal financial assistance programs are to provide
man<agement with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that, with respect to
fedE~ral financial assistance programs, resource use is consistent with laws,
regixlations, and policies; resources are safeguarded against waste, loss and
misixse; and reliable data are obtained and maintained and fairly disclosed in
reports. '
Because of inherent limitations in any system of internal accounting and
admi:nistrative controls used in administering federal financial assistance
pro~;rams, errors or irregularities may nevertheless occur and not be detected.
Alsc>, projection of any evaluation of the systems to future periods is subject
to t:he risk that procedures may become inadequate because of changes in
conditions or that the degree of compliance with the procedures may
dete:riorate .
Our study included all of the applicable control categories listed above.
Duri.ng the year ended June 30, 1992, the City of Dublin had no major federal
fins~ncial assistance programs and expended _~ of its total federal financial
assi.stance under the nonmajor federal financial assistance programs. With
respect to internal control systems used in administering these nonmajor
fede:ral financial assistance programs, our study and evaluation included
considering the types of errors and irregularities that could occur,
dete.rmining the internal control procedures that should prevent or detect such
erro~rs and irregularities, determining whether necessary procedures are
prescribed and are being followed satisfactorily, and evaluating any
weak.nesses .
With respect to the internal control systems used solely in administering the
other nonmajor federal financial assistance programs of the City of Dublin, our
study and evaluation was limited to a preliminary review of the systems to
obtain an understanding of the control environment, and flow of transactions
through the accounting system. Our study and evaluation of the internal
control systems used solely in administering the other nonmajor federal
financial assistance programs of the City of Dublin did not extend beyond this
preliminary review phase.
' Our study and evaluations were more limited than would be necessary to express
an opinion on the internal control systems used in administering the federal
financial assistance programs of the City of Dublin. Accordingly, we do not
, express an opinion on the internal control systems used in administering the
federal financial assistance programs of the City of Dublin.
'
r
~
i
'
'
'
~
'
~
~
'
'
i
1
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
!
, !
AUDITOK'S REPORl ON INI'ERAAL C011r1'ROLS (Continued)
Exhibit C
Also, our audit, made in accordance with the standards mentioned above, would
not necessarily disclose material weaknesses in the internal control systems
used solely in administering nonmajor federal financial assistance programs.
Our study and evaluation and our audit disclosed no condition that we believe
to be a material weakness in relation to the federal financial assistance
programs of the City of Dublin.
This report is intended solely for the use of management and all applicable
federal agencies and those other government agencies from which federal
financial assistance was received and should not be used for any other
purpose. This restriction is not intended to limit the distribution of this
report, which, upon acceptance by the City of Dublin, is a matter of public
record.
November 30, 1992
' ~ ~ Exhibit C
,
'
'
'
'
'
'
REPORT ON THE INTERNAL CONTROL STRUGTURE IN ACCORDANCE
i~ITH GOVERNI~iENT AiIDITING STANDARDS
Honorable Members of the City Council
of the City of Dublin, California
We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Dublin,
California, as of and for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our
report thereon dated November 30, 1992.
We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards
and Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the
United States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial
statements are free of material misstatement.
' In planning and performing our audit of the general purpose financial
statements of the City of Dublin for the year ended June 30, 1992, we
considered its internal control structure to determine our auditing procedures
' for the purpose of expressing.our opinion on the general purpose financial
statements and not to provide assurance on the internal control structure.
' The management of the City of Dublin is responsible for establishing and
maintaining an internal control structure. In fulfilling this responsibility,
estimates and judgements by management are required to assess the expected
' benefits and related costs of internal control structure policies and
procedures. The objectives of an internal control structure are to provide
management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are
safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and that
' transactions are executed in accordance with managements'authorization and
recorded properly to permit the preparation of general purpose financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.
t Because of inherent limitations in any internal control structure, errors or
irregularities may nevertheless occur and not be detected. Also, projection of
any evaluation of the structure to future periods is subject to the risk that
' procedures may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the
effectiveness of the design and operation of policies and procedures may
deteriorate.
' For the purpose of this report, we have classified the significant internal
control structure policies and procedures in the following categories:
' Treasury or financing
Revenue and receipts
Purchases and disbursements
' External financial reporting
,
' ~~ ~ Exhibit C
1
For all of the internal control structure categories listed above, we obtained
' an understanding of the design of relevant policies and procedures and whether
they have been placed in operation, and we assessed control risk.
Our consideration of the internal control structure would not necessarily
' disclose all matters in the internal control structure that might be material
weaknesses under stiandards established by the American Institute of Certified
Public Accountants. A material weakness is a reportable condition in which the
, design or operation of one or more of the specific internal control structure
elements does not reduce to a relatively low level the risk that errors or
irregularities in amounts that would be material in relation to the general
' purpose financial statements being audited may occur and not be detected within
a timely period by employees in normal course of performing their assigned
functions. We noted no matters involving the internal control structure and
its operation that we consider to be material weaknesses as defined above.
~
'
'
~
1
'
~
'
'
'
'
,
However, we noted certain matters involving the internal control structure and
its operation that we have reported to management of the Ci~y of Dublin, in a
separate communication dated November 30, 1992.
This report is intended solely for the use of management and all applicable
federal agencies and those other government agencies from which federal
financial assistance was received and should not be used for any other
purpose. This restriction is not intended to limit the distribution of this
report, which, upon acceptance by the City of Dublin, is a matter of public
record.
November 30, 1992
,
' ~ ~ Exhibit C
LJ
'
~
COHPLIANCE REPORT BASED ON
' AN AUDTl OF TAE GENERAL PURPOSE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS PERFORHED IN ACCORDANCE
Ti~ITH GOVERNNENT AUDITING STANDARDS
'
Honorable Members of the City Council
' of the City of Dublin, California
We have audited the general purpose financial statements of the City of Dublin
' for the year ended June 30, 1992, and have issued our report thereon dated
November 30, 1992. We conducted our audit in accordance with generally
accepted auditing standards; and Government Auditing Standards, issued by
' the Comptroller General of the United States. Those standards require that we
plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
general purpose financial statements are free of material misstatement.
' Compliance with laws, regulations, contracts, and grants applicable to City of
Dublin, is the responsibility of the City's management. As part of obtaining
reasonable assurance about whether the general purpose financial statements are
' free of material misstatement, we performed tests of the City's compliance with
certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grants. However, our
objective was not to provide an opinion on overall compliance with such
' provisions.
The results of our tests indicate that, with respect to the items tested, the
City of Dublin complied in all material respects with the provisions referred
, to in the proceeding paragraph. With respect to items not tested, nothing came
to our,attention that caused us to believe that the Town had not complied, in
all material respects, with those provisions.
, This report is intended solely for the use of management and all applicable
federal agencies and those other government agencies from which federal
, financial assistance was received and should not be used for any other
purpose. This restriction is not intended to limit the distribution of this
report, which, upon acceptance by the City of Dublin, is a matter of public
record.
'
~
November 30, 1992
'
'
'
,
'
'
'
'
'
'
~ ! .
SINGLE AUDIT REPORT ON CO/YPLIANCE (~ITA REQUIRE!lENTS
APPLICABLE TO NOX~fATOR FIDERAL FINANCIAL ASSISlANCE
PROGRAN TRANSAClIONS
Honorable Members of the City Council
of the City of Dublin, California
Exhibit C
In connection with our audit of the general purpose financial statements of
City of Dublin, for the year ended June 30, 1992 and with our study and
evaluation of the City's internal control systems used to administer federal
financial assistance programs, as required by OMB Circular A-128, "Audits of
State and Local Governments," we selected certain transactions applicable to
certain nonmajor federal financial assistance programs for the year ended
November 30, 1992.
' As required by OMB Circular A-128, we have performed auditing procedures to
test compliance with the requirements governing types of services allowed or
unallowed; and eligibility that are applicable to those transactions. Our
procedures were substantially less in scope that an audit, the objective of
' which is the expression of an opinion on the City's compliance with these
requirements. Accordingly we do not express such an opinion.
'
'
'
C~
'
'
'
'
With respect to the items tested, the results of those procedures disclosed no
material instances of noncompliance with the requirements listed in the
preceding paragraph. With respect to items not tested, nothing came to our
attention that caused us to believe that the City had not complied, in all
material respects, with those requirements. However, the results of our
procedures disclosed immaterial instances of noncompliance with those
requirements, which are described in the accompanying schedule of findings and
questioned costs.
This report is intended for the information of the management, and all
applicable federal agencies and those other government agencies from which
federal financial assistance was received and should not be used for any other
purpose. This restriction is not intended to limit the distribution of this
report, which is a matter of public record.
November 30, 1992
'
' ~ , Exhibit C
~
'
'
,
'
~
~J
'
LJ
,
'
'
,
'
REPORT OF CERlIFlID PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT
Honorable Members of the City Council
of the City of Dublin, California
We have audited the financial statements of the City of Dublin
Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects, a fund of the City of Dublin, as of and for the
year ended June 30, 1992, as listed in the table of contents. These financial
statements are the responsibility of the City's management. Our responsibility
is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of
material misstatements. An audit includes examining on a test basis evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit
also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant
estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audit-provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion.
As discussed in Note 1 A, the accompanying financial statements include the
City of Dublin Bicycle/Pedestrian Projects, and are intended to present the
financial position and results of operations for the Transportation Development
Act Special Revenue Fund.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Project
at June 30, 1992 and the results of its operations for the period then ended in
conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.
In connection with our examination, we also performed tests of compliance as
required by the California Administrative Code, Title 21, Chapter 3, Subchapter
2, Article 5.5.
In our opinion, based on the procedures described in the preceding paragraph,
' the City of Dublin has complied with the applicable laws, rules and
regulations of the agreement referred to above.
' November 30, 1992
'
'
,
~ •
Exhibit D
'
'
,
,
'
,
~
~
'
'
'
~
'
'
'
'
'
'
CITY OF DUBLIN
MUNICIPAL CLIII~ITS
We are proud of our extensive list of governmental, special district and school
district audit clients. Our governmental clients are listed below:
Cities:
City of Alameda
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Redevelopment Agency Audit and Compliance Reports
Single Audit Act Report
Transportation Development Act Audit Report
Mortgage Revenue Bond Fund
Retirement System Pension Plan
City of Albany
General Purpose Financial Statements
Redevelopment Agency Audit and Compliance Reports
Public Facilities Financing Authority Controller's Report
Single Audit Act Report
Measure B Compliance Opinion
Police and Fire Relief and Retirement System Pension Plan Audit and
Controller's Report
Transit Operations Controller's Report
City of Antioch
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Redevelopment Agency Audit and Compliance Reports
Single Audit Act Report
City Controller's Report
Transportation Development Act Audit Report
Town of Danville
General Purpose Financial Statements
Redevelopment Agency Audit and Compliance Reports
Single Audit Act Report
Transportation Development Act Audit Report
City of Dublin
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Transportation Development Act Audit Report
Single Audit Act Report
Town of Hillsborough
General Purpose Financial Statements
Measure A Compliance Opinion
City of Livermore
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Redevelopment Agency Audit and Compliance Reports
Public Facilities Corporation Audit Report
Single Audit Act Report
Measure B Compliance Opinion
Capital Financing Authority Controller's Report
' ~ . Exhibit D
City of Larkspur
~ General Purpose Financial Statements
City of Los Banos
~ Software consulting and installation of BRC modules
Accounting assistance
City of Manteca
~ Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Redevelopment Agency Audit, Compliance and Controller's Reports
Recreational Facilities Corporation Audit and Controller's Reports
' Transit Operations Controller's Report
Single Audit Act Report
~ City of Pleasant Hill
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
Redevelopment Agency Audit and Compliance Reports
Residential Mortgage Revenue Bond Fund Audit ~
~ City Controller's Report
Special District Controller's Report
Transportation Development Act Audit Report
' City of Pinole
General Purpose Financial Statements
Redevelopment Agency Audit and Compliance Reports
' City of Saratoga
General Purpose Financial Statements
, Single Audit Act Report
Transportation Development Act Audit Report
~ Special Districts and Authorities:
Bureau of Electricity of the City of Alameda
General Purpose Financial Statements
' Various Compliance Reports
Housing Authority of the City of Alameda
~ Special consulting
East Bay Regional Park District
, General Purpose Financial Statements
Special District Controller's Report
Single Audit Act Report
' Hayward Area Recreation and Park District
General Purpose Financial Statements
Special District Controller's Report
' Livermore Area Recreation and Park District
General Purpose Financial Statements
' Special District Controller's Report
Financing Authority Audit and Controller's Reports
'
i
1
'
~
1
'
1
'
'
~
'
r
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
t
~ . Exhibit D
Livermore Amador Valley Wastewater Management Authority •
General Purpose Financial Statements -
Special District Controller's Report
Ross Valley Paramedic Authority
General Purpose Financial Statements
Tri-Valley Wastewater Authority
General Purpose Financial Statements
Special District Controller's Report
School Districts:
For all of the following school districts we prepared and submitted General
Purpose Financial Statements, Single Audit Reports and State Compliance
Reports:
Larkspur School District
Orinda Union School District
Petaluma Schools
Piedmont Unified School District
Ross Valley School District
Tamalpais Union High School District
'
'
' In the event
to illness,
substituted.
~
CITY OF DUBLIN
OTHFR AVAIIABLE STAFF
~
Exhibit E
one of the people assigned to your audit is unable to continue due
accident or other cause, one of the people below will be
' MARIA CONTRERAS, Manager
t
1
,
'
'
'
'
~
,
'
'
'
1
'
Maria is a graduate of St. Mary's College with five years experience in
private accounting. She is a California CPA, a member of the AICPA,
California Society of CPA's and NAA. Since joining our firm in 1986, Maria
has participated in the following municipal audits:
City of Alameda
City of Antioch
Hayward Area Park and Recreation District
Town of Hillsborough
City of Manteca
South San Joaquin Irrigation District
Larkspur School District
Mill Valley School District
Orinda Union School District
Petaluma Schools
Piedmont Unified School District
Ross Valley School District ,
Shoreline Unified School District
Tamalpais Union High School District
TIMOTHY KRISCX, Manager
Tim received a Bachelor of Arts Degree and a Bachelor of Science Degree
from Eastern Illinois University and is pursuing his Master of Science in
Taxation form Golden Gate University. He is a Certified Public Accountant
in the State of California. He is a member of the American Institute of
Certified Public Accountants, the California Society of Certified Public
Accountants and the American Management Association. He was employed by
Peterson & Co., a certified public accounting firm specializing in
construction related litigation claims, and Wallace, Mah & Louie, Certified
Pubic Accountants, for a total of nine years prior to joining Maze &
Associates. His experience has been in a wide variety of industries
including manufacturing, retail, real estate construction and development,
service oriented industries and not-for-profit organizations. His relevant
audit experience includes:
Northern California Grantmakers
Valley Volunteer Center
Junior Achievement of the Bay Area
San Francisco Economic Development Center
Match-two Prisoner Outreach
Bay Area Business Development Corporation
San Francisco Convention Facilities
San Francisco Convention & Visitors Bureau
1
~
C
~
,
'
'
'
~
'
'
'
'
i
MARY DODGE, Supervisor
CITY OF DUBLIN
OTHER AVAIIABLE STAFF
•
Exhibit E
Mary has a combination of skill which lends itself particularly to
municipal audit work. Her initial public accounting experience was gained
at Touche Ross, where her clients included the City of Sacramento,
Sacramento Redevelopment Agency, and other governmental clients.
Mary was also Controller of the University Foundation at California State
University, Chico for over four years and thus has a unique perspective
regarding goverrunental accounting problems and needs. She also has
extensive federal and State grant experience.
Since joining our firm, Mary has concentrated on governmental and fund
accounting and auditing, and has experience on the following clients:
City of Albany
City of Antioch
California State University Sacramento,
Associated Students, Inc.
California State University Sacramento,
Associated Students Children's Center
California State University Hayward,
Associated Students, Inc.
City of Livermore
City of Rocklin
City of Dublin
City of Pleasant Hill
Livermore Area Recreation and Park District
Reed Union School District
Petaluma Schools
Piedmont Unified School District
Ross School District
Lagunitas School District
, KIM ABELE, Supervisor
Kim graduated from CSU Hayward in 1985 with a B.S. in Business, emphasis is
Accounting. Kim passed the CPA examination on her first try in May 1988 and is
, awaiting her certificate. Kim worked as a bookkeeper while in college and
continued in private accounting for Long's Drugs upon graduation. She joined us
' in February 1988 and has added greatly to our pool of
assisted in refining our computer financial statement Lotus skills. Kim has
preparation programs,
including developing a whole new set of macros. She has gained governmental
audit experience working on the following clients:
'
City of Livermore
City of Pleasant Hill
City of Antioch
' City of Rocklin
City of Manteca
' City of Pinole
'
'
'
'
,
,
~
'
'
~
'
,
,
'
'
'
'
'
'
• . Exhibit E
CITY OF DUBLIN
OTNIIt AVAIIABLE STAFF
KIM ABELE, Supervisor (Continued)
City of E1 Cerrito
Tamalpais Union High School District
JANE CORPUS, Supervisor
Jane is a graduate of CSU Hayward with a B.S. in Business, emphasis in
accounting. Jane's experience includes three years in Accounting for Safeway
Stores while she was a student. She also has experience with computers and
excellent knowledge of Lotus 1-2-3. Jane's municipal audit experience includes:
City of Antioch
City of Livermore
City of Alameda
California State University Sacramento,
Associated Students, Inc.
East Bay Regional Park District
Hayward Area Recreation and Park District
City of Manteca Recreational Facilities, Inc.
East Bay Sanitary, Inc.
Orinda Union School District
City of Saratoga
Ross Valley School District
Tamalpais Union High School District
Petaluma Schools
SYLVIA MA, Associate
Sylvia graduated from CSU Sacramento in 1990 with a B.S. in Business
Administration, emphasis in accounting. She gained valuable accounting
experience as an intern at McMullen, McPhee and Co., CPA's and while working at
Teichert Construction, Inc, as an accounting assistant while in college.
Sylvia's municipal audit experience includes:
City of Alameda
City of Antioch
East Bay Regional Park District
Livermore Area Recreation and Park District
Petaluma Schools
City of Pleasant Hill
Tri-Valley Waste Water Authority
Ross Valley School District
Orinda Union School District
'
' ~ • Exhibit E
1
CITY OF DUBLIN
OTHER AVAIIABLE STAFF
' MARY ANN LUKE, Staff Accountant
' Mary Ann graduated from CSU Sacramento in 1990 with a B.S. in Business, emphasis
in Accounting. She has gained valuable accounting experience with internships
at Chevron USA, Inc., the Sacramento County Department of Public Works, and
, Macias & Pierini, Certified Public Accountants in Sacramento. Her relevant
governmental audit experience is as follows:
' City of Albany
City of Antioch
California Housing Council
City of Dublin
, City of Livermore
City of Manteca Recreational Facilities, Inc.
Piedmont Unified School District
t City of Pinole
SABRINA MYER, Staff Associate
' Sabrina is currently attending CSU Hayward and is pursing a B.S. in
Business. She currently has an A.A. degree in Business from Butte Junior
College. She is working full time in our Small Business Department and has
' significant EDP skills, primarily in general ledger software, LOTUS and
DOS. She has been approved as a qualified 'installer for the ACCPAC family
of Software. She has experience on the following clients:
'
,
,
'
~
'
'
'
City of Manteca
City of Concord, Castle Construction
Air Bearings, Inc.
Heuristic Software, Inc.
Phillabuck, Inc.
Physicians Benefit Trust
Preiss & Hammel, Attorneys at Law
Albertsons Carpet Cleaning
A1's Roofing Supply, Inc.
Motion Systems, Inc.
Popcorn Enterprises, Inc.
HP Distributors
Kennett Pizza
UFMC Health Systems
ANNE MAZE, Staff Associate
Anne has her B.S. in Economics from U.C. Santa Cruz. She has experience on
the following governmental clients:
East Bay Sanitary, Inc.
~ City of Antioch
City of Alameda
Livermore Public Facilities Corp.
City of Pinole
~
' ~ •
EXHIBIT F
~ CITY OF DUBLIN
PROPOSED AUDIT FEES AND HOURS
~ 1992 1993 1994 1995
Partner Menager Supervisor Staff Lotus Typing Proposed Proposed Proposed Proposed
'991 Proposed Audit Fee:
General Purpose
Financial Statements
~ $288 $2,394 $2,772 55,144 $300 $167 $11,065 $11,618 $12,199 $12,809
in e Audit
81 288 599 1,188 67 2,142 2,249 2,362 2,480
~ransportation Development Act Audit 288 342 248 648 67 67 1,660 1,743 1,830 1,922
Total Audit Fees 864 3,335 4,208 5,792 367 301 14,867 15,610 16,391 17,210
~'re
aration of CAFR 864 026
1 1
238 133 133 394
3 3
564 3
742 929
3
p , , , , , ,
~rop. 111 Compliance 257 545 802 842 884 928
Total Billable Fees $1,728 $4,618 $5,991 $5,792 5500 $434 $19,063 520,016 $21,017 $22,068
d
d
~9
91 Propose
Au
it Hours:
udit of General Purpose
~
Financial Statements 2 28 56 127 9 5 227 227 227 227
ingle Audit 2 7 24 2 35 35 35 35
tansportation Development Act Audit 2 4 5 16 2 2 31 31 31 3l
~rop. 111 Compliance 3 I1 14 14 14 14
Preparation of CAFR 6 12 25 4 4 51 51 51 51
i Total Audit Hours 12 54 121 143 15 13 358 358 358 358
i ~
1
1
i
1
1