My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
AG19900416
CabarrusCountyDocuments
>
Public Meetings
>
Agendas
>
BOC
>
1990
>
AG19900416
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/28/2003 9:14:38 AM
Creation date
11/27/2017 12:04:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting Minutes
Doc Type
Agenda
Meeting Minutes - Date
4/16/1990
Board
Board of Commissioners
Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
154
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
April 27, 1990 <br /> <br /> To: Board of Coml~issioners <br /> <br /> From: Blair D. Bennett, Finance Director <br /> <br /> subject: Appointment of Audit Firm <br /> <br /> During the past seven years, Cabarrus County has employed the firm <br /> of Ernst & Young for the audit engagement. Each year we have <br /> negotiated the proposed fee and renewed the contract. This year we <br /> decided to do a formal request for proposal for the audit. Since <br /> the County Finance Department staff is now preparing the entire <br /> financial report With a~l statements, schedules, workpapers, and <br /> footnotes, it was my belief that the current fee did not reflect <br /> the proper credit for these in-house services. We mailed request <br /> or proposals to eighteen audit firms and six proposals were <br /> eturned. Each firm was required to address several areas <br /> reflecting their professional competence and experience with <br /> governmental unit audits. I have enclosed a copy of the request for <br /> proposal in the agenda package. Several of the audit firms made <br /> appointments to discus~ the audit engagement and obtained <br /> information before making proposals. Please find below a schedule <br /> of the firms' proposals and related fees. <br /> <br /> Anticipated <br /> Firm 1990 1991 1992 <br /> <br /> BDO Seidman 32,000 34,000 36,000 <br /> Cooper & Lybrand 33,000 36,000 39,000 <br /> Deloitte & Touche 36,000 37,800(1) 39,700(1) <br /> Dixon & Odom 32,000 33,500 35,000 <br /> KPMG Peat Marwick 33,400 36,74'0(2) 40,414(2) <br /> Potter & Co. 23,500 25,150 26,650 <br /> (1) Increase tied to Consumer Price Index, not to exceed 5%. <br /> <br /> (2) Increase in subsequent years only to extent of inflation, <br /> not to exceed 10%. <br /> <br />qAfter reviewing all thecriteria required and checking references, <br />I r~commend that Cabarrus County award a one year contract to <br />Potter & Co. with an 6ption to renew the contract at the 'above <br />uoted prices for the ensuing years. <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.