Good afternoon, everyone. Okay, we're going to get started. I'll turn it over to Dana Ebanks. It's all yours. Thank you. Good afternoon, everyone. I'm Dana Cohen-Ebanks, purchasing manager and the meeting facilitator. I would like to call to order this committee meeting for request for proposal RFP number GEN 213-253-3P1 for external audit services for the Office of the County Auditor. The time is 1242 p.m. on October 6, 2026. This meeting is being held physically in room GC430 of the Governmental Center Building East, located in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. This meeting has been publicly noticed. This is a public meeting and is being recorded by Breroy County. The video recording will act as the official recording of the meeting. The recording will be made available on the Purchasing Division's website under the RLI RFP repository. Additionally, information reviewed by the committee as part of the selection process will also be posted on the repository. In accordance with Section 218.391-3A-C of the Florida Statute, the purpose of today's meeting is to A, establish the evaluation factors, B, direct the Purchasing Division to publicly announce the RFP, and C, direct the Purchasing Division to provide entrusted firms the RFP. On September 25, 2026, the draft RFP was distributed to the committee members in preparation for today's meeting. Meeting attendance is recorded in the following ways. The Purchasing Agent will record attendance of the committee. All other attendees, please scan the QR code to record attendance. We have a quorum present with the following committee members. Vice Mayor Robert McKenzie, Commissioner Alexander Davis, Commissioner Lamar Fisher, Commissioner Steve Geller, Commissioner Nan Rich, Commissioner Hazel Rogers, Commissioner Michael Udine, Joe Scott, Supervisor of Elections, thank you. Abby Ajayi, Tax Collector, thank you. Representing the Sheriff's Office, we have Colonel Oscar Lorena, thank you. Mr. Bob Melton, County Auditor, was appointed by the board as the financial advisor for this committee. County staff are also available to answer any questions as needed. On October 20, 2026, item number 56, the Borough County Board of County Commissioner established an auditor selection committee for this procurement. The committee is to assist the board in selecting an independent certified public accounting firm to conduct annual financial audits for the county and the county constitutional officers. In accordance with Section 218.319 of the Florida Statute, the committee must evaluate, solicit, and rank firms for annual financial audits. It requires the committee to set the evaluation criteria, issue and publicly announce the request for proposals, provide firms with instructions, review the submitted submittals, and recommend at least three qualified firms in order of preference to the board for award. The committee is responsible for adhering to the county's established evaluation committee procedures to select a vendor. In accordance with Borough County Procurement Code, each evaluation committee member must affirm that they are free of conflicts of interest as provided by Part 3, Chapter 112 of the Florida Statute and the Borough County Employee Code of Ethics. Each committee member, the project manager, and the appointed financial advisor will be presented, will be requested to submit a disclosure form and confirm they will be fair and impartial to all vendors in the selection process. The cone of silence will be in effect upon RFP advertisement. Potential vendors and any representative are prohibited from discussing the solicitation with the commissioner's office and their staff, county staff, appointed committee members, and any other person authorized to evaluate and recommend evaluation in the RFP process, including non-voting representative or the committee's financial advisor. The cone of silence terminates when the awarding authority takes action which ends the solicitation. During the cone of silence, inquiries regarding the solicitation should be directed to the project manager, Jedediah Shank, audit manager, with the county auditor's office or the director of purchasing and or his designee. Also, vendors may communicate with the designated representative from the Office of Economic and Small Business Development at any time regarding the solicitation's county business enterprise participation. In accordance with Section 218.3193A, Florida Statute, the committee is responsible for establishing the factors to be used to evaluate audit services, publicly announcing the RFP provided interested firms with the RFP, evaluating proposals submitted by the qualified firms, and ranking and recommending firms in accordance with the statute. As previously mentioned, prior to this meeting, the draft RFP was distributed to the committee. At this time, the county auditor, Mr. Bob Melton, will make some introductory remarks about the RFP. Mr. Melton, you're recognized. Okay, thank you. My office has initiated the solicitation process for an external audit firm to conduct the annual financial audit for the county and constitutional officers. The annual financial statement audit is an important thing to do. The auditors examine the books and records of the county to provide an opinion on the fairness of the presentation of the county's financial statements. Various stakeholders rely on these financial statements, such as bond rating agencies, which ultimately influence the cost of borrowing for the county. People often ask about the difference between the commercial financial statement audit that we're soliciting for today and the function performed by my office. The external commercial audit focuses on the fairness of the financial presentation of the statements and compliance at a high level with certain federal and state grants. But it's from a high level, like I always say, the 50,000-foot level. Whereas because of that, their materiality threshold is very high. It basically looks at the numbers in the financial statements and would a third party that relies on those statements be concerned if they find a difference in those numbers? Is it material enough to generate that concern? So it's a very high level. The government audits that we perform are more performance-oriented in that we look for efficiency and effectiveness of programs, and we look to how to improve government. That's our mission. Now, in accordance with the county charter, my office serves as the contract administrator for the external audit services. And that is due, I would say, primarily because of the need for independence. The entity managing the audit services ideally needs to be independent of what they're auditing. And so, you know, they're auditing operations under county administration and also the constitutional officers. And, you know, since my office reports directly to the board, we are independent of those county operations. And then my office also serves as an advisor to this committee when it comes to providing financial expertise and any other guidance that's needed. And I'll turn it back over to purchasing. Thank you, Mr. Milton. At this time, I would like to recognize the purchasing, the project manager, Jedediah Shank, to review the solicitations criteria. Jedediah, are you recognized? Thank you, Dana. I'm now going to introduce the scope of services. This is located within your RFP package, and it's also being shown on the screen. The scope of services outlines the requirements and the responsibilities of the CPA firm. And one point that I would like to make within the scope is that this is more than just an audit of a single set of financial statements, but rather it's a conglomerate of various entities combining financial statements, et cetera. And so what that means is that that includes all the funds of the county, constitutional officers, component units, seaport, airport, water enterprise funds, and it also includes various other special reports and tasks. So it's a big job. It's an important job. And because of the number and significance of these tasks, it's particularly important that a qualified and experienced firm be selected. Thank you, Mr. Shank. Next, I would like to recognize the purchasing division to review the responsiveness and responsibility criteria. Ms. Mangin. Thank you, Dania. I'll start on the responsiveness criteria, which is included in the instructions to vendors. That includes the Broward County criminal history screening practices and the lobbyist registration requirements. Please note that the draft that was distributed also included the domestic partnership benefit requirement, but that will be removed for final advertisement based on changes to state law and subsequent county ordinance changes. For criminal history and the lobbyist requirements, if certifications are not submitted with the submittal, the vendor will have three business days to submit. The final responsiveness requirement is the pricing submittal, and that is a true responsiveness requirement. Vendors have to submit pricing with their initial submittal as well as submit for all lines in order to be determined responsive. Are there any questions on responsiveness? Nope. All right. I'll move on to responsibility. Oh, excuse me. Okay. I'll move on to responsibility. The criteria for responsibility includes affiliated entities of the principals, vendor security. Yes. And it's in the instructions to vendors and on PDF file page 7, and it is page, you have the, of the instructions to vendors is page 2 of 15. I'm sorry. Since it's a packet, it doesn't have the consistent page numbers through it. All right. I'll start affiliated entities of the principals. That's disclosing that. Also, enterprise technology services vendor security questionnaire, which deals with the technology and how it's used on the contract, and it's ensuring that we understand how it's handled. Requesting financial statements from the prime vendors, setting insurance requirements, as well as license requirements. We also asked for material history of their litigation, and also set the Office of Economic Small Business Development CBE goal of 25% for the project. Additionally, there's a minimum financial government audit experience requirements. So, regarding, I'll start off with the license requirements. The certified public accounting firm must be dually licensed to practice under Chapter 473 of the Florida statutes, and the partner in charge of the engagement must be a licensed certified public accountant in the state of Florida. For the OESBD requirement, the firms must submit letters of intent with certified CBE firms for at least 25% of their proposed price to be determined responsible. And finally, regarding the minimum requirements, the certified public accounting firm, which is the prime vendor for this contract, must have performed and completed a financial audit as defined in the Florida statutes Chapter 11.45 of at least three Florida municipalities or counties, each with a minimum population of 50,000 within the past five years. For the other items of responsibility, it will be the committee's determination to review and ensure the firms are responsible to complete the work, such as having financial capacity and or ensuring there's not significant risk, such as with litigation history. Are there any questions on responsibility criteria? I'm sorry, who's chairing it? All right. Ms. Bank? Proceed. Can I speak? Yes, you may. Thank you. As I looked at the instructions for the vendors in item number 11, which you just kind of went over as far as the requirement of at least three Florida municipalities or counties, reach a minimum population of 50,000 with the past five years of solicitation dating and time. This is nothing against smaller firms, but I think that we would be looking for firms to handle the size of Broward County, and I would look to have discussion, if not move something, that we change the population from 50,000 to 500,000. There's about 12 counties in Florida that are this size or more, and I think it would create the right firms to be able to compete for this project. I think 50,000 is just too small. I think 500,000 population really makes more sense. So I don't know, Madam Chair, whether how I make that motion or discussion, but I'd like to make that change if possible. Go ahead, Mr. Melton. You recognize it? Yes. If I could make a comment on that, Commissioner Fisher. We looked at last time we had five initial proposers. One of those dropped out during the process. But if we applied those criteria to those that proposed last time, we'd only have one that would meet the criteria. And, you know, obviously we're soliciting fair and open competition. So, you know, as your advisor, I feel that that would be way too stringent. We need to have more firms propose one. Just is not good. So of the five that proposed last time, what was the criteria? What did they meet? Did they meet the 50,000 or more? The 50,000, yes. Yeah, unfortunately, there's just not that many firms out there that is doing government audits of larger governments in a prime position like ours is. So that's why we're not going to get 20 proposals or something. They're just not out there. But I think they – go ahead. I was going to say to follow up on what Commissioner Fisher is saying, because I was going to raise the same issue, we are not only a county of 2 million people, we're a county of 2 million people that runs an airport and a seaport. Because of that, first of all, I had a question also on the liability insurance component because I read in the newspaper every day about auditors being sued, typically in reference to private companies. But it would equally apply to a public corporation like us because we issue bonds. So they could just as easily have the auditors sued. And I'm looking in here, and it looks like we're asking for a million dollars' worth of liability insurance, which I think is an insignificant number. Which is why I agree with Commissioner Fisher, that we probably need a larger company. Now, I was not going to come in at 500,000 because I checked, and there are at 500,000, I believe, only one city in the state of Florida, which is Jacksonville, which as we all know, is a combination city-county because they've annexed everything into the city. So I was going to suggest 250,000 because at 250,000, you get a lot of counties, and you get, I think, seven or eight cities, Tampa, Miami, Tampa, St. Pete, I forget the list. But at 250,000, you get a far larger number than you would get at 500,000. But it's still, I'm not particularly comfortable with having a small local firm do this on their own. I really think we need, because of the 2 million population, because of the airport and seaport, I would feel a lot more comfortable if we came in at a number requiring 250,000 population. I would also be a lot more comfortable about a dramatically higher liability cap, liability insurance. Although, again, if you're going with one of the national firms, they all probably have the larger number anyhow. The last thing I was going to ask about, and please, I don't know if this is the correct time. I did have another question not related to this. I was, since we have sheriff's office here, I was going to ask and tell me if you want me to ask this later or now. To what extent, you know, because we've been told repeatedly we can't audit BSO, to what extent are all of the audits that you're doing public records? And to what extent are you auditing, you know, supervisor of elections, BSO, clerk, property appraiser, as well as us? I do have, you know, again, both are they public and number two, to what extent are you actually, and Mr. Milton mentioned it earlier, but I didn't fully understand his answer. Okay. Yes. Through this audit, it's an audit of the financial statements of the county and of each constitutional officer. So this audit firm will do audits of the constitutionals, but they're just for the purposes of looking at the financial statements and then the high-level grant requirements. It doesn't get down into the trenches, but when that report is issued, it is a public record, and you all do. It is a part of your comprehensive annual financial report, so you have all the numbers. Okay. Oh, I appreciate that answer. So I now go back to my original agreeing with Commissioner Fisher, except I had looked at $250,000 instead of $500,000. I think that's fairer at the appropriate time. I'd like to make that motion and see if Commissioner Fisher would join me. Yeah, I will. Who's sharing the meeting? Thank you. Yes, we are. Mr. Fisher and then Ms. Davis. Thank you. You're welcome. All right. I'd also like to ask the auditor, our auditor, you mentioned that $500,000 is only one firm. So at $250,000, how many firms? I don't have the number for $250,000, but we do have numbers for $100,000, and I'd be glad to give you those. For $100,000, there's 26 cities and 36 counties. Even at $100,000, we would lose one of the proposers that was there last time. So it would be a significant reduction in the number of qualified firms, I believe, that would propose. $250,000, I still believe that is too high. I would recommend if you wanted to raise it $100,000, I think would still work. But I want to emphasize one thing. You know, this is just a minimum standard to get into the pool. As part of the evaluation criteria, you evaluate experience and those type things, and then you'll be looking at the entities that they've audited in the past, how much experience they've had. So this is just to get in the door. It doesn't mean that it's going to give them an advantage. You will still evaluate the experience. And does this, you know, a lot of the companies pair up and you have, you know, the subs and so on. Is this a collective number between the firms that we're talking about in terms of like 100,000, if they have 100,000 population? At least three audits of entities with that population within the last five years. So that would be different entities, not the same city. You know, it would be three different jurisdictions with that population within the last five years to get in the door. And then you would further evaluate that. Okay. So that's the one company who is proposing to get in the door that we're saying. Okay. And the other thing is, how does this, you know, I'm sure you didn't pull this criteria just out of a hat. Did you, is this the standard? Are our neighbors to the south and north using similar criteria when they're looking for their outside auditors? Jed, will answer that? Thank you. So this responsibility criteria is not a set standard across the board. As the county auditor stated, this is a minimum criteria to get in the door. So this discussion, it's a very valid discussion to be had as far as, well, what, what should that minimum bar be? Should it be 50,000, 100,000, 250, 500? With that, I will, I will say that when we're talking about the numbers of available firms that you would have, it's important to note that this responsibility requirement states that they are to perform, this minimum requirement is to perform three audits at that number. So when you're looking at, you know, populations of 50,000, we're saying as a minimum, you need to have performed three audits at 50,000. And for that reason, once you start going up in number, that's why you're looking at fewer available firms out there in that field. Because when you look at, say, those dozen counties that are over 500,000, you have a very limited number of firms that have performed three out of those dozen. I guess my question is, is this a standard that you're looking at? You know, you didn't just come up with this criteria on your own. Is this industry standard? So setting the responsibility requirements is a common procurement function. As far as what that level should be, that is pending discussion of this committee and looking at, well, what types of responses will you get? And in having that discussion and determining what that standard should be, you are looking at, you know, trying to establish something that will certainly keep out the firms that are simply not qualified to do it, but let in enough that you have enough competition and you have enough selection. So to answer your question more specifically, it is a judgmental factor that this committee is determining. And just lastly, over the last few years that you've done this, has this been the standard that you're using today? This standard was consistent with the last procurement that we did five years ago. This standard was set at 50,000. And the one before that? The one before that did not have a population standard. This 50,000 was a function of the committee discussion last time. Prior to that, it was simply three cities and counties within Florida. Thank you. To more specifically answer your question, to my knowledge, there really is not a standard out there as far as how many audits of larger entities. In looking at this, I think you have to take into consideration, you know, in Florida, we have some extra requirements that other states don't have, especially with the Auditor General. The Florida Auditor General has some specific rules and extra components of the report that they require. So Florida is much different than other states. So we need to concentrate more on the Florida experience of the CPA firms. And, of course, counties are more complicated in general than cities because of the constitutional officers and various dependent components and so forth. So, you know, also in the evaluation process, I would recommend giving more away to previous county experience even then. But it boils down just to professional judgment. There's no right or wrong answer to this. As a follow-up to what Commissioner Davis was asking about, I agree with her that it would be helpful if you know, and you may not know, what Dade, Palm Beach, Hillsboro, which I think those three would be our closest comparators. Do any of you know what their standard are for size? If not, we'll proceed without it because we have to vote today. But it would be helpful. I have no idea what they are. And apparently she doesn't. If you all know, that would be helpful. We do not have that information, sir. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Commissioner Fischer. Yes. Going back to some statistics, I believe that of the 67 counties, there's 24 counties that are in excess of 250,000 population. And what you just mentioned, Mr. Melton, was although cities really were different, were counties, right? And there would be more weight accounted for if you have done county work of any size. Again, I think the 250 is a good compromise, but the municipalities really, they play to some extent. But I really would want to focus on the counties and their population. And I think of too many people, 250 is not unreasonable to have companies that qualify in this arena at the end of the day. So that's just my thoughts. Okay. Are you accepting a motion at this? Not at this time. I'm going to turn it back over to Mr. Shang to further discuss the evaluation criteria. Thank you, Dana. So, you know, in continuation of this discussion on the importance of selecting a qualified firm, I'm going to discuss the evaluation criteria. That is located on page 33 out of 119 of your packet. It's about a quarter of the way into the packet, and it's also being shown on the screen. So, with that, this evaluation criteria, so in follow-up of that responsibility criteria that sets the minimum bar, this evaluation criteria is the mechanism that this committee will use for ranking and scoring the responding firms. This provides a weighted criteria in accordance with statutory requirements and industry best practices. And so it includes items such as evaluating the ability of professional personnel, project approach, and experience. The committee will be required to score each of those factors, and the evaluation criteria also includes pricing. Now, pricing is calculated on a formula basis, and in accordance with state statute, it is not the sole predominant factor used in the evaluation. You'll see that it constitutes 20 of the 100 points. So, that completes my comments, and I'm certainly happy to address any questions. I'll turn it back over. Thank you, Mr. Shank. Are there any additional discussion on the evaluation criteria? Hearing none, I'd like to recognize Colleen Pinal from the Risk Management Division to address the insurance questions that was posed earlier. Colleen Pinal with Risk Management, and I'd like to address the insurance requirements. The $1 million, $2 million that you referenced is in regards to general liability. The bulk of this project is based on the professional liability, which we have $2 million per claim for that. I need to unlock it. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Did you say $2 million per claim? $2 million professional liability, which is the bulk of the experience that or insurance that would be needed for this. We can also add on to that a $4 million aggregate, which would be the amount that the insurance would pay for the year for any claims. And how much is that? Well, it would be $2 million each claim. So if any one claim happened during that policy period, that one claim, the insurance company would pay up to $2 million. And then for the aggregate, it would be $4 million overall for any claims happening during that policy period. Thank you. Thank you, Colleen. Are there any other questions regarding the evaluation factors? Hearing none. At this time, we can make a motion to approve the solicitation, the evaluation criteria, the responsiveness and responsibility criteria, and any proposed change to the evaluation factor. You're recognized. Thank you, Madam Chair. I am, again, still not comfortable with $50,000, considering, you know, I'm making up this number, but I'm assuming a city of 50,000 people may have a budget of $50 million. You know, I don't know if that's accurate, but it'd be in the ballpark. We'll have a budget of $10 billion. And I really think that we need a firm with large, substantial audit experience to do that. I've quickly checked with my expert, Mr. Apple, who has informed me that there are, if we changed it to 250,000 population, we'd get 14 governmental bodies in Florida, 10 counties, and four cities. Just for the sake of argument, the 10 counties would be Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Hillsborough, Orange, Duval, Pinellas, Lee, Polk, and Brevard County, while the four cities would be Miami, Tampa, Jacksonville, and Orlando. So there's 14 different government entities that we would have with a 250,000 population. I am also, as somebody who's been practicing law for 44 years, I am absolutely not comfortable with the $2 million combined single limit cap, which is what you've just, I believe, described. I think it would have to be a dramatically larger amount. And I think that the firms that have done the 14 cities, whether or not they're required to have $2 million in insurance, probably have dramatically larger sums because they want to protect themselves. I don't know what, you know, Microsoft has in liability insurance. They may need $2 million or $10 million to compete for contracts, but I'm sure their insurance is in the billions just because they do larger contracts. So I believe that by going with 250,000 population cap, you know, which is 14 governmental entities, we'll get both the expertise that we need, the size that we need, the insurance that we need. But there's still the CBE requirement, which will require, I believe, a substantial Broward County small company presence. So I'm comfortable with that, and I'm making that as a motion. And I want to see if Commissioner Fisher wants to second it. Before we ask for the second, Commissioner Rich, you're recognized? No? You want to? Okay. Yeah, I'm going to second it. I wanted to look more to be more of a compromise, Senator Gellar, that we do at least, just at least the criteria would be at least one Florida municipality or county with a minimum population of 250. I would accept that as a friendly amendment. You know, it would make it easier, so you wouldn't need to have done a lot. But at least if you've done at least one of a large governmental entity. 250 or more. Yeah. I'm okay with Commissioner Fisher's proposed amendment and accept that as a friendly amendment. Yes. Thank you. If I could just comment on that. It does significantly help because under the original criteria, just think you have 14 jurisdictions that would qualify. The firm would have had to done three of those in the last five years. That's a pretty tough bar to meet. But if you change it to one, it definitely would increase the competition, which is what we want. I would say that as part of that, we would still require at least three of the 200, of the 50,000 or more. And of those, at least one would have to be two. I don't want – well, they're probably – no, that's not necessary because you wouldn't have a company that's done 250,000 and hasn't done any smaller. So ignore what I just said. Thank you. We're ignoring it all along, so. Commissioner Rick. I understand the motion now. Do I need to read it as the record? Yes, please. I'd like to make the motion to revise the evaluation factors for draft RFP number GEN 2132533P1 for external audit services, which was distributed by email on September the 25th, 2026 to include the following revisions. To the instructions to vendors, request for proposal item number 11. The motion at the end said at least one Florida municipality or counties with a minimum population of 250,000 within the last five years, the solicitation date and time. Thank you. Yeah, that's what I meant to say. Is there a discussion? Discussion? Go ahead. Oh, go ahead, Ms. Richard. Okay, so I used my trusty phone, if you believe AI. Anyway, but I'm not interested in cities, really. I'm interested in counties. And so when you're talking about 14 cities, I mean, I looked up counties. There are 36 counties with a population exceeding 100,000, and there are 31 counties with a population exceeding over 250,000. So I'm not quite understanding why we would have only gotten one. I don't know how we advertise or where this goes, but it appears to me that there are many counties here. I mean, I'm okay. I could go with this with the one, you know, having at least the 250,000, but I'm just saying we have a large number of counties in this state that are well over the population of 50,000, and I would not support going to 50,000. But I think, you know, we have obviously examples where somebody's, you know, I don't know what their threshold was. Nobody seems to know that at this point. But I'm sure some of them, you know, some of the firms were more, you know, have done more than just $50,000, the 50,000 population. Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, it does. I mean, I would have no problem going to, you know, either the threshold of the 100,000 or the 250,000, but in a compromise, I mean, I would go for this. But I'm just saying there are a lot of counties out there that I'm sure, you know, go higher than we are. And next time, maybe, you know, we could take a look at that and see how many of them actually require something like that, you know, so that you know that there's a higher threshold. Thank you. Commissioner Davis? Yes. Thank you. I'm wanting information more on the 100,000. Because I know right now the 250, you can only, you have to say one to make it work. You'd have to say one would have to be a city. What was the motion? A county. One would have to be a county. That you'd have to have done one county in the state of Florida. But if you had, if it was 100,000, you could open it up, correct? It wouldn't have to be just one. You'd have more people doing more counties in the state of Florida. At 100,000, there would be 36 counties in the state of Florida and 26. By having it one instead of three, you'd definitely increase competition. So you're letting more people in the door, but they still have to be evaluated. Right. So I think the idea is to let more people in the door rather than limit it. So at 100,000, you'd have more options to choose from than at the 250. And you wouldn't have to limit it to, oh, we could probably only find, you know, a company that has done at least one 250,000 county in the state. But if it's 100,000, you'd have a lot more people have done 100,000 in the state. That's a true statement. Okay. So that's one. And then the issue with the insurance, I'm not understanding, you know, if you came up with this number, there's a reason you came up with the number. Why would somebody want a whole different number? If this number has been working on the other solicitation five years ago, you haven't changed anything, and this has worked fine. Is that the case? Prior to solicitation, the minimum limits for the professional was $1 million, $2 million in the aggregate. The thing is, in order to increase the competition, the insurance is a big part of the pricing. So the higher we set the limits, the less companies you have, and it'll be harder to meet that CDB goal as well. Exactly. So we're not trying to make it harder. We want to make it more competitive, but also increasing the standards. So I'm okay with the 100,000. But I'm not sure that we want to totally limit the people that are applying to do the work. Because then you get good, better, better. You can actually choose. But when you start limiting, you know, you start with the $250,000, then you're starting with higher insurance. It's like there's a method of trying to eliminate folk that you don't even know who's applying yet. I don't think we want to go down that slippery slope. Commissioner Rogers? Okay. Thank you. I think I'm with my colleagues as it relates to going from $50,000 to $250,000. To me, that is a major move. From $50,000 to $100,000 or $150,000 to me is realistic. But $50,000 to $250,000 is telling me something is going on. Who are we trying to keep out of being able to participate? Or how are we trying to get more people participating? And that's how I look at it. Which one gives more opportunities for others to participate? They can qualify because they have audited different cities that comes into those various criterias that you have. And what we're looking for is experience. And what we're looking for is, as the county grows, as people move their businesses here into Broward County, they see opportunities at every level. And some levels, it seems as if we're creating opportunities to sustain just a few. And that's what we hear when we're talking to people. Then I would like for us to talk about insurance. And can you tell us what other counties are doing right now as it relates to insurance? Are they self-insured? Or how are they insured? So you're going to compare apples to apples. Are they, you know, am I making sense with how we clarify and qualify the insurance component? The insurance that we're referring to is what we would request of the vendors. That's what we would ask them to have. And we establish the minimum limit based on industry standards for these types of services. Who audits the auditors? Where's the accountability there? Who do they report to? I don't know. I've been here three years. And I guess the audit that this process happened before I got here. It was never explained. So here I am learning. And every day you learn. But there's one area I'm concerned about. Who audits the auditor? I can answer that. I've heard that question thousands of times over my 40 years. But in this case of the CPA firm, they're required to have peer reviews that's regulated by the authorities, that they have to have those every few years to look at the quality of their work. And then as far as our office goes, we do the same thing. And we just had a peer review and the first one for the office, and we passed. So I was real happy about that. But there are mechanisms in place to audit the auditor, so to speak. Yes, the peer reviews are mandatory in order to follow auditing standards. And in the case of the CPA firm, to maintain your license to do audits. Can we have an amended motion? An amended motion to have the amount to amended comes before whatever's before. The amended would go first. You vote on the amended. That's how it works. Robert's rules. So I want to amend. I want a new motion or a secondary motion, whatever you call it. Exactly. The amendment to the amendment using the 100,000 figure. I don't have the full language. And keeping the insurance as is. My motion did not have the insurance issue on it. It just dealt with the population for the record. So my motion was the 250, and it had nothing to do with insurance. Yes. So my motion is, the secondary motion to that is to make it 100,000. The amendment to the amendment, which would be voted on first. Do we have a second on that, Commissioner Fisher? Or no? Do I have a second? All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. How many opposed? That's two. Exactly. Can you clarify who can vote on this? I love that. Sure. What was the count? I'm hearing two. So when we put this audit out last go-round, we had it at the 50,000, and we only got five submissions. That's correct. And one of those withdrew. One of those withdrew. So we had four submissions. Yes, sir. So we're raising it now on Commissioner Davis' motion to 100,000, and Commissioner Fisher's motion to 250,000. Yes. At least one county. It's not focus at all. It's at least one county. Three years ago, was it three that you needed? Three? Three, yes. Yeah. We're reducing the amount from three to one, but increasing the amount of population. So, you know, that will make it smaller and larger. Right. But what I'm proposing is the figure to change to 100,000 with the exact same, you know, what he said, but instead of the 250, 100,000. So. That's for amendments. You have a motion, a second. You can vote on that amendment to 100,000. Otherwise, if that passes, it's fine. If it fails, it goes back to 250. Yes. So I'm going to go around the room and confirm who is in favor. Mr. Joe Scott. Yes. Aye. Commissioner Rogers. Commissioner Davis, obviously. Yes. Commissioner Udine. Aye. Commissioner Geller. Vice Mayor McKenzie. Commissioner Rich. Commissioner Fisher. Aye. And Abby. Miss Abby. So the total count is five yeses and four noes. If I could clarify, is that with one county or is that with three counties and cities? One. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. What was the count? Five, four. Okay. The total count is Mr. Scott, Commissioner Rogers, Commissioner Davis, Udine. Mr. Geller was a no. I think it was six. Oh, the total is, yeah. Six to four. No, five, four. Six to four. Five, four. But it still passes. No, we're about how it passes. Two, three, four, five, six. Six to four. Five to four. That's my question. She announced five to four. I get that. What was the final vote? Hold on. I'm sorry. I just want to know who voted. That's all. I would. That's all I ask. That need to be amended. Okay. All right. Right. No. Vote. I'm asking who. You stay who did it. Please, without interruption. Who voted around this table? That's all I ask. So it's five to four. Oh. Oh, Mr. Joe Scott, Commissioner Rogers, Commissioner Davis, Commissioner Udine, Commissioner Geller, Vice Mayor McKenzie, Commissioner Rich, Commissioner Fisher, and Ms. Abby Adjari. All right. Thank you. Eight. That's nine. Just so you understand, the sheriff representative cannot vote because he's a county employee. Okay. My question is very clear. Okay. Question. Well, not actually question. Motion. Since I have not heard any other amendments, and unless there are, I'm going to move to approve as amended. Unless anybody else has any other amendments, I'll give you an opportunity. Seeing none, I move approval as amended. Only if there is a aye? No. Yeah. Thank you. Motion passes. Five-four. Thank you. Did you two? There you go. They passed unanimous. Change is terrible. Now we're back to 50,000. It was ridiculous. She spoke. Right. Oh, she changed it. She corrected it. Right. I'm sitting here confused. Like, why do they keep saying it was five-four? No, no, no. But it wasn't six-four. Okay. Okay. Right. She was confused. She thought it was on the- So we have to take a vote on the motion as amended. There's a second vote that Senator Geller just moved on the motion as amended. May I have a second on the motion as amended? It was moved and seconded, and everybody voted. I believe. Yeah. Yeah. Nine-zero. No. Oh. Okay. So motion passes 8-1? Yeah. I think so. Thank you. The next item is for the committee to consider if they want vendor presentation. Committee members, do you want in the RFP process, would you like the vendors who submit a proposal to give presentations? Could you repeat what you just said? In the RFP process, there is an opportunity for the vendors who submits a response to give you a presentation or a presentation. Do you guys want to have- And the other option is for them to submit without presentations? We would submit, and you would still see their responses, and you could do Q&A, but you wouldn't have a set, you know, 10 or 15 minutes of them coming up to the podium and, you know, doing a presentation. Last time, we were the- You did. I'd make a motion. Okay. And I think I would second that. Can I just ask Mr. Melton if he has a recommendation? Yes, sir. Absolutely. I would recommend presentations. It's a great opportunity for you all. And in that motion, can I have the length of time for the presentation? And the motion, 10 minutes for each presenter. Okay. Do you agree? Yeah. I was going to suggest 20 with questions, but- 20 with questions. Well, in generally with questions, we leave as unlimited because they can be. So if you want a set- Let me keep the motion at 10 minutes, and then if anyone has questions, they would have questions. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes. 9-1. At this time, I'll go over some information on the RFP advertisement process. In accordance with Section 218.391 of the Florida Statute, the committee shall publicly announce the RFP and provide entrusted firms with the solicitation. The purchasing division issues RFPs through a national electronic bidding system called Bepro. Once advertised, Bepro will send an email notification to all vendors registered with the commodity code for this solicitation. The purchasing division will also notice vendors identified by the county auditor's office as well. No fees required to receive Bara County solicitation notification or to respond electronically through Bepro. Is there any discussion from the committee regarding the public announcement of the RFP distribution? Hearing none, may I have a motion to direct the purchasing division to publicly announce- May I have a second? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Lastly, I would like to now address the next steps as well as the available training that we have for you guys and the required disclosure form to be completed by each audit committee member. Regarding the projected schedule for this meeting, an RFP pre-advertisement notice will be posted through Bepro and the Board of County Commissioner will be notified in accordance with the Procurement Code 2133. If there are no polls from the commissioner, the final solicitation will be advertised for approximately 30 days, which would allow the vendors to ask questions and prepare a response to the solicitation. Once responses are received, staff will prepare a responsiveness and responsibility matrix and an evaluation matrix for use by the audit committee. These matrices will summarize findings and or responses to the evaluation criteria. All vendor responses, matrices, and supporting staff review memorandums will be provided to the committee for their use in evaluating and scoring the responding firms. In anticipation that the committee meeting will be scheduled- It is anticipated that the committee meeting will be scheduled for the end of January or the beginning of February, 2027 for the audit committee to meet and discuss the vendors' responses. At that time, the committee will determine responsiveness and responsibility of the firms, hear presentation, and ask questions of the firms. At the end of the meeting, each audit committee member will score each responsive and responsible firm and submit to purchasing for tabulation. The purchasing division will then calculate the total scores in accordance with the evaluation methodology, approved by the audit committee, and present the result to the committee. The audit committee will then establish by motion its ranking and recommendation in order of preference of no fewer than three firms deemed most highly qualified, unless fewer than three firms respond. Does the committee have any questions regarding their role in this procurement or the next steps? Not a question statement. We're commissioners scheduled stuff way in advance. Can you try and give us at least 45 days' notice of that? Because it sounds like it will be an all-day meeting. Yes. To support the committee, a virtual training class and materials on the evaluation process were provided to each committee member in your appointment notice. It is requested that each member take the available training prior to the next meeting. Committee members may also contact the purchasing agent with question at any time during this process, or may also contact the project manager, Jedediah Shank. One additional important requirement that will be required before the next meeting is the Borough County Disclosure Form to be submitted. This is to ensure that no conflicts exist between the member and any responding firm, and to ensure each committee member can be free and impartial to all vendors that respond to the solicitation. Committee members will be provided this form and in electronic copy of vendors' responses following the solicitation's closing date. Are there any questions on the disclosure forms? Hearing none. Committee members, is there any other business that we need to discuss today? Hearing none. I want to thank you guys for your participation in the solicitation process and for serving on this committee. This committee meeting is adjourned. The time is 1.41 p.m. Thank you. All right.