Board rejects bookkeeping bids, directs staff to solicit local CPAs and rebid

Board members rejected two nonlocal responses to their solicitation for bookkeeping/auditing services and directed staff to contact local certified public accountants and small bookkeeping firms to generate local candidates for the work.

A board member said the board sent 14 letters to local companies and received no local responses; two out-of-state firms submitted proposals that the board found did not match the project's expected bookkeeping scope. The board described the work as tracking inflows and outflows and producing basic beginning-and-ending balances for auditors, not a full nonprofit-style financial statement or ongoing audit.

Board members discussed the qualifications needed (bookkeeping experience vs. CPA) and said the assignment likely requires bookkeeping and standard accounting familiarity rather than a full CPA audit. One board member suggested Johnson, Hickey & Murchison in Chattanooga as an established firm that handles similar clients but said the board preferred to pursue local candidates first.

The board took three steps: it voted to reject the current bids, authorized Nathan to contact local CPAs and bookkeeping firms to explain the scope and solicit candidates, and directed staff to rebid the work with clarified parameters. Members said they will return with candidate names and then vote to approve an individual contractor.

A member noted timing constraints for filings and reporting and urged staff to move quickly; staff said the project's office expects to receive information through August or September, allowing some time to onboard a local contractor if selected.