Committee invites top three audit firms for interviews after evaluating nine proposals

The committee charged with selecting the city's audit firm voted unanimously May 7 to invite the three highest-ranked firms to return for interviews after reviewing nine proposals.

Felix, the staff member who led the evaluation process, described the procedure the committee followed, saying members would state rankings, the staff would tally composite scores and then the committee would move to invite firms for presentations. "Our motion is to bring the top 3 teams back for interviews," Felix said, explaining that the panel would use the composite scoring sheet as the public record of its ranking.

The decision followed a close tally among the top firms. Felix read the composite list aloud: "Number 1 is CLA; number 2 is Pervis Gray and Company, LLC; number 3 is Forvis," and described a tie lower in the ranking. A member noted the difference between the first and second averages was small and suggested bringing the top three because there was a drop-off after third place.

Members discussed what to ask at interviews. Several said they wanted firms to explain how they would tailor an audit approach specifically for Naples, give examples of management-letter recommendations that improved other municipal clients, and explain team composition and the percent of partner involvement. One member also asked firms to describe if and how they use artificial intelligence to improve audit efficiency.

A committee member flagged a potential conflict: Forvis listed the Naples Airport Authority on its client list, and the member said city attorneys should determine whether that relationship creates a conflict given an ongoing mediation and lawsuit involving the airport authority. "That may be a conflict because the city is engaged in a mediation law and lawsuit with them currently," the member said.

Felix and the committee confirmed interview logistics: the committee asked for presentations and standardized questions, to be provided to invited firms in advance, and said presentations would be 30 minutes with time allotted for questions. The panel moved to invite the top three-ranked firms for interviews; the motion was seconded and passed unanimously.

The committee also reviewed historical contract figures for context: Felix read the previous contract amounts as $81,500 for years one and two, $83,100 for year three, $84,700 for year four and $86,400 for year five, and reminded members that single-audit work for federal grant programs would be expected and should be reflected in firms' proposals.

Next steps: staff will finalize the interview questions and send invitation letters to the top three firms. The committee will hear presentations and use the standardized scoring to make a recommendation to the full council.