Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Billing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee flags Clark Hill and Empiric invoices for further verification
Summary
Members questioned Clark Hill invoices that may include work unrelated to foreclosures and discussed Empiric IT billing (Acct. #101101980), noting a $106,000 IT budget and that the court contributes about $2,500/month; approvals were tabled until June 10 to verify accounts and charges.
During bill review the committee raised concerns that invoices from the law firm Clark Hill may include work not related to tax foreclosure work and asked for verification of account numbers (examples cited: 521, 523, 525000831). Chair Jeff Sieting requested verification from Accountant Corinna Hervey on which accounts were used for payments that do not relate to foreclosure work. The minutes record those post‑approved bills include additional or different tasks beyond recurring charges and the committee tabled bill approval until June 10, 2026 to gather more information.
Committee members also discussed Empiric IT billing (Acct. #101101980), whether bills are up to date or have gaps, and potential alternatives: Baldwin reported a $106,000 annual budget for IT and that the court contributes approximately $2,500 per month toward IT costs. Commissioner Fisher said he has consulted with other municipal IT providers as possible alternatives to Empiric. The minutes show no formal change to vendor contracting; follow up was requested before approving the post‑approved bills.
