CRA Minutes 08/21/2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Community Redevelopment Agency August 21, 2006 Page 3 of 7 Mr. Kohler and the scope of services would be reviewed by the CRA before it is released. Mr. McGregor seconded the motion. A brief discussion ensued regarding duplication of the work that the City auditors have done and Mr. Kohler stated he would use the City auditors as a resource. A discussion ensued regarding other firms responding to the RFP and Mr, Kohler said the list he provided does not preclude anyone from responding to the RFP, Mr, Daigle amended his motion stating if there are any other CPA firms that have the expertise that they are more than welcome to submit a proposal for the CRA services, Mr. McGregor seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. After a brief discussion, Mr. Daigle made a motion that Mr. Kohler provide a scope of services to the CRA for their review and upon agreement of the scope of services the two firms discussed at the last meeting would then be contacted to respond to the scope of services with a price. Ms, ROdriquez seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously by voice vote. A discussion ensued regarding reviewing the findings in the Seminole County report, Mr. Hoffmann made a motion to table all discussions regarding penalties, interest, reimbursements and forgiveness until the results from the independent audit are received. Mr. Daigle seconded the motion, The motion unanimously by voice vote, Findings number 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the Seminole County report were discussed and the results of the discussion were: Finding number 3: Publication of a Management Report. The CRA could set up a report to include the information included in the annual report. The information would include budget expenditures and status of CRA projects. Mr. Kohler suggested providing copies of the minutes to the City Commission and Seminole County Commissioners for all CRA meetings. It was suggested that a memorandum should be provided to the City Commission and the Seminole County Commissioners after each CRA meeting. Finding number 4: The CRA does not adopt a budget by resolution each fiscal year. The budget is scheduled on the agenda for review and approval by the CRA. Finding Number 5: Certain parcels were not properly included in the original eRA district noted as Casselberry (C2). The parcels that were not included in the original CRA district should be identified. Finding Number 7: The CRA by-laws are not in compliance with FS 163.356 as to the makeup of its agency membership. Amend the by-laws to be reflective of FS Chapter 163.356- B.