[I. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER]
          [00:00:11]
          SEPTEMBER 22ND SPECIAL CALL MEETING OF THE EAST POINT CITY COUNCIL. MADAM DEPUTY CITY CLERK, ROLL CALL, PLEASE. COUNCIL MEMBER, SHROPSHIRE COUNCIL MEMBER. LEE. PRESENT. 
          COUNCIL MEMBER. ATKINS. PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. ZIEGLER. PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          CUMMINGS PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. MITCHELL PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER. BUTLER. COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS. MAYOR. WE HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU. SO WE ARE HERE FOR THE FORENSIC AUDIT 
          [III.1. Forensic Audit Findings and Recommendations]
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS. PRESENTATION. WELL, IT'S ACTUALLY AGENDA ITEM. CAN I GET A MOTION TO OPEN THE FLOOR FOR DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ON THE FORENSIC AUDIT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS? SO, MADAM MAYOR, MADAM MAYOR, CAN WE PLEASE OPEN THE FLOOR FOR A FORENSIC AUDIT FINDINGS? COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL SAID SO MOVE. SO CAN YOU. SECOND COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER I'LL SECOND IT. THEN IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ALL THOSE OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES. WE FINALLY HAVE THE AUDITOR HERE TONIGHT FROM PLANTE MORAN TO DO THE PRESENTATION. MR. JONES, MY ASSUMPTION IS, IS THE PRESENTATION WILL START WITH THEM AND THEN GO TO YOU. BUT I'LL TURN IT OVER TO YOU TO, FOR YOU TO SHARE WITH US THE FLOW FOR THIS EVENING. THANK YOU. MR. MAYOR AND COUNCIL, FIRST, I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE OUR FORENSIC AUDITORS. SO TONIGHT, LET ME SAY THAT I'M HERE ACCOMPANIED WITH REPRESENTATIVES FROM PLANTE MORAN TO PRESENT THE FINDINGS OF THE FORENSIC AUDIT THAT WAS CONDUCTED AT THE DIRECTION OF THIS GOVERNING BODY. THE PURPOSE OF THE FORENSIC AUDIT IS NOT TO TARGET INDIVIDUALS, BUT TO ENSURE ACCOUNTABILITY, TRANSPARENCY AND THE PROTECTION OF PUBLIC RESOURCES. THESE PRINCIPLES ARE CORE TO PUBLIC SERVICE. THEY'RE CORE AND FOUNDATIONAL TO PUBLIC TRUST. 
          THE REPORT IDENTIFIES SEVERAL ISSUES, INCLUDING CONCERNS TO CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND UNPAID UTILITY ACCOUNTS. IN ONE CASE, THE AUDIT SPECIFICALLY NAMES A MEMBER OF THIS COUNCIL AND TWO OTHERS. WHILE THE BALANCES WERE HIGH, THE CIRCUMSTANCES PROVIDED APPEAR TO OFFER REASONABLE EXPLANATIONS. BECAUSE OF THE SERIOUSNESS OF THESE FINDINGS AND THE AUTHORITY GRANTED BY THIS CITY COUNCIL, I CONSULTED WITH EXPERIENCED LAW ENFORCEMENT PROFESSIONALS WITH THE INFORMATION THAT I'VE GATHERED, THE GUIDANCE WAS CLEAR. THE MATTER RAISED QUESTIONS OF POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST, POSSIBLE MISUSE OF AUTHORITY, OR DOCUMENT IRREGULARITIES SHOULD NOT BE HANDLED SOLELY WITHIN THE CITY HALL. THEY MUST BE REFERRED TO OUTSIDE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES TO ENSURE FAIRNESS. ENSURE INDEPENDENCE AND ENSURE PUBLIC CONFIDENCE. AS SUCH, I'VE JUST BEEN MADE AWARE AS OF 615 EARLIER THIS EVENING, THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE HAS AGREED TO INVESTIGATE AND THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SHOULD IT MERIT, HAS AGREED TO TAKE UP PROSECUTION. I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THIS IS NOT ABOUT POLITICS. IT'S NOT ABOUT PERSONALITIES OR PERSONAL DISPUTES. IT'S ALL ABOUT PROCESS. IT'S ALL ABOUT FACTS. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO ACT WHEN QUESTIONS ARE ARISED. BY REFERRING THESE FINDINGS TO INDEPENDENT AUTHORITIES, WE ENSURE THAT TRUST TRUTH IS ESTABLISHED FAIRLY AND ACCOUNTABILITY, IF REQUIRED, IS APPLIED EQUALLY. I ASK THAT WE APPROACH THIS THESE DISCUSSIONS TONIGHT WITH A FOCUS ON WHAT UNITES US, OUR SHARED DUTY TO UPHOLD PUBLIC TRUST, PROTECTS TAXPAYERS RESOURCES AND DEMONSTRATE THAT NO ONE'S ABOVE ACCOUNTABILITY. WITH THAT, I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE OUR CONSULTANTS THAT WORKED ON THE FORENSIC AUDIT. MICHELLE MCKAY. MICHAEL, PLEASE TAKE US ON THE FIRST PART OF THE PRESENTATION. MADAM MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THANK YOU FOR HAVING US. REALLY 
          [00:05:11]
APPRECIATE THAT. AND JUST AS WE ARE PRESENTING PUBLICLY, MY NAME IS MICHELLE MCHALE. I LEAD THE FORENSIC PRACTICE FOR PLANT AND MORAN HAVE BEEN WITH THE FIRM ABOUT 30 YEARS. WITH ME IS MY ASSOCIATE, KYLE SUTTON. KYLE SUTTON AND I HAVE BEEN ON THIS ENGAGEMENT SINCE ITS INCEPTION. 
          SO YOU HAVE HAD A CONTINUOUS TEAM PERFORMING THE ANALYTICS. THERE'S NOT BEEN ANY TURNOVER. 
          WE ARE WELL VERSED IN THIS ENGAGEMENT. SO WITH OUR PRESENTATION TONIGHT, WE JUST THOUGHT WE WOULD GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT BRIEFLY WHO PLANT MORAN IS WE ARE A 100 YEAR OLD ACCOUNTING FIRM. WE ARE ONE OF THE LARGEST ACCOUNTING FIRMS IN THE NATION. WE HAVE 24 OFFICES WORLDWIDE. WE HAVE CLIENTS IN ALL 50 STATES, AND WE HAVE ABOUT 4000 PROFESSIONALS IN OUR FIRM. SO A PRETTY SIZABLE FIRM, KYLE AND MYSELF AND OTHER MEMBERS OF OUR TEAM PERFORM ABOUT GOODNESS. ABOUT 100 ENGAGEMENTS PER YEAR. NOW, FORENSIC ENGAGEMENTS ONLY. SO AGAIN, WE'RE WE DO THIS. THIS IS ALL WE DO. WE ALSO THOUGHT WE WOULD BRIEFLY ALSO EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN OUR ENGAGEMENT OF FORENSIC AUDIT VERSUS YOUR FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT, WHICH OCCURS EACH YEAR, AND THAT IS A REQUIREMENT FOR YOU ALL TO HAVE. EACH CITY NEEDS TO HAVE AN AUDIT. AND SO AGAIN THE TIMING THERE ARE, YOU KNOW, FIVE DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN OUR FORENSIC SERVICES AND YOUR FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT. AGAIN TIMING RECURRING. OURS IS NOT RECURRING. WE'D LIKE TO SAY NO ONE WANTS TO SEE US TWICE. RIGHT. BECAUSE THAT MEANS YOU HAVE ONGOING PROBLEMS. WE'RE ALWAYS HERE TO HELP. BUT IN THEORY, YOU WANT TO FIX YOUR PROBLEMS AND THEN HOPEFULLY NOT HAVE ANOTHER SITUATION. GIVEN THAT OUR ENGAGEMENT WAS PREDICATED BECAUSE YOU HAD A CYBER INCIDENT. SO THAT'S WHY YOU WANTED A FORENSIC AUDIT. 
          OUR SCOPE IS VERY SPECIFIC. WE HAVE SPECIFIC STEPS, SCOPES OF WORK THAT WE ARE ASSIGNED TO PERFORM ON YOUR BEHALF. THE OBJECTIVE IS FACT FINDING. WE ARE FACT FINDERS VERSUS YOUR FINANCIAL STATEMENT. AUDIT IS TO GIVE AN OPINION OF YOUR FINANCIAL STATEMENTS THAT MATERIALLY REPRESENT WHAT OCCURRED DURING THAT FISCAL YEAR. OUR FRAUD EXAMINATION TECHNIQUES ARE WE LOOK AT DOCUMENTATION, WE DO RESEARCH, BACKGROUND CHECKS, INTERVIEWS, A VARIETY OF THINGS THAT ARE AT OUR DISPOSAL. AUDITS HAVE SPECIFIC CHECKLISTS IF IF YOU WILL, AND HAVE TO PERFORM THE AUDIT PRETTY CONSISTENTLY EACH YEAR. AND THAT'S IN GENERAL TERMS IN FINANCIAL STATEMENT, YOU HAVE STANDARD OF PROFESSIONAL SKEPTICISM. AND IN OUR WORK AGAIN, WE'RE FACT FINDERS. WE ARE LOOKING FOR PROOF EVIDENCE. SO WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH OUR AGENDA. THAT WAS OUR SCOPE OF WORK THAT. PRETTY MUCH OUTLINES WHAT OUR REPORT IS. KYLE IS GOING TO GO THROUGH THESE 11 AREAS AND THEN I WILL CLOSE THEN THEREAFTER. 
          ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. SO I WILL START WITH THE THE FIVE INITIAL AREAS OF CONCERN. AND THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT THE EXPANDED AREAS OF CONCERN. AND I'LL TALK ABOUT EXPANDED AREAS VERSUS EXPANDED SCOPE, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WAS ONE COMMENT OR ONE, YOU KNOW, ONE AREA TO TOUCH ON. 
          SO WE'LL QUICKLY GO THROUGH THE THE FIVE AREAS OF CONCERN. AND THE WAY I PLAN TO GO THROUGH THIS IS I'LL SHARE, YOU KNOW, A VERY QUICK OVERVIEW OF WHAT WE DID AND THE FINDING OR LACK OF FINDINGS, AND THEN GO OVER OUR RECOMMENDATION RELATED TO THAT AREA OF CONCERN, AND THEN GIVE YOU ALL THE OPPORTUNITY TO ASK A QUESTION OR QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT AREA, AND THEN WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT AREA. IF THAT SOUNDS LIKE A PLAN, WELL, WE'LL TRY THAT TO SEE HOW LONG THAT'S FAIR. AND THEN IF IT SEEMS TO YEAH, WE MIGHT GO THROUGH ALL OF THE INITIAL AND THEN YEAH, TOTALLY FAIR AND THEN GO THROUGH THE EXPANDED. BUT WE COULD TRY IT ON THE FIRST. OKAY. 
          YEP. AND THERE ARE OBVIOUSLY SOME AREAS THAT WILL BE OF MORE. THERE JUST BE MORE QUESTIONS RELATED TO THAT. AND SOME OF THEM WILL BREEZE RIGHT THROUGH. SO ALL RIGHT. SO FIRST ONE THAT WE LOOKED AT WAS THE DELETION OF VENDORS. AND AND AGAIN THESE ARE ALL IN OUR ENGAGEMENT LETTER. BUT THERE WERE I DON'T WANT TO SAY ACCUSATIONS, BUT THERE WERE ALLEGATIONS OR THERE 
          [00:10:06]
WAS THERE WAS SOMETHING THAT CAUSED ALL OF THESE AREAS OF CONCERN. AND SO THE FIRST WAS THAT THERE WERE DELETED VENDORS. AND SO WHEN WE LOOKED INTO THIS IN THE BSA SOFTWARE, WHAT WE IDENTIFIED IS IT'S REALLY MORE OF A TECHNICAL. YOU'RE YOU'RE REALLY GETTING INTO LIKE THE TECHNICAL TERMS OF YOUR SOFTWARE. BASNA. BUT WHAT IS DELETED IS THE VENDOR CODE. THE ACTUAL VENDOR IS NOT DELETED FROM THE SYSTEM. AND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE ANALYTICS, WE PERFORMED THE TESTS WE DID. BSA STILL PROVIDES YOU THAT VENDOR INFORMATION. AND SO THERE'S THERE'S NO PROBLEMATIC PROBLEMATIC ACTIVITY RELATED TO THIS CONCERN OR THE VENDORS THEMSELVES. SO JUST AS AN EXAMPLE, IN THE VENDOR AUDIT TRAIL, THERE WERE 44 DELETED VENDORS. AND WE CAN SEE ONE OF THOSE HERE. IT WAS VENDOR CODE ENDING IN FIVE TWO, FIVE. BUT WHEN WE PULL THE CHECK REGISTER SHOWING ALL THE VENDORS WHO WERE PAID THAT CHECK THAT A CHECK TO THAT VENDOR STILL APPEARS. RIGHT. AND SO IT'S REALLY JUST KIND OF A SYSTEM DELETION. THERE'S JUST A SYSTEM COMPONENT HERE. ALL OF OUR ANALYTICS STILL IDENTIFY THESE VENDORS. AND IT'S NOT THESE. IT'S MORE OF JUST A YEAH A PROCESS THING. AND I KNOW THE CITY MANAGER IS GOING TO GO OVER HIS OWN, YOU KNOW, REPORT AND SECTIONS AND THINGS THEY'VE BEEN DOING. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS WE RECENTLY LEARNED IS YOU'VE, YOU'VE MOVED TO THE CLOUD VERSION OF YOUR ACCOUNTING SOFTWARE, WHICH PROHIBITS THE DELETION OF VENDORS. AND SO OUR RECOMMENDATION HERE IS TO JUST PERIODICALLY REVIEW BSA ACCESS RIGHTS, ESPECIALLY FOR CREATING AND MODIFYING VENDORS, JUST MAKING SURE THAT THERE'S THAT APPROPRIATE LEVEL OF ACCESS AND CONTROLS. BUT OUR UNDERSTANDING IS AS PART OF THAT CONVERSION OR THAT TRANSITION TO THE CLOUD VERSION ACCESS HAS ALREADY BEEN RESTRICTED MORE THAN IT WAS, AND WE JUST RECOMMEND A CONSISTENT REVIEW OF THAT. SO I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR TO QUESTIONS ON THAT TOPIC. GOOD TO GO. ALRIGHT. SEE I HAVE A QUESTION. SO ON THIS EXAMPLE IN THE REPORT WHERE IT SAYS DESCRIPTION VENDOR DELETED, IS THAT WHERE IT WAS DELETED. BUT THE CODE STATE IT'S. SO WHAT'S THE. YES THE. AND IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT ON THE POWERPOINT HERE YES. THAT'S LIKE THE AUDIT TRAIL CAPTURES VENDOR DELETED. THAT'S JUST HOW BSA CLASSIFIES IT. WHAT WAS REALLY DELETED WAS THE VENDOR CODE. SO THAT VENDOR CODE WAS ALSO DELETED NEXT TO IT. YES. YEP. BUT WHEN WE RUN ANALYTICS, LIKE IF YOU WERE TO LOOK UP THAT VENDOR IN BSA, THE VENDOR NAME IS STILL IN BSA. THAT VENDOR CODE YOU CANNOT FIND IN BSA. SO IT STILL HAS THE NAME BUT NOT THE ASSIGNED VENDOR NUMBER. CORRECT? YEP, YEP. AND VENDOR. YEAH. THERE'S IT'S JUST A IT'S AGAIN IT'S MORE OF A CLASSIFICATION THING WITHIN BSA. SO YOU STILL HAVE THE NAME FOR THE 44 THAT HAD THE VENDOR DELETED. YEAH. STILL HAVE THOSE VENDOR NAMES. WE SAW THE VENDOR NAMES. I'LL CAVEAT THAT. AND IF THEY WERE PAID I KNOW WE HAVE THOSE VENDOR NAMES. 
          IF THEY WEREN'T PAID, IF THERE WAS NO TRANSACTION WITH THOSE VENDORS, I CANNOT SAY WITH 100% CERTAINTY RIGHT HERE AND RIGHT NOW THAT THEY WOULD BE YOU'D BE ABLE TO FIND THOSE NAMES. I'M PRETTY SURE YOU COULD. AND THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE SOMETHING FOR THE SNA OR THE CITY, YOU KNOW, FINANCE DEPARTMENT TO TO TRY AND IDENTIFY THOSE NAMES, BUT I BELIEVE. YEAH, YEAH. CITY MANAGER HAS SOME FOLLOW UP ON THAT. IT SOUNDS LIKE SO OKAY, WE'LL GO TO COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THEN WE'LL GO TO THE. THE RECOMMENDATION WAS TO PERIODICALLY CHECK BS. AND SO THEN WE'LL GO TO THE CITY MANAGER TO SEE WHAT OPERATIONALLY IS BEING DONE OR GOING TO BE DONE. COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS IS NOW IN. YES. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THIS CLEARLY. SO THE VENDOR IS NOT DELETED. THE VENDOR CODE IS DELETED. CORRECT. 
          AND I DON'T KNOW IF I HEARD THE WHY FOR THAT. SO DOES THAT HAPPEN? IF THERE IS A PERIOD OF TIME WHERE THAT VENDOR IS INACTIVE OR WE'RE NOT DOING ANY BUSINESS WITH THAT VENDOR, AND THE SYSTEM WOULD THEN AUTOMATICALLY PURGE THAT CODE, OR WHY DOES THAT HAPPEN? NO. SO THAT IS A, A SOMETHING THAT A USER WOULD HAVE TO GO IN AND DELETE. I DON'T KNOW IF BSA HAS LIKE A TIME FRAME WHERE IT IT WOULD NOT DELETE THE VENDOR. IF THERE WAS A TIME FRAME ISSUE, THAT WOULD BE IT MAY INACTIVATE THE VENDOR, BUT DELETING, IS IT SOMETHING THAT'S DONE BY A USER. 
          AND OUR UNDERSTANDING BASED ON CONVERSATIONS WAS THAT THIS WAS DONE AS PART OF TRAINING OF, YOU KNOW, HOW TO ADD A VENDOR FOR A FOR A LOT OF THESE INSTANCES WAS HOW TO ADD A VENDOR. AND THEN BECAUSE IT WAS KIND OF A IT WAS JUST A TRAINING PROCESS, IT WAS DELETED WITH SOME OF THE REASON FOR THAT DELETION. BUT IT IS SOMETHING A USER HAS TO DO. 
          OKAY. BECAUSE THAT WAS GOING TO BE A FOLLOW UP QUESTION, BUT I'LL WAIT TO GET THE RESPONSE FROM THE CITY MANAGER. AND MAYBE WITH US UPGRADING TO THE CLOUD, THERE IS A TRAINING MODULE SO THAT THEN THAT DOESN'T SHOW UP IN OUR REGULAR SYSTEM. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO 
          [00:15:06]
ADD IS TWO THINGS. ONE IS AGAIN, AS KYLE SAID, IF THE VENDOR WAS PAID TO THE MIC, IF THE VENDOR WAS PAID, IT DOES NOT DISAPPEAR. IT WOULD NOT BE UNUSUAL TO DELETE VENDORS THAT ARE NOT USED AS LONG AS THERE IS NO HISTORY WITH THAT VENDOR, YOU CANNOT DELETE A VENDOR IF THEY HAVE HAD IF THEY HAVE HISTORY OF PAYMENT, RIGHT. AND SO, MISS MCCALL, THAT WAS GOING TO BE THE QUESTION, A FOLLOW UP QUESTION THAT I HAVE. BUT I WAS GOING TO WAIT FOR THE CITY MANAGER, BECAUSE IF WE ARE KEEPING THE VENDOR NAME BUT NOT THE VENDOR CODE, AND WE HAD TO GO BACK HISTORICALLY TO CROSS-REFERENCE SOMETHING, I WOULD IMAGINE THAT IT'S PROBABLY MORE ACCURATE OR EASIER TO FIND THAT VENDOR THROUGH A CODE VERSUS A SPELLING. PEOPLE CAN MISSPELL TYPE IN THINGS AND ALL OF THAT. SO MY QUESTION WAS GOING TO BE, WHY WOULD WE KEEP THE NAME AND NOT THE CODE? I, I THINK THAT WAS AN OLD BSA ALLOWANCE. I THINK THEY'VE CLOSED THAT GAP. I DON'T THINK YOU CAN DO THAT ANYMORE, ESPECIALLY BEING ON THE CLOUD NOW. OKAY. SO I DON'T THINK IT'S EVEN A WORRY OR CONCERN. THANK YOU. 
          COUNCILMEMBER ZIEGLER. YES, THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO WE HAVE A DATE AND TIME STAMP OF WHEN THESE VENDORS WERE DELETED. DID THOSE DATES AND TIMES MAKE SENSE? LIKE, WERE ANY OF THEM DELETED AT A TIME WHEN IT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN APPROPRIATE TO BE WORKING? I WOULD I HAVE THE LIST OF 44 RIGHT HERE. I'D HAVE TO, YOU KNOW, QUICK THAT DID NOT JUMP OUT IN OUR ANALYTICS AS A PROBLEMATIC, YOU KNOW, LIKE SOMEBODY WAS DELETING VENDORS AT 1 A.M. OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT WAS NOT SOMETHING WE IDENTIFIED. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEP. I WILL. MY QUICK GLANCE IS THESE WERE DONE BETWEEN 930 AND 4:24 P.M. ALL DURING THE DAY. MR. JONES, I'LL GO TO YOU REGARDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WERE MADE AND WHAT'S BEING DONE OR WILL BE DONE OPERATIONALLY. WELL, SURE. AND I CERTAINLY COVER THAT ON MY PRESENTATION, BUT I I'LL DO IT NOW SINCE THE CONVERSATION LED THAT WAY. SO I THINK WHAT WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IS POTENTIALLY HAVING IT BE CONNECTED VERSUS GOING THROUGH ALL OF THIS FROM THEM AND THEN HAVING A PRESENTATION FROM YOU. WE'LL SEE HOW WE ARE WITH TIME. IF WE CAN DEAL WITH EACH ONE AS WE GO, THAT MIGHT BE MORE EXPEDIENT, BECAUSE THE ONES THAT WE'LL NEED TO SPEND TIME TIME ON WILL KNOW. THE ONES THAT WE CAN GET THROUGH, WILL GET THROUGH. SOME OF THEM HAVE NO RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          SO, WELL, I DO KNOW THAT THEY'RE ON A SHORT TIME FRAME BECAUSE THEY GOT TO GET ON THE PLANE. SO WE CERTAINLY WILL DEFINITELY SEE HOW WE HOW IT GOES. AND I THINK IT IT ALL BASED ON THE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS AND WE'LL GET A FEEL FOR THAT. BUT I THINK IT HAD BEEN COVERED PRETTY WELL. I WILL SAY THAT THERE WERE A COUPLE OF ACCOUNTS WHERE THE, THE, THE TIME LOG WAS OUTSIDE OF BUSINESS HOURS. MY. I IDENTIFIED THAT JUST IN IN THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE REPORT, I LOOKED INTO THOSE MATTERS. AGAIN. THOSE EMPLOYEES AREN'T HERE ANY LONGER. AND THERE WERE SOME SOME UNIQUE HOURS THAT SOME OF THEM WORKING, BUT THEY CERTAINLY WEREN'T TRAINING EXERCISES, WHICH I THINK AT THE TIME THE FINANCE DIRECTOR ATTRIBUTED MANY OF THOSE TO TRAINING, AND WE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT THAT. WE'RE LOOKING AT CREATING WHAT WE CALL SANDBOX OPPORTUNITIES, WHERE WE WOULD DO TRAINING OUTSIDE OF THE SYSTEM, BUT STILL BE ABLE TO TO PROVIDE THE SAME TYPE OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING ABOUT THE SYSTEM WITHOUT HAVING TO DO THAT. AND AGAIN, WITH OUR RECENT MIGRATION, WE CAN'T EVEN DO THE TYPE OF OF DELETION OF VENDORS THAT USED TO HAPPEN. SO I THINK IT GOT COVERED. WELL, I JUST WANTED TO TO LET YOU KNOW, THERE WERE A COUPLE OF OF SITUATIONS WHERE THEY WERE ACTUALLY OUTSIDE OF HOURS OR REFLECTIVE OF HOURS THAT OUR ORGANIZATION DON'T DO TRAINING DURING THOSE HOURS. AND SO I WAS ABLE TO TO IDENTIFY THOSE SITUATIONS AND SEE IF THERE WERE ANY NEFARIOUS CONNECTIONS TO THAT. AND I COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN MY REVIEW. BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT NO LONGER CAN HAPPEN ANYWHERE IN OUR SYSTEM. THANK YOU. AND LOOKING AT IT AGAIN WHILE YOU WERE TALKING, THERE'S ONE AT 5:51 P.M. AND ONE AT 6:08 P.M. I THINK THOSE ARE THE THE LATEST ONES. COUNCILMEMBER. 
          FREELY. YEAH. THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER. JUST ABOUT THE PROCESS FOR THE PRESENTATION, YOU SAID 
          [00:20:01]
THAT THE AUDITORS HAVE A TIME CONSTRAINT. YES. I BELIEVE THEY HAVE A FLIGHT TO CATCH IF I'M CORRECT. OKAY. AND I DON'T RECALL THE PLAN THAT YOU DESCRIBED. MAYOR, I, I UNDERSTOOD IT THAT THE AUDITORS WERE PRESENTING THAT MR. JONES WOULD PRESENT IN THE INTEREST OF THE AUDITORS SCHEDULE. IF COUNCIL IS AMENABLE, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE DO IT IN THAT FASHION. WHAT TIME IS YOUR FLIGHT? FOR? FIVE. AT NIGHT. OKAY, SO AGAIN, WE CAN DO THAT IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS IN THE AUDITORS ARE NOT HERE. WHEN WE GET TO MR. JONES THEY'LL BE GONE. AND SO IF WE CAN GO THROUGH THESE RELATIVELY QUICKLY, THERE'S SOME THAT ARE GOING TO SAY NO FINDINGS. IF YOU READ THE REPORT, THERE'S SOME THAT HAVE NO FINDINGS OR NO RECOMMENDATIONS. SO WE'LL BE GOING THROUGH THOSE QUICKLY. I THINK WE COULD DO A PULSE CHECK AT 730 TO SEE WHERE WE ARE, BUT THE MORE WE CAN HAVE AS MUCH INFORMATION DISCUSSED WITH THE AUDITORS HERE, I'M GLAD THEY'RE HERE TONIGHT, THE BETTER IT WILL BE, BECAUSE IF ONCE THEY LEAVE, IF THERE'S SOMETHING THAT COMES UP DURING MR. JONES, THEY WILL BE GONE. SO IF YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT ONE, PLEASE. OH, ONE SECOND, KYLE, JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE WILL NOT BE GONE. 
          WE WON'T BE HERE, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY ADDRESS ANY ADDITIONAL THINGS SUBSEQUENT TO THIS MEETING. ABSOLUTELY RIGHT. YOU WON'T BE HERE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE HERE TONIGHT, TONIGHT. SO THERE WILL EITHER BE ANOTHER MEETING. IF WE WANTED TO FULLY DISCUSS SOMETHING ELSE THAT WOULD NEED YOU ALL HERE. OKAY. GO AHEAD. ALRIGHT. SO OUR SECOND AREA OF, OF INITIAL AREA OF CONCERN WAS LOOKING FOR THE APPROVAL OR PAYMENT OF VENDORS OUTSIDE THE NORMAL PROCESS. AND WE DID IDENTIFY THIS LISTING OF CHECKS WHICH WERE DISPERSED FROM THE BANK WHICH WE COULD NOT RECONCILE TO THE CHECK REGISTER. SO IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THESE WERE RECORDED AS JOURNAL ENTRIES, SO STILL RECORDED IN THE ACCOUNTING RECORDS, JUST NOT THROUGH THE NORMAL VENDOR PAYMENT PROCESS. AND SO WE'VE LISTED THOSE CHECKS THERE. AND OUR FINDING HERE, OUR RECOMMENDATION IS AS PART OF THIS, WE WERE TRYING TO RECONCILE THESE BETWEEN WHAT THE ACCOUNTING SYSTEM SAID AND WHAT THE BANK, WHAT WAS DISPERSED FROM THE BANK, BECAUSE WE WERE LOOKING AT TRANSACTIONS FROM THE BANK. AND WHAT WE FOUND IS THAT BANK RECONCILIATIONS WERE NOT PERFORMED TIMELY. I'M SURE THE CITY MANAGER WILL HAVE AN UPDATE ON WHAT THAT PROCESS LOOKS LIKE NOW, BUT AS OF THE TIMING OF OUR TESTING, AT LEAST BANK RECONCILIATIONS WERE NOT PERFORMED TIMELY. THEY WERE SEVERAL MONTHS BEHIND, AND AS A RESULT, SOME OF THESE CHECKS WERE WERE NOT RECONCILED. AND SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONTINUE TO WORK WITH EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL RESOURCES TO IMPROVE THIS PROCESS AND ENSURE THAT THERE'S ADEQUATE STAFFING LEVELS TO PERFORM THESE PROCEDURES EFFECTIVELY. I DON'T SEE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL, MR. JONES. YES, I THINK I HAVE A I'LL ADD MAKE SURE I ADD THIS RECOMMENDATION TO THE GROUP OF RECOMMENDATIONS THAT I'VE BEEN PULLING TOGETHER. BUT YOU'RE CORRECT ABOUT THE THE TIMELINESS OF RECONCILIATIONS. 
          AND WE'RE ACTUALLY UTILIZING THE ACCOUNTING PORTION OF PLANTE MORAN TO HELP US GET CAUGHT UP TO SPEED WITH OUR RECONCILIATIONS. ALL RIGHT. THE THIRD AREA OF CONCERN THAT WE INVESTIGATED WAS THE APPROXIMATELY $11 MILLION OF CAPITAL ASSETS, WHICH IN LOOKING THROUGH THE FIXED ASSET LEDGER, THERE WERE NO THERE WAS NO DESCRIPTION FOR THESE FIXED ASSETS, BUT THEY WERE BEING DEPRECIATED. THESE ASSETS WERE ADDED PRIOR TO OUR SCOPE PERIOD, WITH THE MOST RECENT TRANSACTION IN 2017. AFTER REVIEWING EMAILS. YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T IDENTIFY THE NONEXISTENCE OF CAPITAL ASSETS. WE ALSO DIDN'T IDENTIFY WHAT THESE CAPITAL ASSETS WERE. AND SO THERE WERE JUST SOME THAT HAD NO DESCRIPTIONS, AND THERE WERE OTHERS THAT WERE JUST ENTERED AS ADJUSTMENTS. AND OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THIS THIS OCCURRED BECAUSE CAPITAL ASSETS WAS BEING RECORDED IN A SPREADSHEET AND NOT UTILIZING THE FIXED ASSET LEDGER. PART OF THAT WAS BECAUSE OF THE TRANSITION TO BSA MANY, MANY YEARS AGO. SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO REEVALUATE ASSETS AND RELATED VALUES. 
          LISTENED INTO THE LAST COUNCIL MEETING. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU'VE ALREADY DONE A GREAT JOB OF OF WORKING THROUGH THAT, AND YOU'VE ALREADY HEARD KIND OF THE UPDATES ON THAT. SO THAT WAS OUR RECOMMENDATION. IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S BEEN FULLY IMPLEMENTED BY THE CITY ALREADY. 
          I DON'T SEE ANY COUNCIL MEMBERS. MR. JONES, I ACTUALLY HAVE A COUNCIL MEMBER. FREHLEY, YOUR 
          [00:25:01]
LIGHT WAS NOT ON WHEN I SAID THAT. GO AHEAD. YEP. COULD YOU JUST FOR EVERYONE'S EDIFICATION, CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY DOES IT MATTER IF WE DON'T HAVE SORT OF ANY EXPLANATION OF WHAT THESE ASSETS ARE? WHY DOES IT MATTER TO THE CITY? WELL, SORRY, WHY DOES IT MATTER TO THE CITY, TO THE CITY THAT THERE ARE THESE ASSETS EXISTED OR THEY SEEM TO MAYBE HAVE EXISTED, BUT WE DON'T REALLY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE. THEY'RE STILL DEPRECIATING. WHY DOES THAT MATTER? YEAH. SO FROM A DEPRECIATION STANDPOINT, THAT LEADS TO EXPENSES ON THE CITY'S INCOME STATEMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, ARE NOT TRUE EXPENSES. AND SO BY GETTING THESE OFF OF THE BOOKS, THE THE BALANCE SHEET NOW AND THE INCOME STATEMENT ARE MORE REFLECTIVE OF WHAT ACTUALLY IS TRANSPIRING AND EXISTS AT THE CITY. THANK YOU. YEP. MR. JONES. I WOULD JUST SAY THAT WE WENT THROUGH A PRESENTATION LAST WEEK, AND THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WILL ALSO BE COMING, COMING FORWARD IN A A LARGE ACCOUNTING OF ALL THE DIFFERENT RECREATION RECOMMENDATIONS. SO I AGREE WITH WHAT WE'VE DONE SO FAR. THANK YOU. AND I WOULD ADD THAT SOME OF THOSE ASSETS ON THE SPREADSHEET THAT HAS BEEN KEPT SINCE LIKE 2000, 10 OR 11 DATE BACK BEYOND 2017. AND SO I THINK THE RECENT RECENT CAPITAL ASSET, WAS IT A STUDY OR INVENTORY EVALUATION HE JUST PRESENTED? MAYBE AT OUR LAST COUNCIL MEETING, DEALT WITH ALL OF THAT PRE IF WE CAN GET THE BEGINNING DATE OF THE THE LATEST DATE OF THE ASSET ON THAT, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. SO I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO KNOW IS PRIOR TO 2017 ALL RIGHT. YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT ONE. ALL RIGHT. OUR NEXT ONE IS RELATED TO AN INVENTORY WRITE DOWN THAT OCCURRED FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30TH 2021. THE NET IMPACT WAS APPROXIMATELY 1.5 MILLION IN THE GENERAL FUND. 
          AND WHAT WE IDENTIFIED IS THAT ESSENTIALLY THIS THIS BOIL DOWN TO INCONSISTENT INVENTORY COUNTS. AND SO IN 2019 AND 20, THERE WAS A VERY LARGE BINDER, HUNDREDS OF PAGES THAT DETAILED ALL OF THE INVENTORY. AND THEN IN 2021, THIS BINDER, MUCH SMALLER, DIDN'T INCLUDE THE LEVEL OF DETAIL AS IN PRIOR YEARS. SO THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT EXISTED IN 2020. 
          JUST A SMALL SNIPPET. AND ESSENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, THIS INVENTORY COUNT JUST WAS NOT PERFORMED FOR THE 2021 FISCAL YEAR TO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL. AND SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO FOLLOW A CONSISTENT INVENTORY COUNT PROCEDURE, KIND OF LIKE YOU DID WITH THE FIXED ASSET OR FIXED ASSET EVALUATION, MAKING SURE THAT WHAT'S ON THE BOOKS IS ACCURATE, AND THEN DOING A COMPREHENSIVE INVENTORY COUNT, YOU KNOW, AT A PREDETERMINED DATE, AND THEN JUST, YOU KNOW, BEING MORE THOROUGH AND OVERSEEN BY AN INDIVIDUAL THAT SHOULD BE IN CHARGE OF THAT. SO AGAIN, MORE SO JUST IN ACCOUNTING INVENTORY COUNT PROCEDURE THAT LED TO SOME DISCREPANCIES THAT WITH SOME TYPE OF INVENTORY COUNT, I DON'T WANT TO SAY AUDIT. RIGHT. 
          BUT AN INVENTORY COUNT PROCEDURE CLEANUP WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE OUR RECOMMENDATION TO RECTIFY THIS ISSUE. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I DON'T SEE ANY LIGHTS, MR. JONES. YEAH. 
          SO ON THE INVENTORY THINGS WE ARE WE'RE STILL PLAYING CATCH UP ON THOSE THINGS. BUT IF WE RECALL THE SAME CONSULTING FIRM, I THINK IT WAS THAT WE HAVE USED FOR OUR CAPITAL ASSETS, WE PLAN ON ENGAGING WITH THEM TO HELP US GET CAUGHT UP ON OUR INVENTORY BACK UP AS WELL. AND AGAIN, THOSE THINGS ARE USUALLY ITEMS THAT ARE $5,000 AND LESS. GOING THROUGH THE SAME PROCESS THAT WE DID WITH THE LARGER CAPITAL ASSETS AND IDENTIFYING WHAT THOSE ARE, AND THEN HAVING APPROPRIATE USE OF LIFE ESTABLISHED FOR THOSE ITEMS, AND HAVING SOME TYPE OF PROTOCOL FOR WHAT THEY CALL SCRAPPING OR SURPLUS, WHAT THE ITEMS ARE NO LONGER OF USE FOR US. SO WE'RE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING THROUGH THOSE ITEMS. COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. THIS IS A QUESTION FOR THE CITY MANAGER. I KNOW THAT YOU 
          [00:30:05]
WEREN'T HERE DURING THESE TIMES, BUT DO WE HAVE A POSSIBLE EXPLANATION WHY WE HAVING THESE INVENTORY ISSUES AND THE FIXED ASSET ISSUES IN THAT SO THAT WE DON'T REPEAT THOSE PROBLEMS BECAUSE WE'RE HAVING THE RECOMMENDATIONS? I UNDERSTAND THAT AND I UNDERSTAND THAT 2021 WE WE'RE DEALING WITH COVID. IS THAT PART OF THE REASON THAT YOU FIND IN YOUR, YOUR DISCOVERIES? OR HOW DO WE NOT PREVENT THIS FROM HAPPENING AGAIN? SURE. COVID CERTAINLY DID NOT HELP, BUT A LOT OF OUR SYSTEMS ARE ANTIQUATED, AND SO EVEN OUR SYSTEMS AND OUR WAREHOUSING AREN'T QUITE UP TO DATE. NOT DIGITAL, NOT DIGITALLY, YOU KNOW, ACCESSIBLE AND HAVING BARCODES AND SERIAL NUMBERS TRACKED, ALL THOSE THINGS WE HAVE, WE HAVEN'T DONE. 
          AND AND IF WE HAD DONE IT, MOST OF THOSE PEOPLE ARE NO LONGER WITH US. SO THE SYSTEMS THAT THEY LEFT BEHIND ARE STILL PAPER AND OLD, MUCH LIKE THE SAME CHALLENGES WE HAD WITH OUR CAPITAL ASSETS. SO WE'RE WE'RE JUST MOVING FORWARD TO BRINGING UPDATED GET THOSE THOSE THINGS DIGITAL AND GET THOSE MODERNIZED AND AND GETTING A FULL ACCOUNTING OF THAT. I THINK IT'S REALLY EASY TO MOVE IT AROUND FROM AN ACCOUNTING STANDPOINT AND JUST MAKE SOME ESTIMATIONS. AND I THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHAT HAS GOTTEN US BY THROUGH OUR PREVIOUS ANNUAL AUDITS. BUT NOW THAT IT'S KNOWN THAT WE HAD TO DO A WRITE DOWN, ANYTIME YOU DO A WRITE DOWN, THEN THAT'S LIKE A RED FLAG AND IT'S TELLING FOLKS THAT, LOOK AT THOSE KIND OF THINGS THAT, HEY, MAYBE THESE RECORDS AREN'T AS UP TO DATE AS WE HAD THOUGHT, BECAUSE YOU MAY AUTOMATICALLY ASSUME THAT THEY ARE UNTIL YOU SEE SOMETHING LIKE A WRITE DOWN. SO THIS IS JUST OUR KIND OF MARKER TO SAY, YEAH, WE NEED TO GET GET THIS ADDRESSED. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PLANNING ON DOING. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. NEXT. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE FIFTH AND FINAL INITIAL AREA OF CONCERN, WHICH IS THE THE FISHING PAYMENTS WHICH KIND OF PRECIPITATED ALL OF THIS. RIGHT. SO IN THAT WE DID NOT IDENTIFY INFORMATION CONNECTING THE PERPETRATORS OF THIS SCHEME TO ANYBODY THAT WORKS AT THE CITY. AND SO REALLY OUR RECOMMENDATION HERE IS IT WAS KIND OF A BREAKDOWN IN PROCESS, RIGHT, THAT ALLOWED THESE PAYMENTS TO BE SENT OUT. 
          AND SO JUST CONTINUED DILIGENCE, REGULAR TRAINING, MAKING SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR INITIATING AND APPROVING WIRES ARE PROPERLY TRAINED ON HOW TO CHANGE VENDOR INFORMATION. ALL OF THAT, JUST GOOD INTERNAL CONTROLS ARE ARE, YOU KNOW, YOU'RE REGULARLY TRAINED ON IT SO THAT IT IT IS PREVENTED IN THE FUTURE. COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. I THINK THIS MESSAGE TO IS OR THIS QUESTION TO IS FOR THE CITY MANAGER, JUST SO THAT THERE'S FULL TRANSPARENCY FOR THE PUBLIC. DO ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE REPORT FROM THE POLICE CHIEF, WHICH TALKS ABOUT THE STEPS IN WHICH CITY EMPLOYMENT, EMPLOYEE INVOLVEMENT WAS HANDLED? I AM NOT, SO THE POLICE CHIEF IS NOT HERE. AND JUST FOR THE RECORD, I WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW IN THE DOXING SITUATION WHICH RESULTED FROM A FINANCIAL LOSS, THERE WERE CITY EMPLOYEES THAT WERE INVESTIGATED NOT ONLY THROUGH THIS FORENSIC AUDIT, BUT ALSO BY OUTSIDE AGENCIES, INCLUDING THE SECRET SERVICE, BECAUSE IT'S A FINANCIAL CRIME. AND AT THAT TIME, IT IS MY RECOLLECTION THAT NO ONE FROM THE CITY PARTICIPATING IN THIS SCAM. IS THAT WHAT YOU GUYS UNDERSTAND TO THAT? THAT WAS OUR UNDERSTANDING AS WELL. YES. THESE PERPETRATORS WERE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY, UNRELATED TO CITY PERSONNEL. AND JUST TO FURTHER THAT, WE DID PERFORM BACKGROUND RESEARCH, CHECKS AND MAPPING AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS WE WOULD DO IN OUR INVESTIGATION. AND WE ALSO DID NOT IDENTIFY ANY CITY EMPLOYEES THAT WERE WILLFUL OR COLLUDED WITHIN THAT SCHEME. AND I WILL SAY, ALTHOUGH NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT PARTICULAR MEMORANDUM, I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE RECENT UPDATE THAT I GOT FROM THE POLICE CHIEF, THAT IT INDICATED A RECENT CONVERSATION THAT HE HAD WITH THE FBI AGENT THAT WAS WORKING THAT CASE, AND THAT TWO ARRESTS HAD BEEN MADE, AND THERE WERE NOT ALL OF THE I MEAN, JONES, IF YOU COULD SPEAK UP A LITTLE BIT, PLEASE, THAT. 
          [00:35:02]
YEAH. THANK YOU. THAT TWO ARRESTS HAD BEEN MADE, THAT THERE WERE OTHER ASSAILANTS THAT WERE OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTRY THAT ARE STILL BEING IN PURSUIT OF, BUT I'M NOT SURE WHATEVER THE FINAL ADJUDICATION WAS. BUT I DO KNOW THAT AT THE TIME, I THINK THERE WAS INDICTMENTS MADE AND, AND, AND THEY RESULTED IN AT LEAST TWO ARRESTS. AND I'M NOT REAL SURE WHERE, WHERE THE LATEST UPDATE IS ON THAT, BUT I DO KNOW THAT ARRESTS HAVE BEEN MADE. 
          ANYTHING ADDITIONAL, MR. JONES, YOU WANT TO ADD REGARDING OPERATIONAL, YOU JUST GAVE THE UPDATES FROM LAW ENFORCEMENT OR FROM THE CHIEF THAT YOU RECEIVED RECENTLY. 
          OPERATIONALLY, THE RECOMMENDATION OR IT SPEAKS TO NEEDING GOOD INTERNAL CONTROLS TO AVOID FUTURE PHISHING SCHEME AND HAVING FINANCE DEPARTMENT UNDERGO REGULAR TRAINING. YES. 
          THANK YOU FOR FOR THAT MAYOR. YES. SO WE HAVE BEEFED UP CONSIDERABLY OUR CYBER SECURITY. 
          WE RECENTLY HAD THAT EVALUATED BY ONE OF OUR INSURANCE PROVIDERS, AND WE RANKED VERY HIGH IN THAT AREA. SO WE'VE MADE SOME SOME TREMENDOUS PROGRESS. AND WE CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH CREATING NEW LAYERS OF SECURITY SO THAT FOLKS ATTEMPTING TO HACK WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH MULTIPLE LAYERS OF LAYERS OF SECURITY. THAT BEING SAID, WE ALSO HAVE AND THIS GOES TO SOME OF THE INTERNAL CONTROLS, WHICH YOU'LL FIND THAT THERE ARE FACTS, IF YOU WILL, THROUGHOUT THIS PRESENTATION ABOUT VARIOUS AREAS OF OUR CONTROLS THAT HAVE BEEN FOUND INSUFFICIENT OR CERTAINLY WEAK. AND WE ARE ALONG THE WAY STRENGTHENING. SO THAT'S GOING TO BE A THEME THAT YOU SEE THROUGHOUT MANY OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE GET TO MY PRESENTATION, WHICH IS GOES THROUGH THE SAME AREAS BUT JUST ARE MORE FOCUSED WITH INTERNAL OPERATION CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS MOVING FORWARD. BUT THAT, AGAIN, WIRE TRANSFERS THAT HAPPENED WITHOUT AN OUTSIDE OF THE. BSA SYSTEM, THOSE THINGS ARE NOT GOING TO BE HAPPENING AGAIN. WE MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING HAS TO HAVE A PO HAS TO GO THROUGH THE SYSTEM. THIS PHISHING SCHEME ESSENTIALLY TOOK ADVANTAGE OF. A WEAK SYSTEM, LACK OF COMMUNICATION, AND A PRACTICE THAT ALLOWED FOR WIRES TO GO OUT. USUALLY THEY WOULD DOUBLE BACK AND FILL OUT THE APPROPRIATE PAPERWORK AND AND IMPLEMENT IMPLEMENT THE APPROPRIATE INPUTS. BUT THE PRACTICE OF IT GOING OUT INITIALLY WAS SOMETHING THAT WASN'T UNUSUAL, MAYBE UNUSUAL TO THIS VENDOR WITH THE AMOUNTS THAT IT WAS, BUT THE PRACTICE ITSELF ACTUALLY WAS KIND OF A PERFECT STORM AND TOOK ADVANTAGE OF WEAK SYSTEMS THAT EXIST THEN THAT DO NOT LONGER NO LONGER EXIST. COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL OH, THANK YOU. SO YOU ANSWERED A MAJORITY OF THE QUESTIONS. I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR PRESENTATION. I GUESS YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK MORE ON INTERNAL CONTROLS, BECAUSE I KNOW WE I GUESS REALLY NEGLIGENT LAST TIME. SO I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN. YES. YOU SAID THAT THERE ARE MULTIPLE LAYERS OF SECURITY. CAN YOU PROVIDE JUST A FEW EXAMPLES OF THE MULTIPLE LAYERS OF SECURITY? YES. SO WE'LL IT'S VERY FAMILIAR WITH OUR EMAIL PROTECTIONS. SO EVERY EMPLOYEE, EVERY COUNCIL PERSON HAS TO ANYONE WHO UTILIZES OUR OUR EMAIL SYSTEM HAS TO GO THROUGH TRAINING WHO'VE BEEN THROUGH THOSE THOSE TRAININGS YOURSELF. WE NOW DO THAT ANNUALLY. IF YOU DON'T GET THE TRAINING DONE, THEN YOU DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THE SYSTEM THAT'S BUILT IN AS AN AUTOMATIC. SO THAT IS ALSO NEW. BUT THEN WE'RE DOING SOME THINGS WITH MICROSOFT DEFENDER, WHICH CREATES ANOTHER LAYER OF PROTECTION THAT INVOLVES PIECES OF OF AI TO HELP IDENTIFY RAPIDLY VARIOUS THREATS, AND THEN ALSO HELPS DIAGNOSE ONCE ATTEMPTS COME IN. SO THERE'S THE ABILITY TO EVEN START TO DO SOME FORENSIC ADJUSTMENTS BASED ON THE ATTACKS THAT ARE 
          [00:40:07]
ATTEMPTED. SO THINGS OF THAT NATURE CREATES MULTIPLE WAYS. WE'VE BEEN DOING THROUGH THIRD PARTY VERIFICATION ON CERTAIN THINGS AND UTILIZING THINGS LIKE OUR, OUR PAY I THERE'S A THERE'S A, THERE'S A PAY TO CERTAIN CHECK SYSTEMS THAT WE WORK WITH THE BANK TO MAKE SURE THAT CHECKS AREN'T GOING IN. THE NAME OF IT IS ESCAPING ME RIGHT NOW. BUT THERE'S A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE HAVE DONE NOW THAT WE HADN'T HAD BEFORE. ALL RIGHT. NEXT. 
          ALL RIGHT. SO WE WILL GET INTO THE EXPANDED AREAS OF CONCERN NOW. AND JUST TO KIND OF CLEAR UP SOME, SOME POSSIBLE CONFUSION OR MISCOMMUNICATION THAT I THINK MAY HAVE CAUSED SOME CONVERSATIONS IS WE WANT TO OUTLINE THIS IS PART PHASE THREE OF OUR ENGAGEMENT LETTER OR CONTRACT WITH THE CITY. SO PART OF OUR SCOPE WAS TO RUN DATA ANALYTICS TESTS TO IDENTIFY ADDITIONAL UNKNOWN ANOMALIES. AND SPECIFICALLY THAT THAT LAST ONE IS KIND OF A A CATCH ALL, IF YOU WILL, OF OTHER ANALYTICS AS DETERMINED APPLICABLE AS MORE INFORMATION IS IDENTIFIED. SO IF WE BECAME AWARE OF INFORMATION WE WOULD PERFORM ANALYTICS AROUND THAT INFORMATION IDENTIFIED. OR AS A RESULT OF THE ANALYTICS WE PERFORMED. IF IF THERE WERE MORE ANALYTICS THAT NEEDED TO BE PERFORMED AFTER THAT, WE PERFORMED THAT. SO AGAIN, EXPANDED AREAS OF CONCERN, NOT AN EXPANDED SCOPE. SO THE FIRST AREA OF THIS WERE JUST THE THE DATA TESTING. I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO DETAIL ON ALL 14 TESTS. I LOVE DATA, I'M SURE YOU ALL DON'T LOVE DATA AS MUCH, SO I WON'T BORE YOU WITH ALL THAT. BUT ESSENTIALLY FROM THIS TESTING, WE IDENTIFIED TWO VENDORS FOR WHICH WE PERFORMED ADDITIONAL TESTING. AND SO IN PARTICULAR, I WANT TO SHARE THESE. YOU KNOW, I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO THE DETAILS ON DATA ANALYTICS, BUT I WILL SHARE THE RELEVANT TESTS THAT RESULTED IN OUR FINDINGS THAT WE ARE PRESENTING TODAY. SO THE FIRST TEST WE RUN IS AN ADDRESS MATCH BETWEEN THE EMPLOYEE MASTER FILE AND THE VENDOR MASTER FILE. SO THE EMPLOYEE MASTER FILE IS GOING TO LIST ALL ACTIVE AND INACTIVE EMPLOYEES OF THE CITY. THAT'S GOING TO INCLUDE COUNCIL MEMBERS. REALLY ANYBODY PAID BY THE CITY AND THEN AS AN EMPLOYEE AND THEN THE VENDOR MASTER FILE, WHICH IS GOING TO INCLUDE ALL ACTIVE AND INACTIVE VENDORS PAID BY THE CITY. AND WE USE A MAPPING SOFTWARE TO MAP THESE AND SEE WHERE ARE THERE MATCHES, WHERE IS AN EMPLOYEE? WHERE IS AN EMPLOYEE LISTED ON THE MASTER FILE WITH AN ADDRESS THAT IS ALSO LISTED AS A VENDOR ON THE MASTER FILE. 
          SO THAT'S THE FIRST TEST. THE SECOND ONE IS ROUND DOLLAR AMOUNT INVOICES. THAT'S A COMMON. ALL OF THESE TESTS ARE ARE THINGS THAT WE RUN FOR MOST OF OUR FORENSIC ENGAGEMENTS. 
          THEY'RE VERY COMMON TESTS. AND SO WE LOOK FOR ROUND DOLLAR AMOUNTS RIGHT. IF YOU'RE PURCHASING SOMETHING TYPICALLY THERE'S GOING TO BE SOME SOME EXTRA DOLLARS OR CENTS KIND OF IN THE PRICE. RIGHT. IF YOU GO TO THE THE GROCERY STORE, IT'S NOT GOING TO COST YOU EXACTLY $100. SO TYPICALLY WHEN PURCHASING THINGS, WE'RE NOT GOING TO SEE EXACTLY $1,000. 
          RIGHT. AND THEN SEQUENTIAL INVOICES AND THERE'S A WHOLE WHOLE LIST OF REASONS OF WHY THAT IS A CONCERN. BUT A HIGH LEVEL WE ARE LOOKING TO SEE IS A VENDOR ISSUING YOU INVOICE NUMBER 123456, WHERE YOU'RE THE ONLY CUSTOMER OF THAT THAT VENDOR. SO AN EXAMPLE OF THAT WE SEE HERE ON THE LEFT IS INVOICES NUMBERS ONE, TWO, THREE AND FOUR ALL IN ROUND DOLLAR AMOUNTS. SO WE RUN THESE TESTS FOR THE MAPPING ONE. FOR EXAMPLE WE IDENTIFIED ABOUT 20 VENDORS THAT HAD A MATCHING ADDRESS TO AN EMPLOYEE. ONLY A HANDFUL OF THOSE WERE PAID ABOVE $10,000. AND THEN WITHIN THAT YOU KNOW, WE IDENTIFIED INVOICES, PULLED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION. AND SO THE FIRST VENDOR THAT WE PRESENT IS THE MEN OF INTELLIGENCE ASSOCIATION. 
          THIS THIS VENDOR SHARED AN ADDRESS WITH A SOMEBODY LISTED ON THE EMPLOYEE MASTER FILE. 
          THEY HAD THE ROUND DOLLAR AMOUNT INVOICES SEQUENTIALLY NUMBERED. SO THEY TRIPPED A NUMBER OF OUR RED FLAGS DURING THE SCOPE PERIOD. THEY WERE PAID $130,000. AND SO THIS IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE OF AN INVOICE THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US, OUR, YOU KNOW, FINDING IN OUR REPORT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE JUST RECOMMEND THAT THE CITY FOLLOW UP AND MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE VENDOR, GIVEN THE RELATIONSHIP. RIGHT, GIVEN THAT THEY SHARED AN ADDRESS. 
          AND SO THAT'S ALL OUR RECOMMENDATION, OUR REPORT IDENTIFIES IS, IS, YOU KNOW, THE CITY SHOULD TAKE THESE NEXT STEPS TO IDENTIFY IS THIS APPROPRIATE. SAME THING WITH THIS OTHER VENDOR. WE IDENTIFIED NAACP OF ATLANTA AGAIN SEQUENTIAL INVOICE NUMBER ONE AND NUMBER TWO ROUND DOLLAR AMOUNTS. AND WHEN LOOKING AT THE INVOICE AT THE TIME, YOU KNOW, WE WERE A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED ABOUT WHY IS THE CITY GRANTING UTILITY ASSISTANCE. 
          [00:45:05]
AND AND AGAIN WE JUST PRESENT THE FACTS AS WE FIND THEM. THIS WAS THE INVOICE THAT WE HAD. 
          AND SO OUR UNDERSTANDING IS, YOU KNOW, I DON'T EVER WANT TO STEAL THE CITY MANAGER'S THUNDER WITH HIS REPORT. BUT, YOU KNOW, OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT FURTHER RESEARCH IS DONE BY THE CITY. BACKGROUND INFORMATION IS KNOWN BY THE CITY. AND SO THE CITY IS THE ONE THAT IS ABLE TO IDENTIFY. IS THIS AN APPROPRIATE RELATIONSHIP OR NOT. AND SO AGAIN OUR RECOMMENDATION WAS JUST TO REVIEW THOSE VENDORS AND JUST VALIDATE THAT THE GOODS OR SERVICES WERE PROVIDED TO THE CITY. AND I'LL OPEN THAT ONE UP TO QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. 
          YES. AND THANK YOU SO MUCH. AND I KNOW THAT YOU PROBABLY HAVEN'T RECEIVED THIS INFORMATION, BUT ON AUGUST 7TH, WE RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM THE MEN OF INTELLIGENCE ASSOCIATION, AND THEY HAD SOME ISSUES. BUT I JUST FEEL LIKE THIS NEEDS TO BE SAID ON RECORD. 
          BUT ONE OF THE SPECIFIC ISSUES OF CONCERN IS, NUMBER ONE, THE MISCHARACTERIZATION OF INVOICE 0004 IN THE AMOUNT OF $60,000. THE AUDIT STATES. THIS IS A LIMITED DETAIL INTO THE NATURE OF THE SERVICES PROVIDED FOR THE INVOICES SUBMITTED DURING OUR SCOPE PERIOD. A TOTAL OF TWO DETAILED SERVICE REPORTS WERE SUBMITTED TO SUPPORT INVOICE NUMBER 0004, DOCUMENTING EVERY SENIOR, LEGACY, RESIDENT AND PROPERTY SERVICE DURING THE FIRST TWO QUARTERS OF THE FY 2022. THE FIRST REPORT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY ON FRIDAY, OCTOBER 1ST, 2021. THE SECOND REPORT WAS EMAILED CONCURRENTLY WITH THE AFOREMENTIONED INVOICE ON DECEMBER 13TH, 2021. WE ARE UNCLEAR AS TO WHY THE INVOICE WAS SUBMITTED, BUT NOT THE ACCOMPANYING REPORT, AND HE HAS SUBMITTED SCREENSHOTS. IT WAS EMAILED TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL AS IT RELATED TO THIS SPECIFIC INVOICE. HE ALSO ATTACHED IT TO THAT EMAIL IN WHICH MAYOR AND COUNCIL RECEIVED IT IN ADDITION TO THE CITY MANAGER, AND HE ALSO PROVIDED AN ACCOMPANYING VIDEO PRODUCED AND POSTED BY THE CITY'S PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICE ABOUT THE PROGRAM. CLICK HERE. AND HE GOES ON TO DISCUSS HIS CONCERNS THAT THAT INFORMATION WAS EITHER WITHHELD FROM AUDITORS OR INTENTIONALLY, INTENTIONALLY DISREGARDED IN THE FINAL AUDIT REPORT. SO I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT THAT YOU ALL HAVE THAT INFORMATION AS WE GET THROUGH THIS PROCESS. 
          THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER BUTLER. YES, MA'AM. MADAM MAYOR, AND I'LL JUST CAN YOU CORRECT ME IF I'M MISTAKEN? BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS YOU WHO MADE SURE THAT THE CITY PUT THAT CONTRACT OUT FOR BID. IT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT. AND I THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT IDEA. DID DID WE NOT THAT THE SERVICES THAT THE MEN OF INTELLIGENCE OFFERED. DID WE NOT PUT THAT OUT FOR BID? I DON'T RECALL, BUT THAT INFORMATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN PROVIDED TO THE AUDITORS IF IT WAS, I DON'T RECALL IF IT INITIALLY WAS OR IT WAS THE SECOND TIME AROUND. BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO THEM AND IS EASILY ASCERTAINABLE THROUGH THE CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT DEPARTMENT. THROUGH. CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT. AND THEN THERE WOULD BE THEY WOULD HAVE THE SOLICITATION AND THEN THERE WOULD BE A VOTE ON COUNCIL ON THE CONTRACT. AND SO IF THAT WASN'T DONE OR THAT WASN'T SHARED, I SHOULD SAY THAT, OR EVEN IF THAT WASN'T LOOKED INTO, WOULD BE A MISSTEP. AND I'M NOT SURE IF THE AUDITORS LOOKED INTO IT OR KNEW ABOUT IT OR IF STAFF SHARED IT, BUT I DON'T RECALL WHETHER OR NOT THAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. BUT OUR RECORD SHOULD REFLECT IT. I DON'T RECALL REVIEWING ANY, YOU KNOW, OUT TO BID, YOU KNOW, BID REQUEST. I DO WANT TO, YOU KNOW, POINT OUT IN OUR REPORT, WE DO IDENTIFY WE DID OBTAIN A LISTING OF THE PROPERTIES THAT WERE I DON'T KNOW IF IT CAME FROM THE QUARTERLY REPORT OR YOU KNOW, WHERE THAT CAME FROM. I BELIEVE IT WAS A SPREADSHEET THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US. BUT WE WE DO. WE DID GO THROUGH THAT SPREADSHEET AND THAT LISTING OF PROPERTIES AND DIDN'T IDENTIFY WHAT DO WE SAY, ANY ANY PROPERTIES RELATED TO THE THE SHARED ADDRESS, COUNCIL MEMBER EMPLOYEE. AND SO THAT WAS ONE OF OUR ADDITIONAL STEPS THAT WE TOOK WAS LOOKING AT THAT THAT LISTING. BUT AGAIN OUR OUR ROLE WAS WE IDENTIFIED THIS VENDOR. 
          IT'S, YOU KNOW, UP TO THE CITY TO, TO DETERMINE IF THAT WAS VALID. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE 
          [00:50:03]
HAS BEEN WORK TO IDENTIFY THAT OR, OR, YOU KNOW, LOOK INTO IT MORE. COUNCILMAN. YES, MADAM MAYOR, I'M GOING TO DEFER TO THE CITY MANAGER WITH REGARDS TO THE NAACP. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS WAS DURING COVID AND IN ORDER TO SECURE FUNDS FOR UTILITY RELIEF, THERE HAD TO BE A NONPROFIT THAT DISTRIBUTED THOSE FUNDS. BUT I'LL ALLOW THE CITY MANAGER TO VERIFY THAT OR NOT, THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. EXCUSE ME. COUNCILMAN. OH. GO AHEAD. YEAH, THAT'S THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. ALSO, SINCE THIS TIME WE'VE BROUGHT THIS SERVICE IN-HOUSE AND THIS IS ACTUALLY CURRENTLY PROVIDED THROUGH OUR OFFICE OF EQUITY, INCLUSION AND EMPOWERMENT. AND AND WE STILL DEEM IT IMPORTANT AND, AND PROVIDE THESE SERVICES TO OUR CITIZENS. COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE, THANK YOU. AND LET'S GO BACK TO MEN OF INTELLIGENCE. THAT PROCESS, I BELIEVE, WAS BIDDED OUT AND THEY WANTED TO THEY WAS GRANTED THE, THE THE BID. BUT WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO OR THE CITY, MR. JONES, TO CORRECT WHAT ERROR OR MISTAKES THAT WAS PUT IN THERE THAT LED, THAT MADE IT APPEAR AS IF THEY RECEIVED MORE MONEY AND DIDN'T PROVIDE THE SERVICE? IF I MAY 1ST, IF I MAY. SO WE OUTLINED SO, AS KYLE MENTIONED EARLIER, THE REASON MEN OF INTELLIGENCE WAS FLAGGED WAS BASED UPON THE RED FLAG TESTS THAT WERE RESULTED. INVOICE NUMBER ONE, INVOICE NUMBER TWO, INVOICE NUMBER THREE, AND SO FORTH, AND THE WHOLE DOLLAR AMOUNTS. WHAT WE ALSO OUTLINED IN OUR REPORT ON PAGE 25 IS THAT HOW AN ADDRESS IS ADDED IS THE INTELLIGENCE, AS WE WERE TOLD BY THE CITY, THEY CALL IN AND ADD THIS ADDRESS TO A LISTING. THERE'S VERSUS LIKE A RESIDENT CALLING INTO THE CITY SAYING, I WOULD LIKE SERVICE THROUGH THIS ORGANIZATION. SO THERE IS A BALANCE BECAUSE IF I AND I DON'T KNOW THIS ORGANIZATION, BUT I WOULD WANT TO KNOW, HOW DO I KNOW THAT THE CLEANUP WORK WAS DONE AT THIS, THIS RESIDENCE? HOW HOW WOULD YOU KNOW? SO INSTEAD, HAVING A RESIDENT CALL AND SAY, I WOULD LOVE SERVICE, I REALLY NEED THIS ASSISTANCE. THAT WAY THE CITY HAS THAT ADDRESS, AND WHEN MEN OF INTELLIGENCE SENDS THEIR INVOICE, THEY HAVE THAT PROOF THAT, YES, THAT ADDRESS WAS ON THE LIST. JUST AN EXAMPLE. YES. 
          AND IN MY PRESENTATION I GO A LITTLE DEEPER. SO ESSENTIALLY I RESEARCHED IN OUR IN OUR SYSTEM EVERYTHING THAT'S BEEN PAID TO MEN OF INTELLIGENCE. SO STARTING IN 2021, GOING TO 2025, WE HAVE SPENT $678,000.20 WITH MEN OF INTELLIGENCE. I THEN GO BACK AND LOOK AT OUR CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS WITH MEN OF INTELLIGENCE. AND THUS FAR, I HAVE BEEN ABLE TO ATTRIBUTE 500,005, $550,000, FIVE YES, $550,000. SO I AM STILL LOOKING FOR THE THE DELTA OF ROUGHLY $178,000 IN CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS. THAT WOULD EXPLAIN THAT THOSE THAT THAT OUTLAY THAT THE FUNDING ONCE I FIND THAT, THEN I CAN THEN GO INTO THE DETAILS AND MAKE SURE THAT THOSE THINGS ARE ARE ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE INVOICING AND REPORTS THAT HAD BEEN PROVIDED TO THAT TIME. IF THERE'S ANY GAPS IN THAT, IN THAT, THEN I WOULD SEEK TO GET ANSWERS DIRECTLY FROM INTELLIGENCE TO SEE IF THEY COULD PROVIDE RECORDS THAT CAN FILL THOSE GAPS, BUT THAT RIGHT NOW IS CONSIDERED TO BE ONGOING IN MY REVIEW. BUT TO DATE, THAT'S WHAT I'VE BEEN ABLE TO FIND. AND I CERTAINLY THAT WAS PART OF MY PRESENTATION. I HAVE A SLIDE TO SHOW SOME SOME DETAILS VISUALLY, BUT THAT'S BASICALLY A SYNOPSIS OF THAT PARTICULAR WORK TO DATE. BUTLER, ARE YOU STILL IN? YES, MADAM MAYOR, REGARDING THE MEN OF 
          [00:55:07]
INTELLIGENCE, I MAY HAVE ONE EXPLANATION. NOT FOR THE MONEY, BUT FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S A SENIOR CITIZEN ON WHERE AVENUE, I THINK IT WAS THAT WAS CITED BY CODE ENFORCEMENT, WHERE A TREE HAD FALLEN DOWN IN HER BACKYARD AND SHE HAD NO MEANS TO DISPOSE OF THAT TREE. SO I WOULD CALL OR I CALL MEN OF INTELLIGENCE AND ASK, COULD THEY HELP HER WITH THAT DISPOSITION OF THAT FALLEN TREE? SO I KNOW THAT THEIR SCOPE OF WORK WENT OUTSIDE OF JUST CUTTING GRASS. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE DONE FOR THE CITY. UNTIL WE GOT THIS OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION TO TRY TO DO THOSE THINGS. AND SO IN THAT WAY, THEY WERE DOING A GOOD JOB FOR THE CITY. AND I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT WAS ACCOUNTED FOR AND HOW THE FEES WERE. IF IT WAS ACCUMULATION OF FEES OR, YOU KNOW, THEY JUST CHARGE A SET AMOUNT. I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH HOW THAT WORKS, BUT I KNOW THAT I WOULD MAKE THOSE CALLS, AND THAT'S ONE EXAMPLE OF HELPING SOMEONE IN NEED. RECENTLY WE HAD A GENTLEMAN WHO'S YOU WOULD THINK THAT HE ASKED FOR THEM TO COME CLEAN UP THE YARD. BUT WHEN YOU SEE THE YARD IS AS IF HE WAS A HOARDER. AND ALL OF THESE THINGS IN THE YARD, SO WHERE YOU WOULD THINK THE JOB WOULD CAUSE A COUPLE OF HUNDRED DOLLARS. BUT WHEN YOU LOOKED AT THE SCOPE OF WORK, THEN IT WILL EXCEED, YOU KNOW, 1000 OR $2000 JUST TO CLEAN THAT YARD UP, BECAUSE HE HAD EVERYTHING IN THERE. AND SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH, WITH THE WORK THAT THEY DID. COUNCIL MEMBER STRATFORD. SO. BECAUSE I KNOW MORE ABOUT THE PROGRAM, BECAUSE IT'S SOMETHING THAT I STARTED, THEY DO PROVIDE MORE THAN JUST YARD SERVICE. 
          THEY ALSO CUT TREES DOWN AND ESPECIALLY TREE LIMBS. THAT'S HANGING OVER THE SENIOR HOME. 
          THAT COULD CAUSE POTENTIAL HARM TO THEM IN THE EVENT OF A STORM. AND IF THAT TREE LIMB FALL, IT WOULD DO DAMAGE TO THE HOUSE. SO THAT THAT IS SOME OF THE THINGS THAT THEY DID WAS CUT THE TREES DOWN, AS WELL AS THE TREE LIMBS, AS WELL AS CLEAN THE GUTTERS AND THE YARD. SO THEY THEY PERFORM THE WHOLE LOT OF THINGS BESIDES JUST YARD CLEANING UP. THEY DID A LOT. SO I WOULD RECOMMEND AND I'M SURPRISED, MR. JONES, YOU HAVEN'T REACHED OUT TO MEN OF INTELLIGENCE TO IF YOU HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT ANYTHING OR ANY INVOICE OR IF, IF IT'S SOMETHING THAT YOU COULDN'T FIND, YOU COULD HAVE REACHED OUT TO THEM TO POSSIBLY SIT DOWN AND GO OVER ANY CONCERNS THAT YOU HAD. BUT AGAIN, AND I GUESS ONCE YOU DO THAT, BECAUSE IT WAS PUT OUT THERE AS IF THEY RECEIVED MORE MONEY AND ALL THEY DID WAS JUST CLEAN YARDS. 
          AND THAT'S THAT WAS NOT THE CASE. THEY WENT ABOVE AND BEYOND. THEY DID MORE THAN JUST CLEAN YARDS. COUNCIL MEMBER FREELY. YEAH. THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER I WAS NOT ON COUNCIL AT THE TIME SO I COULD BE MISTAKEN, BUT I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS EVER A BIDDING PROCESS OR A CONTRACT INVOLVED IN THIS. I, I WAS UNDERSTOOD IT WAS AN MOU, A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. I DON'T THINK THERE'S A BIDDING PROCESS ON AN MOU, BUT PERHAPS THE CITY ATTORNEY CAN ADDRESS THAT. NO. MY RECOLLECTION IT WAS MOU AS WELL. AND OUR ORDINANCES DON'T PROVIDE FOR THERE TO BE A COMPETITIVE BIDDING PROCESS FOR THAT. I'M NOT SAYING THAT ONE WAS REQUIRED. I'M JUST SAYING THAT OUR ORDINANCE DOES NOT PROVIDE FOR THAT. RIGHT. SO IT WAS AN MOU THAT WAS SORT OF GRANTED TO THIS ORGANIZATION. THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. THANK YOU. SO I'LL JUST SAY FOR THE RECORD, WHILE WE HAVE BEEN TALKING, I WENT ON TO THE CITY'S WEBSITE. CITY CLERK'S OFFICE AGENDAS AND MINUTES TYPED IN MEN OF INTELLIGENCE AND A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS. NUMBER 2022. DASH 1774. IT SAYS IT'S THEIR RESPONSE TO THAT REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL. NOW, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY STARTED SERVICES, BUT THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN IT SAYS IT'S 2022 DASH 1774, BUT THEIR LETTER AND PROPOSAL DATED IN 
          [01:00:03]
THIS IS JULY 30TH, 2021. SO MR. JONES SAID HE'D HAVE HE HAS MORE INFORMATION THAN SHOW THE $678,000 AND ALL OF THE PAYMENTS, BUT THERE WAS AT LEAST IT LOOKS LIKE A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS. IF THIS INFORMATION. I PULLED IT FROM, AGAIN, THE CITY'S WEBSITE. FROM 2020. IT SAYS EFCC 2022 DASH 1774 I DON'T KNOW IF SOMEONE FROM CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT IS HERE, MR. JONES, BUT THEY MIGHT WANT TO LOOK UP THAT NUMBER SO THAT AS WE GET TO YOUR PART OF THE PRESENTATION, I'LL HAVE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT. YEAH, THAT THAT'S HELPFUL. SO I WILL SAY THAT THERE ARE AT LEAST THREE CONTRACTS THAT I'VE BEEN ABLE TO FIND. AND THERE WAS ONE THAT HAD A EXTENSION CLAUSE IN IT. AND SO BASED ON WHAT I'VE BEEN ABLE TO FIND, ONE WAS FOR $10,000, THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE WITH AN EXTENSION FOR AN ANNUAL ALLOTMENT OF $210,000, INCLUDING THAT EXTENSION THAT WOULD GO TO $430,000. AND I JUST RECENTLY HAD A CONTRACT PROVIDED TO ME THROUGH FINANCE THAT SHOWED ANOTHER 100, A SEPARATE CONTRACT FOR ANOTHER $120,000. SO AGAIN, I CAN AT LEAST ATTEST FOR CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS OF $550,000. AND TO COUNCILWOMAN SHARPSHOOTER'S POINT, THE FIRST THING TO DO IS TO FIND ALL OF OUR OBLIGATIONS AND MAKE SURE THAT'S IN LINE BEFORE I REACH OUT. AND I DO PLAN ON REACHING OUT, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT THERE'S SOME OTHER SMALL, SMALL ITEMS THAT WERE USED IN COUNCIL FUNDS FOR THIS ORGANIZATION THAT MIGHT BE MORE DIFFICULT TO FIND, BECAUSE THOSE WOULD BE UNDER A DIFFERENT PROCUREMENT PRACTICE WITH THE CITY THAT MAY NOT REQUIRE CONTRACTS BECAUSE THEY WERE SMALL IN NATURE. SO THOSE THINGS I'M TRYING TO TRACK DOWN, AND THEN ONCE I GET COMFORTABLE WITH THOSE ITEMS, THEN I'LL GO IN AND DO SOME OF THE QUALITY ASSURANCE OF SEEING HOW THEY MATCH UP WITH THE ITEMS THAT WE HAVE BEEN INVOICED, THE ACTUAL PROPERTIES, THOSE KIND OF THINGS, AND MAKE SURE ALL OF THAT IS IS APPROPRIATE. AND THEN IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT ISN'T OR OUR RECORDS DON'T SHOW, THEN I WILL CERTAINLY SIT DOWN AND ASK THE VENDOR TO EITHER EXPLAIN THOSE IN THESE CONTRACTS. I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY CLAUSE THAT WOULD REQUIRE THE VENDOR TO DO ANY AUDITING, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT MIGHT BE VOLUNTEERED OR AT LEAST UNDERSTOOD THROUGH INTERVIEWING. SO THOSE ARE THAT'S MY PROCESS OF OF GETTING TO THAT. AND THAT'S WHY THAT IS STILL CONSIDERED TO BE ONGOING PROJECT FROM AT LEAST MY SIDE OF IT. COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS. YES, THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. 
          THE FIRST QUESTION WOULD BE TO THE CITY MANAGER. I HEARD YOU JUST MENTIONED THAT YOU'VE BEEN ABLE TO IDENTIFY THREE CONTRACTS. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. AND SO ARE YOU CONSIDERING OR ACCOUNTING THE MOU AS ONE OF THE CONTRACTS OR ARE THERE THREE CONTRACTS AND AN MOU? SO ARE THEY SYNONYMOUS IN THIS? I THINK THE MOU I AM CONSIDERING, I THINK THE MOU WAS FOR THE $10,000, WHICH WOULD MAKE A MORE SENSE. THE CONTRACT WAS DEFINITELY THE LARGER NUMBER ITEMS AND I HAVE. I DO HAVE THOSE SIGNED CONTRACTS BECAUSE THAT'S GOTTEN ALONG THE WAY, CONTRACTS THAT WERE DRAFTS. BUT IF THEY DIDN'T HAVE A SIGNATURE, I DIDN'T CONSIDER IT UNTIL JUST RECENTLY. I JUST WAS ABLE TO CONFIRM AND GET ONE WITH SIGNATURES FOR I THINK IT WAS 100, 150, WHICH NOW I HAVE NOW ACCOUNTED TO BE A PART OF THE $550,000 OBLIGATIONS THAT I WAS ABLE TO CONFIRM. SURE. SO THE MOU IS ONE OF THE THREE CONTRACTS OF WHICH YOU SPEAK? YES. AND THE IN THE MOU DID THAT PREDATE THE TWO OTHER CONTRACTS? TO MY MEMORY, IT DOES. IT SEEMED TO BE SEQUENTIAL IN THAT ORDER. AND OVER THE YEARS THE OBLIGATIONS GOT LARGER. AND SO IT DOES SEEM LIKE IT STARTED OUT WITH THE MOU FOR THE SMALLER AMOUNT. OKAY. BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT I REMEMBER READING IN THE 
          [01:05:01]
FORENSIC AUDIT THAT THE SERVICES WERE VOLUNTEER. SO IS THE MOU, THE DOCUMENT THAT SPEAKS TO VOLUNTEER SERVICES. BECAUSE THEN I WOULD AND THEN WE WENT TO A PAID METHOD OR WERE THERE DOLLARS SPENT DURING THE VOLUNTEER PHASE? I HAVEN'T MADE IT TO THAT PART THAT IN MY METHODOLOGY, I HAVEN'T GOT TO THE DETAILS OF OF THAT JUST YET. BUT THAT WOULD MAKE SENSE. AND CERTAINLY FROM THE AUDITOR'S STANDPOINT, THAT THIS IS THE TESTING PIECE. THEY'RE JUST PICKING UP THINGS THAT HAVE HAVE TRIGGERED THEIR, THEIR SYSTEM. THEY THEY'RE NOT REALLY TASKED TO REALLY GO INTO THAT DEEP UNLESS THEY FIND SOMETHING THAT IS SUSPICIOUS, THAT TAKES THEM INTO THAT, THAT DEEP. BUT NOW THAT THEY'VE GIVEN ME THAT FLAG, I CAN GO IN AND THEN GO INTO THAT DEEP. AND JUST WITH ALL THE SCOPE OF THIS FORENSIC AUDIT, I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET TO THE LEVEL OF DETAIL IN THIS PARTICULAR PIECE OF THE AUDIT. IT'S BEEN ONE OF THOSE THINGS TO PUT A PIN IN IT, GET THROUGH THE REST OF THE ITEMS, AND THEN COME BACK AND GET TO THE LEVEL OF DETAIL THAT WE NEED TO ANSWER THOSE KIND OF QUESTIONS. OKAY. SO YOU'LL GET BACK TO US ON THAT. ABSOLUTELY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. THANK YOU. AND REAL QUICK. SO IT LOOKED LIKE THAT THAT INVOICE TO MEN OF INTELLIGENCE WAS $60,000. IS THAT CORRECT? YES I BELIEVE THAT WAS INVOICE NUMBER FOUR. DO WE KNOW IF THAT EVER WENT TO COUNCIL TO BE VOTED ON? NO, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING I WOULD BE FAMILIAR WITH. MR. JONES. YEAH, I DON'T KNOW. AGAIN, THAT'S A LITTLE DEEPER THAN I'VE BEEN ABLE TO GET THUS FAR. OKAY. AND I THINK THE HEART OF THIS IS THAT WE ALSO DON'T EXACTLY KNOW OR AGREE ON IF THE AMOUNT THAT WAS GIVEN TO THEM IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE SERVICES RENDERED. CORRECT. AND SO DO WE HAVE. SO IN THAT INVOICE THAT WE JUST SAW, IT JUST HAS CLEAN CITY INITIATIVE. IS THERE ANY OTHER DESCRIPTION OTHER THAN THAT THAT DETAILS OUT WHAT THAT INVOICE IS ACTUALLY FOR? OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THERE'S ALSO QUARTERLY REPORTS THAT WOULD HAVE SUPPORTED THIS INVOICE, WHICH WE RECEIVED AFTER THE, YOU KNOW, REPORT. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S JUST RECORD KEEPING WITH, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE WHEN WE PULL INVOICES OR LOOK AT INVOICES, WE GO TO A FOLDER THAT'S FILED IN FILING CABINETS. AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE INVOICE THAT WAS IN THOSE FILING CABINETS. SO MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT HAS COME TO LIGHT LATER THAT THERE IS MORE THERE'S QUARTERLY REPORTS THAT WOULD SUPPORT THAT $60,000. BUT THAT'S KIND OF WHAT IS RETAINED IN THE FOLDER FOR THIS VENDOR. OKAY. THAT WE RECEIVED. AND MR. JONES, DO YOU KNOW, IN THE EVENT THAT THIS ORGANIZATION RECRUITED A THIRD PARTY ORGANIZATION TO, LET'S SAY, CUT GRASS WITH A LANDSCAPING COMPANY OR TO HIRE A TREE SERVICE TO CUT TREES, DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS IS FOR THEM TO GET THAT APPROVED THROUGH THE CITY, TO ENSURE THAT THEY ARE AN APPROPRIATE VENDOR? AGAIN, I, I'M NOT SURE ALL THE PROCESSES THAT WENT ON AT THAT TIME. I KNOW THAT IN IN MY WORK, I'M STILL TRYING TO LOCATE THE RFP. I'M TRYING TO MATCH UP THE CONTRACTS WITH THE FUNDS EXPENDED. I'M TRYING TO GET AN ANALYSIS THAT MATCHES THE CONTRACTS WITH THE SCOPE OF WORK. I'M LOOKING FOR ANY SUBMITTED PROGRAM REPORTS AND VERIFICATIONS THAT WOULD ALSO INCLUDE THE COUNCIL PROCESS LEADING UP TO THOSE POINTS. SO AT THIS POINT, I'M REALLY STILL AT KIND OF STEP ONE TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE HAVE EXPENDED, I ACTUALLY HAVE SOME TYPE OF CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATION THAT AT LEAST HOLDS THAT. THEN TO GO INTO DETAIL OF WHAT THOSE SCOPE OF WORK IN THAT CONTRACT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP. AND THEN I WOULD JUST CONTINUE TO GO DEEPER AND DEEPER TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING HAD BEEN DONE APPROPRIATELY. IF IT HADN'T, IF IT HAD BEEN DONE OUTSIDE OF PROTOCOLS, I WILL, YOU KNOW, I WILL NOTE THOSE THINGS. AND KEEP IN MIND, THIS IS AROUND A TIME FRAME IN THE ORGANIZATION'S HISTORY WHERE THERE'S A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE OUTSIDE OF PROTOCOL. SO IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN ANY UNIQUELY UNSETTLING FACTS TO BE FOUND HERE. IT'S JUST THE FACT THAT IT WILL HELP US STRENGTHEN CONTROLS SO THAT WE DON'T DUPLICATE THE SAME ERRORS. SO THAT THAT'S MY METHODOLOGY AS WE MOVE FORWARD TO LEARN MORE ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR RED FLAG THAT THAT THE AUDITOR HAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION. THANK 
          [01:10:04]
YOU. AND KNOWING THAT THAT THIS ORGANIZATION WAS APPROVED IN THIS YEAR'S BUDGET, AND ALSO KNOWING THAT THIS ORGANIZATION APPEARED IN IN THE AUDIT, WHAT ARE WE DOING RIGHT NOW? ARE WE RENDERING SERVICES THROUGH THEM, OR HAVE WE PAUSED UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE OR WHAT? WHAT CAN YOU UPDATE US ON THAT? COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL AND COUNCIL MEMBER CLEMENS AND THEN COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS RELEASED YOUR MIC SO THAT THE CITY MANAGER CAN COME IN. YES, WE WE HAVE PAUSED. 
          THEY HAVEN'T APPROACHED US TO RENEW ANY CONTRACTS. AND UNTIL WE GET A HANDLE ON ALL OF THOSE THINGS, WE ARE PAUSING. I THINK THE OTHER BIG PIECE, SHOULD WE MOVE FORWARD, WE WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE AUDITING PROVISIONS IN OUR CONTRACT SO THAT WE CAN REQUIRE, IF NEED BE, TO HAVE THE TYPE OF ON THE GROUND IN THE FIELD TYPE OF REPORTING THAT WE MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE AT THIS POINT. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO IT IS 740. SIX AND WE MADE IT THROUGH THE INITIAL SCOPE. WE'RE JUST THROUGH THE FIRST ONE ON EXPANDED SCOPE. AND SO AFTER THESE THREE COUNCIL MEMBERS WE GOT THAT. WE FINISHED THIS DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE EXPANDED SCOPE SECTIONS. WE WILL HAVE THE AUDITOR PRESENT AND SHARE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS. HAVE THE CITY MANAGER INITIALLY RESPOND TO THAT AND MOVE FORWARD. AND THEN WE WILL HAVE THE FURTHER PRESENTATION FROM THE CITY MANAGER THAT GOES IN DEPTH. SO HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET YOU ALL OUT OF HERE BY 820 AT THE LATEST SO YOU WON'T MISS YOUR FLIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL, THEN COUNCIL MEMBER CLEMENS AND COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS. YEAH, I WAS JUST GOING TO STATE THE EXACT SAME THING. AT THIS RATE, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO FINISH. AND WE HAD TO CALL A SPECIAL MEETING. SO I WOULD JUST ASK MY COLLEAGUES OR EVEN MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RESERVE ALL OUR QUESTIONS AND LET THEM FINISH THE PRESENTATION. I MEAN, I JUST STATED, I KNOW THAT'S WHY I WAS IN THAT'S I WAS IN. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER. SO IS THAT A MOTION OR TO MAKE A MOTION IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION? I JUST SAID AS THE PRESIDING OFFICER, HOW WE'RE GOING TO PROCEED. SURE. WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE LET THEM CONTINUE AND RESERVE OUR QUESTIONS FOR THE END. SECOND, IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? DISCUSSION. COUNCILMEMBER SHROPSHIRE SO ARE YOU SAYING DON'T ASK ANY QUESTIONS, PERIOD. AT THIS RATE, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT. OH, SECOND, WHO ARE YOU TALKING TO? SO DON'T ASK ANY QUESTIONS. PERIOD. BECAUSE WHAT I INDICATED IS THAT AFTER THIS DISCUSSION, NOW THAT THERE'S A MOTION, WE MIGHT JUST MOVE TO THE NEXT ONE, THAT THEY WILL PRESENT THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS AND FINDINGS. THE CITY MANAGER WILL PROVIDE AN INITIAL RESPONSE, AND THEN WE WILL GO THROUGH ALL OF THE REMAINING ITEMS IN THAT WAY. THEY WILL THEN BE ABLE TO LEAVE. IF THERE ARE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM FOR THE FORENSIC AUDITOR, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO ANOTHER SPECIAL CALL MEETING OR A MEETING OF COUNCIL IF THAT IS THE CASE, BECAUSE EITHER FRAMEWORK INITIALLY WAS NOT GOING TO PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THEM AND GOING THROUGH THAT WITH THEM BEING HERE, I FELT, WOULD BE NOT EFFICIENT. BUT NOW WE'RE AT A POINT WHERE WE'VE GONE THROUGH HALF OF IT. HOW MANY MINUTES GO BY? ITEMS DO WE HAVE? NOW? SO WE HAVE FOUR MORE 11, SIX TOTAL, SIX TOTAL. YEAH OKAY. SO WE HAVE FIVE MORE. SO WE'VE GONE THROUGH. WE WILL HAVE GONE THROUGH SIX OUT OF 11 WITH QUESTIONS. AND THEN IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL THEN THEY WILL HAVE TO COME BACK AND MAYBE. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. NO. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, ALL THOSE OPPOSED. MOTION CARRIES. AND SO. WHAT WAS THE MOTION TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF WE FINISHED THIS ITEM OR IF WE GO TO THE NEXT ONE. MADAM DEPUTY CITY CLERK. 
          WHAT ABOUT THE COURT HOLDING THE QUESTIONS? YES. YEAH. MITCHELL. MOTION. COUNCILMEMBER MITCHELL, MOTION TO HOLD THE QUESTIONS UNTIL THE END. THAT'S WHAT I GOT. OKAY. SO LET'S GO TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. ALRIGHT. SO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN COUNCIL MEMBER CLEMENS AND COUNCIL 
          [01:15:05]
MEMBER ATKINS. IF YOU HAD ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT ITEM, YOU CAN SEND THEM IN OR THEY'LL HAVE TO COME BACK. GO TO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. ALRIGHT. SO ITEM NUMBER SEVEN IS CREDIT CARDS. 
          ESSENTIALLY WHEN WE WERE TRYING TO ANALYZE CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS, THE BANK WAS UNABLE TO PROVIDE DATA IN A USABLE FORMAT. SO TYPICALLY WE'RE ABLE TO GET DATA IN A CSV OR EXCEL FORMAT. THE BANK INFORMED US THAT THE ONLY WAY FOR US TO GET CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS TO ANALYZE WAS TO PROVIDE INDIVIDUAL PDF DOCUMENTS BY EMPLOYEE, AND THERE ARE A NUMBER OF CARDS OUT THERE. AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAD A VERY MANY YEARS OF A SCOPE PERIOD. AND SO JUST GETTING THAT DATA WAS NOT FEASIBLE. AND SO WE DID NOT PERFORM TESTING ON CREDIT CARD TRANSACTIONS OTHER THAN WE DID IDENTIFY A FEW THAT DID NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT SUPPORTING DETAIL. AND SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS JUST ENFORCING A POLICY THAT REQUIRES SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION BE PROVIDED FOR ALL PURCHASES MADE USING A CITY CREDIT CARD. MR. JONES. YES, FROM OUR RESPONSE IS THAT WE REACHED OUT TO THE BANK WITH THIS INFORMATION AND THEY IT HAD AT LEAST INDICATED THAT THEY HAVE THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE INFORMATION. SO I'VE ASKED IF THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO MEET WITH PLANTE MORAN AND GO THROUGH THIS AGAIN WITH THEM, AND THEY INDICATED THEY WOULD. PLANTE MORAN INDICATED THAT THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO HAVE THAT MEETING. SO WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF SETTING UP THAT MEETING TO SEE IF WE CAN GET A BETTER ANALYSIS OF A CREDIT CARD SITUATION. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER EIGHT. ALL RIGHT. I THINK THIS ONE'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. WHEN WE'RE ON SITE TALKING WITH EMPLOYEES, TRYING TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF POLICIES AND PROCEDURES, WE WERE INFORMED BY THOSE EMPLOYEES THAT THERE WAS NO CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY. 
          BUT THE CITY DOES HAVE ONE. IT'S IN THE CHARTER. AND SO, YOU KNOW, IT'S GREAT THAT THE CITY HAS A POLICY. AND AND OUR ORIGINAL RECOMMENDATION HAD BEEN CREATE A POLICY. BUT NOW THAT WE KNOW THERE IS A POLICY, THE FACT THAT EMPLOYEES WERE NOT AWARE OF IT IS PROBLEMATIC IN ITSELF. AND SO WE JUST RECOMMEND MAKING SURE THAT EMPLOYEES, COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE AWARE OF THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY, WHETHER THAT'S THROUGH TRAINING, REFERENCE MATERIAL, WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE, MAKING SURE THAT CITY EMPLOYEES AND COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE AWARE OF THIS POLICY THAT DID ALREADY EXIST. MR. JONES. YES, WITH REGARDS TO THE CONFLICT OF OF INTEREST POLICY, I IDENTIFIED THAT WE DO HAVE THEM. I ALSO IDENTIFIED SOME RECENT SITUATIONS INVOLVING ONE OF OUR COUNCIL MEMBERS THAT WOULD HAVE TRIGGERED A CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY AND THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED IN THE IN THE, IN THIS IN THE ORDINANCE AND CHARTER. AND AND SO MY PRESENTATION WILL GO INTO THOSE IN A DEEPER ASPECT AND SHOW THE OUTLINE OF WHAT SHOULD BE HAPPENING. OKAY. ITEM NUMBER NINE. NUMBER NINE IS POSITIVE PAY. AND SO THIS IS A NOT A POLICY BUT A CONTROL THAT THE BANK IMPLEMENTS WITH YOU ALL AS A CITY THAT ESSENTIALLY ALLOWS THE THE BANK TO CAPTURE OR IDENTIFY EXTERNALLY FRAUDULENT CHECKS. SO IF YOU SEND A CHECK IN THE MAIL AND SOMEBODY WERE TO STEAL THAT CHECK, WASH IT AND WRITE A CHECK FOR A DIFFERENT AMOUNT, THIS SHOULD BE IDENTIFIED IN THE POSITIVE PAY PROCESS. AND WHAT WE LEARNED IS THAT AFTER THE SCOPE, AFTER OUR SCOPE PERIOD, THERE WERE SEVERAL CHECKS THAT WERE ALTERED EXTERNALLY, NOT BY SOMEBODY AT THE CITY, AND WERE FLAGGED BY THE BANK AS AN EXCEPTION. BUT UNFORTUNATELY THERE WAS A LACK OF REVIEW AT THE CITY LEVEL TO SAY, YOU KNOW, THE BANK FLAGGED THIS, WE SHOULD FLAG IT. WE SHOULD ALSO IDENTIFY THIS AS AN EXCEPTION AND NOT ALLOW THIS CHECK TO BE PAID. AND SO OUR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE REVIEW PROCESS OF THIS LIST OF EXCEPTIONS IS DONE SERIOUSLY AND DONE DILIGENTLY AND NOT NOT GRANTING EXCEPTIONS IF THEY ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE GRANTED. AND WE'VE PROVIDED THE LIST OF CHECKS TO THE FINANCE DIRECTOR AS PART OF THIS. YEAH, THIS WAS THE THE PROGRAM THAT I STUMBLED OVER EARLIER ON THAT ADDITIONAL LAYERS OF SECURITY THAT I WAS TRYING TO ARTICULATE EARLIER POSITIVE PAY SYSTEM. 
          ESSENTIALLY, WE AGREE WE NEED TO STAY VIGILANT WITH THE PROCESS THAT WE HAVE. IT'S A STRONG PROCESS AND WE'LL STRENGTHEN OUR INTERNAL CONTROLS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE 
          [01:20:06]
STAY CURRENT WITH THE PRACTICE BY AUDITING AND AND CHECKING IN THAT WE, YOU KNOW, STILL WITH THE BANK AND MAKING SURE THAT THE PROCESS AND THE COMMUNICATION BETWEEN US AND THE BANK ARE SMOOTH, MOVING, MOVING SMOOTHLY. ALL RIGHT. NUMBER TEN. ALL RIGHT, I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO SKIP TO NUMBER 11 AND GO BACK TO NUMBER TEN BECAUSE NUMBER 11 WILL BE VERY SHORT I THINK. SO ESSENTIALLY WHILE WE WERE ON SITE, THERE WERE THERE WAS AN OUTGOING WIRE TRANSFER THAT OCCURRED AROUND THE SAME TIME AS THE PHISHING SCHEME PAYMENTS. 
          AND SO WE WERE JUST ASKED TO LOOK AT THAT WIRE BECAUSE THERE WAS SOME CONCERN OF, IS THIS POTENTIALLY A WIRE THAT WAS A PHISHING SCHEME WAS PART OF THE INITIAL ISSUE, BUT WE JUST MISSED. RIGHT. AS THE CITY WE JUST MISSED THIS. IT WAS AN ACTUAL FRAUDULENT WIRE, A FISHING WIRE, AND THERE WAS JUST SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT. AND WHAT WE FOUND IS AFTER REVIEWING THE DOCUMENTATION, IT WAS NOT PART OF THE PHISHING SCHEME. IT WAS A, YOU KNOW, A NORMAL WIRE AS PART OF OPERATIONS. AND SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS RELATED TO THIS. AND WE JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, FOLLOW UP WITH THAT SINCE THAT WASN'T ASKED, THAT WAS MADE. YES. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE PRACTICES, I THINK, THAT WE HAVE HAD TO TRY AND BE EXPEDIENT TO OUR VENDORS. THERE WOULD BE PRACTICES TO GET THE WIRE OUT IN BEFORE IT WAS FULLY SUBMITTED, THAT WITH A PO ASSIGNED AND GONE THROUGH OUR PROCESS, AND THEN THE PRACTICE WOULD BE TO GO BACK AND THEN FILL IN THE APPROPRIATE PAPERWORK. THE PROBLEM IS, IS SOME CASES IN PARTICULARLY THE ONES THAT WERE FLAGGED, THEY WEREN'T GOING BACK IN A TIMELY MANNER. SO NOW ERRED ON THE SIDE OF OF CAUTION AND MAKING SURE THAT WE DO IT RIGHT. IF IT MEANS THAT WE'RE A LITTLE SLOWER IN DOING IT, LET'S GET THAT PART RIGHT. AND THEN ONCE WE DO THAT RIGHT, THEN WE'LL LOOK AT WAYS TO STREAMLINE PROCESS AND BE A LITTLE FASTER. 
          BUT WE NEED TO SLOW DOWN, MAKE SURE WE'RE DOING IT RIGHT FIRST, AND THEN LOOK AT WAYS TO IMPROVE UPON THAT AFTER WE GET THAT PART RIGHT. SO AT THIS POINT THE DIRECTIVE IS GET IT DONE FIRST, SUBMIT EVERYTHING, GET THE PO NUMBER, AND THEN PUT OUT WIRES ACCORDINGLY. YEP. AND I DO BEFORE GOING TO NUMBER TEN AS WELL. I DO WANT TO JUST POINT OUT THE LAST FOUR SLIDES OF OURS ARE JUST A SUMMARY OF ALL OF THESE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR QUICKER REFERENCE. SO WE HAVE ALL 11 RECOMMENDATIONS. JUST KIND OF SUMMARIZE AT THE END, AND I'M SURE I KNOW THE CITY MANAGER WILL BE TALKING ABOUT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT JUST WANTED TO TO POINT THAT OUT. SO THEN YES, ITEM NUMBER TEN IS UTILITY BILLING FINDINGS. AND SO WE JUST WANTED TO EMPHASIZE FROM OUR ENGAGEMENT LETTER CONTRACT AS PART OF OUR DIRECTIVE TO IDENTIFY ADDITIONAL UNKNOWN ANOMALIES BEYOND THE CURRENT ISSUES. WE WE YOU KNOW, WE IDENTIFY WE NOTED THAT TESTS MAY INCLUDE OTHER ANALYTICS AS DETERMINED, APPLICABLE AS MORE INFORMATION IS IDENTIFIED. AND SO AS IT RELATES TO MORE INFORMATION THAT WAS IDENTIFIED. 
          WE WERE AT A CITY COUNCIL MEETING AND WE BECAME AWARE OF INFORMATION ALLEGING UNPAID UTILITY BILLS. SO WE PERFORMED THOSE ADDITIONAL DATA ANALYTICS TESTS AS PART OF OUR SCOPE. AND WE IDENTIFIED THREE RESIDENTIAL BALANCES OVER $10,000, ALL OF WHICH ARE DISCUSSED IN THE REPORT. BUT, YOU KNOW, IT WAS LATER CONFIRMED. AND I'M I'M SURE THE CITY MANAGER WILL TALK ABOUT THIS AS WELL. BUT TWO OF THOSE BALANCES, TWO OF THE LARGER ONES, WERE RELATED TO WATER LEAKS AND PIPE BREAKS. AND SO THERE WERE EXPLANATIONS FOR THOSE. AND THEN THE OTHER ONE WE IDENTIFIED WAS FOR THE PRIMARY ADDRESS OF A COUNCIL MEMBER IN THE TOTAL OF 13,753 28. THAT'S AS OF JULY 23RD, 2024, PRESENTING A POTENTIAL, WHETHER ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED, CONFLICT OF INTEREST. I KNOW THE CITY MANAGER KIND OF TOUCHED ON THAT ALREADY, AND SO I BELIEVE HE HAS INFORMATION TO SHARE, AS WELL AS THE KIND OF THE THE LEAN PROCESS. SO WE IN THIS THE CHARTER, WE IDENTIFIED THAT THERE SHOULD BE A LEAN PROCESS. WE DID NOT INQUIRE ABOUT THAT. AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT MAY BE A FOR ACROSS THE CITY. IT'S JUST NOT BEEN A POLICY THAT'S BEEN ENFORCED. AND SO THERE WILL BE ENFORCEMENT OF THAT GOING FORWARD ACROSS THE CITY. AGAIN, I WILL LET THE CITY MANAGER AND DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TALK ABOUT THAT PROCESS. BUT OUR RECOMMENDATION SEEMS LIKE IT'S BEING FOLLOWED IS TO WORK WITH ACCOUNT HOLDERS TO COLLECT DELINQUENT BALANCES. AND THEN THE PROCESSES YOU HAVE DOCUMENT THOSE AND CONSISTENTLY FOLLOW THEM. MR. JONES, I THINK YOU HAVE A VERY DETAILED, PROBABLY 
          [01:25:09]
RESPONSE TO THAT. AND SO WE ARE AT 8:00. WE SAY TIME TO GO THROUGH THE RECOMMENDATIONS. 
          WHAT TIME DO YOU ALL NEED TO LEAVE HERE? SO WE ARE AT 5.5. WE DISCUSSED WE DISCUSSED 5.5 OF THEM. IF SOMEBODY HAD QUESTIONS I SHOULD SAY FROM YOUR SIDE OF IT. AND SO WHAT TIME DO YOU NEED TO LEAVE. SO WE NEED TO LEAVE AT ABOUT 10 TO 15. AFTER EIGHT. SO. I JUST WANTED TO TO CLOSE IS SINCE OUR ENGAGEMENT STARTED, I HAVE TO COMMEND THE CITY. YOU ALL HAVE MADE A LOT OF PROGRESS IN, AND I THINK THE MANAGER IS GOING TO TOUCH MORE ABOUT THE CHANGES THAT YOU ALL HAVE MADE. I THINK IT'S FANTASTIC. WHEN WE FIRST STARTED, YOUR ACCOUNTING WAS SEVERELY BEHIND, SEVERELY BEHIND. YOUR AUDITS WERE BEHIND, WHICH IS JUST NOT A GOOD THING TO HAVE HAPPEN WITH THE STATE. SO I COMMEND YOU ALL FOR FOR MOVING THE NEEDLE AND MOVING FORWARD. SO AGAIN, I WE'RE HAPPY TO CONTINUE. I KNOW CREDIT CARDS WERE GOING TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION TO SEE BECAUSE WE HAD LOTS OF DISCUSSIONS AND EMAILS WITH THE BANK THAT SAID THEY COULD NOT PROVIDE US USABLE DATA. SO WE WERE VERY INTERESTED IN IN LEARNING THIS FROM MR. JONES, THAT THEY NOW SAY THEY CAN PROVIDE THE DATA. SO IT'S IT'S INTERESTING, BUT WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT ASPECT OF OUR ENGAGEMENT. AND AS WELL AS IF THERE IS A SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT THAT IS NEEDED FOR THE MEN OF INTELLIGENCE BASED UPON THE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT AS WELL. OF COURSE, THAT WOULD BE BEYOND OUR SCOPE, OF COURSE. SO THOSE WERE THE FEW THINGS I JUST WANTED TO SHARE AND CLOSE WITH YOU. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. 
          AND SO YEAH, A RECOMMENDATION OF CHANGING BANKS WOULD PROBABLY GET A BANK TO FIND SOME INFORMATION THAT YOU NEED. SO WE'RE HOPING THAT ABSOLUTELY, ABSOLUTELY YOU SHOULD EASILY BE ABLE TO GET DATA. WE DO THIS ALL THE TIME. SO THAT WOULD DEFINITELY BE SOMETHING GOOD TO COME BACK AND LET US KNOW. BUT OUT OF THE OTHER ONES 11 YOU HAD NO RECOMMENDATIONS. THAT WAS THE OUTGOING WIRE. THAT'S CORRECT. THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY EMPLOYEE SAID IT DIDN'T EXIST, BUT IT'S IN THE CHARTER. SO THAT'S A TRAINING ISSUE. AND SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE MAY BE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ON THAT. I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER CUMMINGS AND COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS WERE IN ON DATA TESTING. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL HAD SOMETHING, SO MAYBE WE CAN. YOU WERE THE LAST TWO THAT WERE IN ON THAT DISCUSSION. IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, MAYBE WE CAN FINISH NUMBER SIX. CREDIT CARD FINDINGS AND THAT WILL LEAVE CREDIT CARD AND POSITIVE PAY. BUT YOU ALL NEED TO HAVE FURTHER MEETINGS ON CREDIT CARD ANYWAY. AND THEN POSITIVE PAY. GO BACK TO THAT SCREEN REAL QUICK. SO COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          CUMMINGS AND COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS ON THE DATA TESTING. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. AND I DIDN'T HAVE A QUESTION WITH REGARDS TO DATA TESTING. IT WAS JUST A JUST ALLOW THEM TO KIND OF, YOU KNOW, CONTINUE THEIR BECAUSE I KNOW THEY WERE PRESSED FOR TIME JUST CONTINUE THEIR PRESENTATION. SO I'M OUT. COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS DID YOU HAVE ANY. YES. MY QUESTION IS REALLY I THINK MORE FOR THE CITY MANAGER. IT'S REGARDING INDEMNIFICATION BECAUSE WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT ENTITIES THAT ARE AN EXTENSION OF THE CITY BEING ON PRIVATE PROPERTIES DOING WORK. AND SO I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE BETTER ASKED FOR THE CITY MANAGER. SO YES, WE CAN'T HELP YOU ON THAT. CHECK NUMBER SIX. ALL SEVEN WILL COME BACK. EIGHT WAS DONE. 
          POSITIVE PAY. DID ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON YOUR WHAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION ON THIS. 
          THAT WAS JUST ON THAT. AGAIN EMPLOYEES NEED TO FOLLOW THE PROCESS. POSITIVE PAY IS A FRAUD PREVENTION TOOL THAT IS PROVIDED BY THE BANK. BUT IF THE BANK IS NOTIFYING THE EMPLOYEE THAT IS IN CHARGE OF POSITIVE PAY AND FAILS TO RESPOND TO A FLAGGED TRANSACTION, THEN IT BECOMES THE CITY'S RESPONSIBILITY AND NOT THE BANKS. SO IT'S JUST THAT TRAINING AND MAKING SURE THE INTERNAL CONTROLS ARE IN PLACE. SO THE BANK WAS NOTIFYING. SO THERE'S NOT SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL MIGHT NEED TO DISCUSS WITH REGIONS AS POSITIVE CARD, JUST THE CREDIT CARD OKAY. SO THIS IS MORE OPERATIONAL. YES. DID ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON POSITIVE PAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT ONE AS WELL. AND SO THAT JUST LEAVES SEVEN. YOU'LL GET MORE INFORMATION. AND THEN THE UTILITY BILLING SOUNDS LIKE 
          [01:30:04]
THOSE QUESTIONS WILL BE MORE APPROPRIATE FOR THE CITY MANAGER. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY INITIAL QUESTIONS AROUND THAT. I'M TRYING TO SEE HOW WE MIGHT PREVENT YOU ALL FROM HAVING TO COME BACK. IF THERE ARE QUESTIONS REGARDING YOUR FINDING ANY QUESTIONS ON TEN, UTILITY BILLING FOR THE AUDITOR IS NOT. THAT WILL GO TO THE CITY MANAGER. ALL RIGHT. SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE. YOU'RE GOING TO WORK WITH THE CITY MANAGER ON SEVEN. 
          THERE WERE NO QUESTIONS FOR YOU ALL ON UTILITY BILLING. SO THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY ONE THAT'S OUTSTANDING. AND THEN WE'LL GET FURTHER INFORMATION FROM THE CITY MANAGER AS WELL AS WHATEVER SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION. I DON'T KNOW IF STAFF IS BACK REGARDING THE RFQ THAT I MENTIONED FOR MEN OF INTELLIGENCE, BUT AS YOU MENTIONED THE SUPPLEMENTAL, YOU'RE OPEN TO SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION. AND SO IF THEY CAN PROVIDE THAT TO YOU AS WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WERE ANY OTHERS. THAT'S JUST THE ONLY ONE THAT CAME UP WHEN I DID A QUICK SEARCH. MR. JONES. THANK YOU. THE ONLY THING I WOULD ADD ON THAT TOPIC, I WAS JUST INFORMED THAT WE DISCOVERED THAT MEN OF INTELLIGENCE WAS ALSO IDENTIFIED AS M. OH, I IN OUR IN OUR SYSTEM WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT M.O. I. SO MAYBE THERE ARE SOME EXPLANATIONS. 
          ONCE WE START LOOKING INTO MORE IN THE SYSTEM AND SEE IF WE CAN GET MORE DATA. BUT WE JUST DISCOVERED THAT. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU ALL SO MUCH. HAVE A SAFE FLIGHT. AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO GETTING MORE INFORMATION ON THE CREDIT CARD. SOUNDS GREAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR HAVING US. HOPEFULLY YOU'LL GET ALL THE INFORMATION YOU NEED. WE HOPE SO. IT'S AND WE HOPE FOR YOU AS WELL. THANK YOU. 
          OKAY, MAYOR, I'M READY TO START. WHENEVER YOU'RE READY, GO RIGHT AHEAD. OKAY. SO I INITIALLY STARTED AS A PART ONE PART TWO SERIES. I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO REQUIRE THAT AT ALL. I THINK THIS ACTUALLY SHOULD GO PRETTY QUICKLY SINCE WE GOT THE SAME AREAS COVERED BY THE PLANTE MORAN. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I WILL SAY, AND I THINK THEY THEY COVERED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TYPE OF AUDIT WORK THEY DO AND THE TYPE OF AUDITS THAT WE'RE USED TO SEEING. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS WITH THIS PARTICULAR ENGAGEMENT THAT I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COUNCIL AND THE PUBLIC KIND OF UNDERSTOOD ONE OF THE THINGS THAT IS DIFFERENT BETWEEN THAT PROCESS IS USUALLY IN AN ANNUAL AUDIT, THERE IS A LOT MORE INTERACTIONS WITH STAFF BECAUSE STAFF IS THAT MAIN CONTACT IN THIS SITUATION. THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS THE MAIN CONTACT, AND I THINK THE DIFFERENCE IS KIND OF LIKE HAVING AN X RAY. AND CERTAINLY AN X RAY IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE, AS OPPOSED TO MAYBE AN MRI OR CT SCAN. IT, IT IT. WITH STAFF INVOLVEMENT, YOU CAN GET MUCH MORE DETAILED, GET MUCH MORE FLAVOR, AND HAVE A FULL AND AND FULLER PICTURE IF YOU WILL. SO IT'S ALMOST LIKE A22 DIMENSIONAL PHOTOGRAPH COMPARED TO MAYBE A 3D IMAGE WITH WITH STAFF BEING ABLE TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE AUDITORS ARE LOOKING FOR, ACCESS VARIOUS SYSTEMS TO TRY AND GATHER THAT INFORMATION AND AND HELP THAT PROCESS. SO I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF WHILE VERY USEFUL, OBVIOUSLY, WE IDENTIFIED A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WE'LL BE WORKING ON. BUT NOW THAT CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE IS INVOLVED, NOW WE CAN REALLY DIG IN DEEP AND FIND OUT WHY SOME OF THE THINGS APPEARED THE WAY THEY ARE, WHAT WAS THE CIRCUMSTANCES OR THE ENVIRONMENTS IN WHICH THESE THINGS HAPPENED AND OCCURRED. AND THAT IS THE TYPE OF INFORMATION YOU NEED TO ACTUALLY MAKE CORRECTIONS. SO. THAT BEING SAID, I LOOKED AT THE SAME AREAS AND SO I WON'T, YOU KNOW, GO INTO A LOT OF THAT. WE WE COVERED THE DELETION OF VENDORS. WELL, I JUST IDENTIFY A COUPLE THAT I KNEW THAT TRAINING ACTIVITIES WEREN'T 
          [01:35:07]
HAPPENING AT THESE TIME FRAMES. AND EVEN SOME OF THE THINGS AROUND US. 8:00 I KNOW WE'RE NOT DOING TRAINING AROUND THAT TIME. I KNOW WE'RE NOT DOING TRAINING AT AT 5:00. AND SO, YOU KNOW, I CAN BRING THAT KIND OF ENVIRONMENT TO REVIEWING SOME OF THAT KIND OF INFORMATION TO SEE IF THERE'S SOME ISSUES THERE. AGAIN, WE WE MADE SOME CHANGES. WE ALREADY HAD DEALT WITH MAKING SURE THAT NOT EVERYBODY HAS ACCESS TO THE LEADING. WITH THE MIGRATED SYSTEM NOW GOING TO CLOUD, CLOUD BASED SYSTEM, YOU CAN'T EVEN DO THOSE KIND OF THINGS RIGHT NOW. AND WE ALSO ARE ARE ABLE TO DO BETTER TRACKING FOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST, MAKING SURE THAT EMPLOYEES AREN'T DOING BUSINESS WITH THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS WITH. WITH CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT GOING ON WITH THE CITY, WHICH WHERE WE HAD HAD INSTANCES WHERE THAT HAD OCCURRED AND WE HAD TO LET EMPLOYEES GO BECAUSE OF OF DOING THOSE KIND OF THINGS. SO WE WE LOCK THOSE THINGS UP, MAKE THOSE PROTOCOLS VERY FAMILIAR. AND AS A PART OF BRINGING ON NEW EMPLOYEES, BEING REALLY CLEAR WHAT IS ALLOWED AND WHAT IS NOT ALLOWED. 
          AND IF THERE IS SUCH SITUATIONS THAT DISCLOSURE FILE FILINGS ARE ARE DONE AND AND CLEARLY LAID OUT, ANY, ANY TYPE OF RELATIONSHIPS LIKE THAT, I THINK IT ALSO SHOWED TO US A VERY, I MEAN, AN IMPORTANT IMPORTANCE OF HAVING LIKE MAYBE AN INTERNAL AUDITOR THAT MAY BE NOT SO FOCUSED ON COMPLIANCE, BUT CERTAINLY PART OF IT WOULD BE COMPLIANCE. BUT CERTAINLY ABOUT EFFICIENCIES AND MAKING SURE THAT THESE TYPE OF POLICIES AND TRAINING AND PRACTICES ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED ACROSS THE ORGANIZATION, WHICH HAS BEEN A CHALLENGE IN THE PAST. SO AS WE GO MOVING FORWARD FOR NEXT BUDGET PROCESS, WE WILL BE LOOKING TO ADD A FTE IN THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT OR POTENTIALLY THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE TO GIVE IT ADDITIONAL AUTONOMY TO WORK AMONGST DEPARTMENTS. BUT WE CURRENTLY ARE SEEING NEED AFTER NEED OF HAVING SOMEONE BE ABLE TO DIG DOWN DEEP INTO CERTAIN SITUATIONS. AND I THINK THE STAFF, PARTICULARLY IN TIMES OF THE ORGANIZATION, HAVE BEEN UNDERSTAFFED AND NOT HAVING THE OPPORTUNITIES OR THE OR THE TIME TO REALLY GO INTO SOME OF THE DETAILS NEEDED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT SO VULNERABLE. SO THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I IDENTIFY AS WORK NEEDED MOVING FORWARD, REQUIRE THE THE ENTRY AND DETAIL JUSTIFICATION NOTES IN ALL OF OUR. REQUISITIONS. 
          RIGHT NOW, YOU GO INTO, I THINK, ONE OF THE CHALLENGES AND WHY, IF YOU HAVEN'T HEARD WHY I SOUND LIKE I'M LOOKING FOR CONTRACTS, I'M LOOKING FOR RFPS, I'M LOOKING FOR THINGS. JUST BECAUSE THESE THINGS AREN'T EASILY FOUND. AND IN MOST ORGANIZATIONS I'VE BEEN WITH, ONCE YOU PULL UP THAT VENDOR AND IN THE SYSTEM, YOU GET ALL OF THE SUBSEQUENT DOCUMENTATION. 
          WITH THAT RIGHT THERE, YOU CAN GET THE CONTRACT, YOU CAN GET THE RFP ASSOCIATED WITH THE CONTRACT, YOU CAN GET A WEALTH OF INFORMATION. WE'VE BEEN REALLY LAX ON PROVIDING THOSE KIND OF DETAILS, WHICH MAKES US HAVE TO GO SEEK ASSISTANCE FROM THE CITY CLERK, SEEK ASSISTANCE FROM CONTRACTOR PROCUREMENT, DIG UP SOME THINGS. SOMETIMES THEY DON'T HAVE THEM AND THEY HAVE TO GO INTO ACTUAL HARD COPY FILES. IT'S BEEN. A CHALLENGE, CHALLENGING PROCESS TO GET THOSE THINGS DIGITIZED, GET THOSE THINGS READILY AVAILABLE. QUARTERLY AUDIT LOG REVIEWS. AGAIN, THIS GOES DOWN TO MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE KEEPING THAT THOSE INFORMATION UPDATED AND DATED. AND AND THE ONLY WAY TO KIND OF DO THAT IS TO SO THAT PEOPLE KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING INTO KIND OF OUR OWN INTERNAL FORENSIC ANALYSIS APPROACH TO MAKING SURE THAT THINGS ARE BEING INPUTTED AND UPDATED CORRECTLY. AND SO, AGAIN, PROBABLY A TASK THAT WOULD MAKE A LOT OF SENSE FOR INTERNAL AUDITOR TO STAY ON TOP OF. BUT RIGHT NOW, WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT THOSE TYPE OF REVIEWS ARE BEING DONE, TRAINING FOR, YOU KNOW, LIVE DATA SEPARATIONS. I CALL IT THE SANDBOX TESTING ENVIRONMENT WHERE WE ACTUALLY NOT GOING INTO THE ACTUAL SYSTEM TO SET UP VENDORS JUST SO THAT FOLKS KNOW HOW TO WORK 
          [01:40:03]
THE SYSTEM, UTILIZING VENDOR TEST VENDORS, THOSE KIND OF THINGS. WE CAN DO THAT IN SEPARATE PROGRAM ALTOGETHER. EVEN I THINK WE CAN RECALL SOME OF OUR. UTILITY KERFUFFLES, PARTICULARLY WITH ELECTRICITY, WHEN EVEN NIAC HAS COME DOWN TO DO SOME THINGS AND ACTUALLY AFFECTED THE REAL SYSTEM THAT CREATED ISSUES WITH OUR BILLING IN THE PAST. I MEAN, THAT'S HAPPENED WHEN SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, ALL OF THAT'S BECAUSE WE DIDN'T HAVE A SEPARATE SANDBOX TO TRY IMPLEMENT VARIOUS RATE CHANGES, IMPLEMENT VARIOUS OTHER TYPE OF AUDITS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO DO WITHOUT HAVING TO WORRY ABOUT CLOSING OUT SOMETHING AND AFFECTING THE SYSTEM, OR ACTUALLY AFFECTING THE CHANGE THAT ACTUALLY HITS SYSTEM WIDE, THOSE KIND OF CHALLENGES. SO THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT WE'RE WORKING ON. AND PERIODIC SURPRISE AUDITS. 
          AND AGAIN, ANOTHER OPPORTUNITY FOR AN INTERNAL AUDITOR OR A THIRD PARTY IN THE MEANTIME TO DO SO THAT WE STAY VIGILANT ON THE PRACTICES THAT WE SET UP AS IMPORTANT BENCHMARKS FOR OURSELVES. WE KIND OF TALKED ABOUT APPROVING AND MAKING PAYMENTS TO VENDORS OUTSIDE OF THE SYSTEM. I THINK WE WE KNOW NOT GOOD NOT GOING TO BE DOING THOSE THINGS, MAKING SURE THAT WE MANDATE ROUTING IN IN OUR BUSINESS, MAKE SURE THERE'S ACTUALLY PURCHASE AGREEMENTS THAT ARE APPROVED BEFORE WE MAKE WIRE TRANSFERS, MAKING SURE THAT EVEN IN EMERGENCIES THAT WE MEET AND GO THROUGH. SO CERTAIN PROTOCOLS. AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, HONE IN ON SOME OF OUR BIG EVENTS LIKE WEDNESDAY, WIND DOWN LOT OF ACTIVITIES THAT ARE AT A FEVERISH PACE AT THAT TIME. AND WE'RE DOING A LOT OF OF SENDING WIRE AND TRANSFERS WITHOUT ACTUALLY HAVING THE SYSTEM TOTALLY CAUGHT UP. SO MY DIRECTION IS LIKE EVEN. AND THEN ONE, WE DO BETTER PLANNING. BUT IN THE BIG PICTURE, EVEN IN THOSE SITUATIONS WHERE WE CERTAINLY WANT TO GET PAYMENTS OUT, WE SLOW DOWN, MAKE SURE WE GET THAT STUFF IN PROPERLY, AND THEN OBVIOUSLY GET THOSE THINGS PAID OUT. BUT THAT'S IMPORTANT. PERFORMING A QUARTERLY COMPLIANCE AUDITS GOES BACK TO WHAT I'VE SAID BEFORE. AGAIN, WE GOTTA AUDIT OURSELVES, AUDIT OURSELVES, MAKE SURE WE'RE DOING IT RIGHT. AND THEN WHEN WE GET OUT IN FRONT OF THE AUDITING WORLD, OUR AUDITS WILL GO FASTER BECAUSE WE ARE DOING AND BRINGING THINGS AND KEEPING THINGS IN A CERTAIN QUALITY THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE AUDIT AUDITORS TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE LEVEL OF DETAIL TO FIND INFORMATION LIKE I'VE PERSONALLY WITNESSED. I THINK THIS IS ALSO SAYING THE SAME, SAME THING. I'M TRYING TO MAKE SURE I COVERED EACH ONE OF THOSE. MOST OF THESE ARE WITH OUR BSA. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAD DONE, AND WAS KIND OF ODD THE WAY IT WAS SET UP, BUT WHEN WE MOVED TO THE CLOUD, WE WERE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE WAS THE LAST IN THE APPROVAL PROCESS THAT ACTUALLY WASN'T HAPPENING BEFORE. SO IF THERE WERE ISSUES THAT WERE BREWING THROUGH THE SYSTEM THAT DIDN'T GET CAUGHT, THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE WASN'T THE LAST DAY TO CHECK AND MAKE SURE EVERYTHING'S FINE. 
          IT WAS LEFT IN ANOTHER DEPARTMENT. SOMETIMES CONTRACT PROCUREMENT, SOMETIMES FINANCE DEPARTMENT, AND SOMETIMES THOSE ISSUES CAN THEN GET OUT OF CONTROL AND AND BE OUT OF THE GATE, IF YOU WILL. MAYBE HAVING TO REACH OUT TO A BANK TO HOLD SOMETHING BACK OR COUNSEL, COUNSEL A CHECK OR WHATEVER, THOSE KIND OF THINGS. SO THIS WAY IT'S A LITTLE TIGHTER, MAYBE ARGUED A LITTLE SLOWER, BUT CERTAINLY DEFINITELY MORE QUALITY ASSURANCE. WE TALKED ABOUT OUR CAPITAL ASSETS PRETTY THOROUGHLY. I THINK THAT I'VE BEEN IMPRESSED WITH OHC. 
          ADVISORS CERTAINLY INDICATED THAT WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO USE THEM AS WE GET OUR OUR INVENTORY UP TO SPEED. BUT, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IF YOU RECALL, THIS IS JUST RECAPPING. WE WE ROUGHLY HAD ACCOUNTED FOR 65% OF OUR CAPITAL ASSETS, WHICH WERE VERY OLD. AND AND THEY ALSO IDENTIFIED OUT OF THAT 65%, ANOTHER 35% PROBABLY NEEDS TO BE DEEMED AS SCRAP OR SURPLUS 
          [01:45:03]
AND OR ANOTHER 25%, I SHOULD SAY. AND THEN AND THEN WE FOUND NEW ASSETS THAT ADDED ANOTHER 10%. SO GETTING THOSE UP TO SPEED GIVES US FAIR OF ACCOUNTING. SHOULD WE HAVE INSURANCE CLAIMS? SHOULD WE HAVE NATIONAL, NATURAL NATURAL DISASTERS AND FEMA IS REQUIRED? WE WILL HAVE SOLID INFORMATION NOT TO EVEN MENTION. AS WE GO THROUGH OUR FUTURE ANNUAL AUDITS, WE CAN FEEL COMFORTABLE THAT THIS INFORMATION IS SOLID AND NOT HAVE TO SLOW DOWN OUR AUDITING PROCESS BY GIVING THEM INFORMATION OR PAUSE ON THE DATA THAT WE'RE GIVING THEM. 
          THE. AGAIN, WE'VE TALKED A LITTLE BIT JUST ABOUT THE IMPROVEMENTS WE MADE WITH OUR OUR ASSETS, THE VERIFICATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN DONE. WE BEEN ASKED TO MAKE SURE WE WE HAVE A CLEAN FIXED ASSET LIST, AND THAT'S DEALING WITH THOSE OLDER ITEMS AND DISPOSING THEM. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE THE AREA OF CONCERN NUMBER FOUR THE INVENTORY WRITE DOWN. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT. WE KNOW WE NEED TO WORK IN THAT AREA. ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS IS TO IMPLEMENT UPGRADE CENTRALIZED INVENTORY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. A LOT OF THAT IS IMPROVEMENTS IN OUR WAREHOUSE AREA REQUIRE. PURCHASES AND AND THINGS AND DISPOSAL OF PROJECTS THAT THEY ARE ACTUALLY LOGGED. AND AND THERE'S OPPORTUNITIES TO DO THAT IN REAL TIME WITH TECHNOLOGIES NOW. AND SO AGAIN WE'LL LOOK AT IF WE NEED TO DO A SCOPE OF WORK WITH OWHC OR IF WE NEED TO DO ANOTHER RFP, DEPENDING ON HOW THIS WORK IS, IS CONSIDERED AS OPPOSED TO WHAT WE'VE ALREADY CONTRACTED THEM WITH. BUT CERTAINLY THEY BELIEVE THEY CAN HELP US BELIEVE. WE BELIEVE THAT THEY CAN HELP US. AND SO WE'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT DOING THAT AS SOON AS WE HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO FUND IT. THE PHISHING SCAM, WE WE COVER THAT. PRETTY MUCH. 
          BUT I DID WANT TO REMIND FOLKS WHAT, YOU KNOW, THE INITIAL ATTACK WAS 1,000,000.2. LAW ENFORCEMENT HELPED US RECOVER 434,000 OF THAT CYBER INSURANCE ALSO ALLOWED US TO GET 200 BACK. 
          SO A NET LOSS OF $585,000. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE LEARNED FROM THE SITUATION THAT OBVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED THE WEAKNESSES THAT WE HAVE IN OUR SYSTEM, AND WE'VE CERTAINLY CLOSED A LOT OF THAT, BUT THE COMMUNICATION AMONGST OUR DEPARTMENTS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING CHALLENGE. AND ONE OF THE THINGS WE'RE BETTER COMMUNICATION. WE COULD HAVE GOT LAW ENFORCEMENT INVOLVED A LOT SOONER, WHICH WOULD HAVE ALLOWED US TO RECOVER, POTENTIALLY RECOVER MORE THAN WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO RECOVER. SO IN THAT PROCESS, YOU KNOW, WE'VE LOOKED AT MAKING SURE THAT OUR INSURANCE, OUR COMMUNICATIONS ARE BETTER, OUR CYBERSECURITY IS BETTER. NO. BEFORE IS IS ONE OF OUR TRAINING MECHANISMS THAT HAVE HAVE WORKED AND GOT US MORE VIGILANT. AND THERE'S BEEN SOME THINGS WITH OUR NEW INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DIVISION DIRECTOR, MR. WELLMAN, WHO'S BEEN LOOKING TO BRING ON A SPECIALIST THAT IS ON CYBER SECURITY. AND SO WE'RE, WE'RE, WE'RE WE'RE WORKING ON A NUMBER OF THOSE THINGS. I MENTIONED IMPLEMENTING ANOTHER LAYER, WHICH IS IMPLEMENT DEFENDER, MICROSOFT DEFENDER, EXCUSE ME. AND THAT IS ALSO INTRODUCING THE ABILITY TO HAVE I DRIVEN INSIGHTS TO HELP MANAGE SECURITY INCIDENTS, AS WELL AS HELP US BLOCK THOSE ATTEMPTS WITH EVEN SOME MEASURES TO COUNTER, IN A SENSE OF MAYBE BEING A LITTLE BIT ON THE OFFENSIVE BY TRACKING PEOPLE WHO TRY TO BREAK INTO OUR SYSTEM. SO THE THE OTHER REMAINING THESE WERE THE EXPANDED. AREAS OF INTEREST. WE CERTAINLY TALKED ABOUT MEN OF 
          [01:50:05]
INTELLIGENCE AND THE. ATLANTA EIGHT NAACP. THIS JUST SHOWS WHAT AND I IDENTIFY AS ONGOING. 
          THIS JUST SHOWS WHAT WE HAVE BEEN SPENDING WITH MEN OF INTELLIGENCE. THE 678 NUMBER, THAT'S THE TOTAL AMOUNT WE SPENT. AND I AGAIN NEED TO MATCH UP. SOME OF THE CONTRACTS WITH THE THE WORKS OF SERVICE. I THINK NOW THAT WE KNOW THAT THERE'S MOYA, MAYBE THAT'S WHERE I CAN FIND THE RFP HAS HAS SOME CHALLENGES FINDING THAT FINDING MAKING SURE THAT THAT I HAVE ALL OF THE RELATED CONTRACTS SEEING IF THERE IS A TRUE DELTA AFTER ALL, THOSE CONTRACTS ARE AT LEAST ACCOUNTED FOR. I'M SURE THAT SOME OF THOSE CONTRACTS PROBABLY HAD VOLUNTEERISM IN THEM. MAYBE SOME OF THEM HAD PAID LABOR SYSTEMS IN THEM. I HAVEN'T BEEN ABLE TO GO INTO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL YET, BUT I WILL BE GOING THROUGH THAT, MAKING SURE THAT THE SCOPE OF SERVICES AND THE CONTRACTS ACTUALLY MOUNT UP, ESPECIALLY WITH THE VARIOUS TIME FRAMES. AND THEN SUBMITTING, LOOKING AT ALL THOSE SUBMITTED PROGRAM REPORTS, HAVEN'T SEEN THOSE YET. I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE OUT THERE. I JUST DON'T KNOW WHERE WHERE THEY'RE ALL AT, BECAUSE THAT SOUNDS LIKE THEY'RE IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS. AND THEN CERTAINLY SITTING DOWN WITH THE VENDOR AND POTENTIALLY ASKING AND REQUESTING ANY VOLUNTEERED RECORDS THAT THEY WILL BE WILLING TO GIVE TO CLOSE UP ANY GAPS WE MIGHT HAVE. MAYBE WE WON'T. TRAILING OFF MR. JONES IF HE COULD, MAYBE WE WON'T HAVE ANY HAVE ANY GAPS. BUT IF WE DO, REACHING OUT TO THE VENDOR TO CLOSE ANY OF THOSE WITH ANY KIND OF DOCUMENTATION THEY MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, AGAIN, AT 550,000 THAT I CAN FIND IN CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS, STILL LOOKING TO FIND ROUGHLY AROUND 178,000 THAT WE'VE PAID OUT BUT HAVEN'T FOUND WHAT ESTIMATED THOSE THAT PAYOUT YET. CREDIT CARD. WE KNOW. BEEN WORKING WITH COUNCIL ON CREDIT CARDS CURRENTLY. RIGHT NOW THERE'S A NUMBER OF OF THERE'S A DRAFT THAT'S BEEN DRAFTED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. THERE'S A NUMBER OF BENCHMARKS. I'VE SAT DOWN WITH SEVERAL OF YOU ALREADY LOOKING TO CONTINUE TO MEET WITH COUNCIL AS THEY'RE DESIRED TO MEET AND PULL TOGETHER A RECOMMENDED DRAFT. I THINK IT WAS AT OUR NEXT WORK SESSION IN OCTOBER. THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. AND SO THERE'S A DISCLOSURE. THERE'S A AFTER LOOKING AT OUR ORDINANCE, LEARNED OF DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS, THE FORENSIC AUDIT IDENTIFIED AN ONGOING POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST BY COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE. THE FINDING ALONE IS ENOUGH TO TRIGGER AN AFFIRMATIVE AFFIRMATIVE DUTY BY THE COUNCIL MEMBER TO FILE A DISCLOSURE IN WRITING TO THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. THIS APPLIES WHENEVER THERE'S A CONFLICT, BE IT ACTUAL POTENTIAL OR ALLEGED THAT I'M NOT SURE HAS BEEN DONE. I'M NOT EVEN SURE IF THE COUNCILWOMAN HAS BEEN BRIEFED, BUT IF THAT DISCLOSURE DOES NOT OCCUR AND THE ORDINANCE SAYS PROMPTLY IT DOESN'T HAVE A PENALTY IF YOU DON'T DO IT BY A CERTAIN TIME. BUT IT DOES SAY PROMPTLY THAT ITSELF COULD BE VIEWED AS A VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE. SO THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS CONTINUE TO PROVIDE. PROCEDURAL CONSEQUENCES, AND THOSE ARE IDENTIFIED IN SECTION TWO, DASH 4012, SUBSECTION D, E, AND G ONE. THE CITY CLERK MUST KEEP THOSE DISCLOSURES ON RECORD FOR THEM TO THE ETHICS PANEL. THE CITY ATTORNEY, AND ANY INVOLVED PARTIES. IF ANOTHER PUBLIC SERVANT OR CITIZEN BELIEVES A CONFLICT EXISTS, THEY CAN FILE DISCLOSURES WITH THE CLERK. THE DISCLOSURE ALSO TRIGGERS FORWARDING TO THE ETHICS PANEL AND THE CITY ATTORNEY. A PUBLIC 
          [01:55:05]
SERVANT SHALL NOT PARTICIPATE IN ANY PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS. EXECUTIVE SESSION DISCUSSIONS, EXECUTIVE SESSION DISCUSSIONS, OR VOTING WHERE THE PUBLIC SERVANT, THE PUBLIC SERVANTS, FAMILY MEMBER OR PARTNER IN INTEREST MAY GAIN FROM ANY DISCUSSION ULTIMATELY MADE, INCLUDING LEGAL ISSUES AND EMPLOYMENT ISSUES. SO THOSE ARE THINGS THAT I LEARNED OF. IN JUST LOOKING AT THAT, I HAVE NOT, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, BEEN UPDATED THAT ANY OF THIS PROCESS IS BEING DONE. AND THERE'S BEEN A NUMBER OF OF ALLEGATIONS, AT VERY LEAST OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND OBVIOUSLY ONE IN WRITING THROUGH THE FORENSIC AUDIT. SO THE OTHER AND WE COVERED THE POSITIVE PAY PRETTY CLEARLY. BUT I KIND OF EQUATED THIS TO AN ANALOGY I USED WITH, SAY THERE'S A THE KINGS HAVING A BANQUET AND THE BANK IS KIND OF THE THE GUARD. AND HE HAD THE BANK HAS A LIST. AND IF YOU'RE NOT ON THAT LIST BEING THE, THE, THE VENDOR HOLDING THE THE LITTLE CHECK THAT HE'S TRYING TO GET CASHED, IF YOU'RE NOT ON THAT LIST OR GAIN ENTRY TO THE KING'S BALL, THEN YOU DON'T GET IN. BUT IF THE CITY NOT DOING THEIR JOB IS ESSENTIALLY KIND OF THE GUY BEHIND THE LIST SAYING, HEY, YOU CAN SNEAK IN THE BACK DOOR, THEN YOU KNOW THAT'S OUR FAULT AND NOT THE BANK'S FAULT. SO I THINK THAT WAS CLEAR, BUT I WAS HAVING A LITTLE FUN WITH THAT ONE. BUT ESSENTIALLY, WE GOTTA BE VIGILANT AND STAYING ON TOP OF OUR JOBS AS THE GUARDS AND MAKING SURE THAT THE PROTOCOLS ARE IMPLEMENTED PROPERLY AND NOT GET LAXED. GOING ON TO THE UTILITY BILLING ALLEGATIONS. SO AGAIN, ON PAGE 29, THE FORENSIC AUDIT IDENTIFIED INSTANCES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, INCLUDING THE COUNCIL MEMBER AND THE UTILITY ACCOUNTS HELD BY HER FAMILY MEMBER AT THE TIME OF THE AUDIT, THE OUTSTANDING BALANCE WAS $13,753.28. AS OF SEPTEMBER 1ST, THE OUTSTANDING BALANCE IS $15,782.28. COUNCILWOMAN SHROPSHIRE WAS IDENTIFIED IN RELATION TO THESE ISSUES. THE OTHER TWO RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNTS WERE IDENTIFIED THE SAME ON THE SAME PAGE OF THIS REPORT. THE THE NEXT HIGHEST BALANCE FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER DURING THE SAME TIME FRAME WAS $800, $811.42. I'LL REFER TO IT AS CASE ONE THE LOW DRIVE. THIS IS A HISTORY OF THE ACCOUNT. IN 2015, NO PAYMENTS WERE MADE THAT YEAR. IN 2016, NO PAYMENTS WERE MADE THAT YEAR. IN 27, OUR RECORDS SHOW SEVEN PAYMENTS WERE MADE FOR THAT YEAR. IN 2018, THREE PAYMENTS MADE THAT YEAR IN 2019, THREE PAYMENTS MADE THAT YEAR IN 2020, THREE PAYMENTS WERE MADE THAT YEAR. WE DID NOTE SOME IRREGULARITIES ON THE ACCOUNT DURING THAT TIME. IN 2021, TWO PAYMENTS WERE MADE THAT YEAR. IN 2022, NO PAYMENTS WERE MADE THAT YEAR. IN 2023, TWO PAYMENTS WERE MADE THAT YEAR. IN 2024, THREE PAYMENTS WERE MADE THAT YEAR. IN 2025, FOUR PAYMENTS HAVE MADE TO DATE. IN CASE TWO THE AUDIT. EXCUSE ME, THE AUDIT HIGHEST. THE HIGHEST RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNT BALANCE OF $55,007.16. THE RESIDENT EXPERIENCED A WATER CONSUMPTION SPIKE IN AUGUST OF 2023 WITH CONTINUED ALARMING WATER SPIKES. A WELLNESS CHECK WAS CONDUCTED IN SEPTEMBER OF 2023 DESPITE PAYMENTS BEING MADE ON THE WATER, CONSUMPTION CONTINUED TO BE ABNORMAL. JULY 2024 THE RESIDENT ENTERED INTO A NURSING FACILITY DUE TO ILLNESS. THE ILLNESS WAS RELATED TO CONFUSION AND DISORIENTATION. UTILITIES WERE DISCONNECTED. A WATER LEAK WAS DEEMED RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RESIDENT ON THE RESIDENTS SIDE 
          [02:00:04]
OF THE MAIN, AND AT THAT TIME IT ACCRUED TO APPROXIMATELY 67 $67,000. THE RESIDENT NO LONGER RESIDE AT THE PROPERTY, AND STAFF IS WORKING TO ESTABLISH UTILITY LIEN TO PROCESS THE OUTSTANDING BALANCE. IN CASE THREE, THE AUDIT. THE RESIDENTIAL ACCOUNT BALANCE WAS AS $31,480.98. THE RESIDENT RENTER IN THIS INSTANCE EXPERIENCED ELEVATED ELECTRICITY AND WATER CONSUMPTION LEVELS. THE RESIDENT WAS MAKING PAYMENTS REGULARLY EVEN EVEN THOUGH THERE WERE MONTHS WHERE THOSE BILLS WERE UPWARD OF $5,000 AND MORE. THE RESIDENT APPEARED TO HAVE MAINTAINED THIS LEVEL OF HIGH CONSUMPTION WITHOUT CONCERN, AND SLOWLY DEVELOP A PRACTICE OF NOT PAYING THE FULL AMOUNT OWED. THE ACCOUNT WAS ALLOWED TO ACCUMULATE DUE TO THE LEVEL OF INFREQUENT PAYMENTS, BUT ULTIMATELY THE RESIDENT COULD NOT KEEP PACE AND THE ACCOUNT WAS DISCONTINUED AT 30 $32,183.64. 
          A WATER LEAK WAS ALSO SUSPECTED IN THIS CASE, BUT THE RESIDENT WHO EXHIBITED ISSUES OF HOARDING REFUSED ENTRY INTO THE PROPERTY FOR AN INSPECTION. CURRENTLY, THE RESIDENT APPEARS TO BE LIVING WITHOUT UTILITIES AT THE SAME LOCATION. A WELLNESS CHECK WAS DONE AS RECENTLY AS TODAY, AND THE RESIDENT APPEARS TO STILL BE LIVING AT THE LOCATION. PAGE 29 OF THE AUDIT ALSO TALKED ABOUT THE NEXT HIGHEST BALANCE FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER, AS AS OF THE SAME DATE, IT WAS $811.42, WHICH APPEARS TO ALIGN WITH MANY OTHER ACCOUNT BALANCES IN THE CITY. AS NOTED BY THE THE FORENSIC AUDITOR. THIS IS EXPLAINED BY THE CITY'S BUDGET BILLING PROCESS. THIS IS ALSO IDENTIFIED IN ORDINANCE, AND THAT ORDINANCE IS SUPPLIED BELOW CERTAIN. ESSENTIALLY, IT IS A PROCESS THAT ALLOWS CUSTOMERS AND GOOD STANDING TO PARTICIPATE IN A EQUALIZATION PROCESS THAT'S BASED ON THE AVERAGE OF THE PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS. WHEN THAT EVENS OUT, THE PEAKS AND VALLEYS OF A NORMAL USAGE IS CORRECTED, AND IN THE NEXT 12 MONTHS, AND THEN IT'S EVENED OUT AT THAT RATE FOR THE NEXT 12 MONTHS, AND THEN IT CONTINUES TO GO ON IN THAT FASHION. SO ONE OF THE THINGS IN IN OUR PROCESS, WE LEARNED I LEARNED THAT YES, WE DO HAVE A ORDINANCE THAT REQUIRES AN AUTOMATIC UTILITY LIEN PROCESS. THE CITY HAD NOT. AND THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2013. THE CITY HAD NOT IMPLEMENTED NOT ONE CASE IN THE AUTOMATIC LIEN PROCESS. THE CITY IS CURRENTLY LOOKING OR WE'RE CURRENTLY MOVING FORWARD WITH IMPLEMENTING THAT. THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT WE ARE ARE RUNNING THROUGH AND CHECKING, BUT WE SUSPECT TO BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT UP AND RUNNING IN NOVEMBER. THE AREA CONCERN NUMBER 11 WAS THE WIRE TRANSFER. THIS AGAIN, WE'VE BEEN KIND OF TALKING ABOUT STRENGTHENING OUR CONTROLS. THE MAIN PIECE OF THIS IS MAKING SURE THAT INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED INTO BEING AS A FIRST. AND ONCE THAT IS DONE, THE VENDOR CAN BE ISSUED PURCHASE ORDER NUMBER AND ULTIMATELY APPROVAL FOR PAYMENT THROUGH THE VARIOUS FORMS OF WIRE PAYMENT VIA BANK. SO IN SUMMARY, CERTAINLY A PLAN ON HAVING ALL OF THE VARIOUS RECOMMENDATIONS THAT'S INCLUDING THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM O. H THE RECOMMENDATIONS 
          [02:05:01]
FROM PLANTE MORAN, THE RECOMMENDATIONS IDENTIFIED BY THE CMO'S OFFICE ALL INTO ONE DOCUMENT. WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF BRINGING ALL THOSE TOGETHER AND A A PLAN AND STRATEGY ON AND IMPLEMENTING THAT BROKEN DOWN BY QUARTER, QUARTERLY IMPLEMENTATION. WE CERTAINLY HAD TAKEN WHAT WE HAD GOTTEN FROM THE AUDITOR VERY SERIOUSLY. IN MANY CASES. AND IN ALL CASES, FRANKLY, WE JUST GOT THE INFORMATION WHEN THE PUBLIC GOT IT. SO IT HAS CONSUMED A LOT OF MY TIME, A LOT OF STAFF'S TIME TO GET US UP, TO BE UP TO SPEED SO THAT WE CAN RESPOND IN A TIMELY MANNER TO THIS ISSUES. SO I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WE AND WE STILL HAVE ONGOING THINGS, OBVIOUSLY, QUESTIONS WITH SOME OF THE DATA TESTING WE HAVE TALKED THROUGH. AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S MORE WORK TO BE DONE THERE, BUT WE LITERALLY IN THE SHORT TIME FRAME OF MONTHS HAVE BEEN TACKLING ISSUES THAT'S BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION, THAT HAS BEEN ONGOING FOR YEARS. AND SO I TAKE THAT NOT AS AN EXCUSE FOR ANYTHING BUT AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT STAFF HAS REALLY WORKED HARD TO GET US TO THIS POINT. STAFF HAS ALSO MADE IMPROVEMENTS. THAT'S BEFORE I'VE GOTTEN HERE. SO THEY GET ALL THE CREDIT FOR FOR SEEING THAT SOME OF THESE ISSUES NEEDED TO BE ADDRESSED, EVEN THOUGH THEY WEREN'T BEING DIRECTED OR OR BEING TOLD BY THE FORENSIC AUDIT BECAUSE IT HADN'T BEEN SHARED WITH THEM OR HADN'T BEEN DONE AT THAT TIME. BUT GAPS WERE IDENTIFIED. AND EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NOT BEEN ANY SYSTEMATIC FRAUDS, FRAUD PROVEN, WE WE HAVE ISOLATED OR POTENTIAL FOR ISOLATED ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AND WE HAVE ADDRESSED AND WE WILL CONTINUE TO ADDRESS AND WILL NOT IGNORE ANY SUCH INSTANCES. CORRECTIVE MEASURES ARE UNDERWAY. INTERNAL REVIEWS CONTINUE, AND EVERY MATTER THAT THE AUDITOR HAS BEEN BRINGING TO OUR ATTENTION, WE HAVE ADDRESSED, OR AT LEAST HAS A STRATEGY TO ADDRESS. I THINK OVERALL, I WANT TO LEAVE THIS WITH THE NOTIONS THAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT TRANSPARENCY, ALL ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY AND STRENGTHENING OUR CONTROLS. WITH THAT, I CONCLUDE. ALRIGHT, SO WE'VE HEARD QUITE A BIT, THE CITY MANAGER HAS GONE THROUGH ALL OF THE. FINDINGS. THE 11 FINDINGS, AND WITH HIS RECOMMENDATIONS, LIKE SOME OF THEM ARE STILL UNDERWAY. THERE'S WORK BEING DONE ON A NUMBER OF THEM. AND THE CITY MANAGER. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS I DON'T SEE ANYONE IN RIGHT NOW. 
          SHOULD WE? SO WHEN THIS INITIALLY CAME UP, WE HAD A STANDING ITEM ON OUR. CAN'T REMEMBER. IT WAS THE FIRST MEETING OF THE MONTH AROUND AUDITS, RIGHT? SO LIKE JUST GETTING AN UPDATE ON WHERE WE ARE WITH THESE FINDINGS. AND SO MAYBE THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. WE DID I THINK WE DID THE FIRST MEETING OF THE MONTH, BECAUSE THAT AGENDA IS USUALLY LIGHTER. 
          AND SO FIGURING OUT A MONTHLY CADENCE TO GET UPDATES ON THE ITEMS THAT ARE OUTSTANDING AND ONGOING, I WILL START BECAUSE THIS WAS RAISED AT A PREVIOUS MEETING. I'M GOING TO GO TO THE CITY ATTORNEY. IT WAS RAISED IN A PUBLIC COMMENT. TWO DASH 4010 I BELIEVE, WAS THE ORDINANCE SECTION. AND ONE OF THE ITEMS LISTED DEALS WITH THE UTILITY ACCOUNT AND OF A HOME WHERE A CURRENT COUNCIL MEMBER LIVES. AND IT WAS STATED THAT COUNCIL WAS VIOLATING THE ORDINANCE. 
          AND SO IF YOU COULD, BEFORE WE OPEN THIS DISCUSSION, BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE HOW COUNCIL WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THESE, WE'VE PRETTY MUCH DISCUSSED THE FIRST SIX WITH THE AUDITOR. WE WENT THROUGH ONE THROUGH SIX AND THERE WERE QUESTIONS AND THE CITY MANAGER RESPONDED. THERE WAS SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROVIDED ON MORE DETAILS IN IN THE PRESENTATION. AND SO WE CAN 
          [02:10:07]
GO WE CAN AGREE THAT ONE THROUGH SIX HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED, NOT TO LIMIT ANYONE. IF PEOPLE HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS, THEN WE CAN START. I THINK WE PROBABLY SHOULD GO IN A ORDER OF EACH FINDING, AND I'M JUST TRYING TO DECIDE WHERE WE START. DO WE START AT ONE? WE'VE GONE THROUGH ONE THROUGH SIX WITH THE FORENSIC AUDITORS AND START AT SEVEN EIGHT. THERE'S A CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY, BUT THE CITY MANAGER DID RAISE SOME OTHER MATTERS. 11 THERE WAS NO RECOMMENDATIONS. AND SEVEN, THE CREDIT CARD, THEY'RE STILL LOOKING INTO THAT. SO SEVEN AND 11 I DON'T THINK IT WOULD WE UNLESS YOU ALL WANT TO GIVE SOME ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE ON THAT. SO I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT A CADENCE. BUT MADAM CITY CLERK, IF YOU COULD START WITH THAT, BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE WHEN WE'RE GOING TO GET TO THE DISCUSSION OF THAT ITEM OR HOW IT MAY COME UP, AND THEN I WILL COME BACK TO COUNCIL, I GUESS. LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION. IS THERE A CONSENSUS THAT WE'VE GONE THROUGH ONE THROUGH SIX, OR DO YOU ALL HAVE QUESTIONS ON ONE THROUGH SIX THAT WE WENT THROUGH WITH THE AUDITOR? MY QUESTION, AS I STATED BEFORE, FOR SIX, NUMBER SIX WAS AROUND INDEMNIFICATION, AND THAT WAS A QUESTION FOR THE CITY MANAGER. 
          OKAY. AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO ANSWER THAT TODAY, BECAUSE REALLY, THE QUESTION IS IF WE'VE GOT ENTITIES GOING ON TO PRIVATE PROPERTY TO DO WORK. AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S A DISCUSSION ABOUT AN MOU, AND THEN THERE'S SOME OTHER THINGS THAT ARE DEEMED AS A CONTRACT. 
          IF THOSE THINGS HAVE OR HAVE NOT GONE THROUGH THE PROPER PROCUREMENT PROCESS. ALL OF OUR VENDORS, ARE THEY REQUIRED TO INDEMNIFY THE CITY, BECAUSE OTHERWISE WE WOULD BE OPEN TO EXPOSURE ON THOSE THINGS. AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE GOT A RESPONSE FOR THAT, MR. CITY MANAGER OR MADAM ATTORNEY. SO, SO LET'S LET'S DO THIS. CAN WE GET CONSENSUS THAT WE'VE TALKED THROUGH ONE THROUGH FIVE. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THE VENDOR DELETED VENDORS, APPROVAL OF PAYMENT OF VENDORS OUTSIDE OF THE SYSTEMS CAPITAL ASSET EVALUATION INVENTORY WRITE DOWN AND FISHING PAYMENTS. DID ANYBODY HAVE QUESTIONS ON THOSE BASED ON THE CITY MANAGER'S PRESENTATION? SO WE'LL START WITH SIX IN OUR COUNCIL DISCUSSIONS SIX. AND THEN WE'LL GO TO. WE'LL JUST GO DOWN IN CASE YOU ALL HAVE ANY FEEDBACK AROUND CREDIT CARD POLICIES. CITY ATTORNEY, IF YOU COULD ADDRESS THAT ISSUE BEFORE WE GET TO. EITHER NOW, BEFORE WE GET TO THAT ITEM, WHEN WE HAVE THE DISCUSSION ON THE ITEM, BECAUSE THERE'S NO POTENTIAL DUTY IF WE'RE NOT ON THE DISCUSSION OF THAT ITEM, ARE YOU ASKING FOR ME TO DISCUSS COUNCILMAN ATKINS QUESTION OR THE ITEM YOU MENTIONED BEFORE ABOUT THE POTENTIAL CONFLICT? SO I WAS INITIALLY ASKING YOU TO DEAL WITH TWO DASH 4010, BUT I WILL ASK YOU TO DEAL WITH THAT WHEN WE GET TO NUMBER EIGHT. AND LET'S GO AHEAD AND START WITH SIX, BECAUSE I THINK THAT DEALS WITH EIGHT AND TEN. SO THE QUESTION THAT COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS POSED ABOUT INDEMNIFICATION AS IT RELATES TO VENDORS THAT WE CONTRACT WITH. SO I WILL SAY JUST A DISCLAIMER INITIALLY. HOLD ON, LET ME GET ORDERED. THE ORDER IS LIKE. OKAY, IF EVERYBODY CAN RELEASE THEIR MINDS. I WILL SAY AS INITIAL DISCLAIMER, I HAVE NOT SEEN THE CONTRACTS THAT THE CITY MANAGER REFERENCED. I HAVE SEEN THE MOU. THE MOU WAS ENTERED INTO FEBRUARY 20TH OF 2023 WITH THE MEN OF EXCELLENCE ASSOCIATE. I'M SORRY, MEN OF INTELLIGENCE ASSOCIATION. I WILL SAY THAT IN THE MOU THERE IS NOT AN INDEMNITY CLAUSE. IT PROVIDES FOR A SCOPE OF WORK. IT ALSO PROVIDES FOR COMPENSATION AND REPORTING. BUT THERE IS NOT ANYTHING REGARDING INDEMNIFICATION OF THE CITY. THE CONTRACTS MAY HAVE 
          [02:15:01]
DIFFERENT LANGUAGE, BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN THOSE. MR. JONES, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ADDITIONAL? HAVE YOU SEEN THE CONTRACTS? YEAH, I DIDN'T ANALYZE THE CONTRACTS THEMSELVES TO THAT LEVEL. MY MAIN THING WAS JUST TO GET THE ACCOUNTING PART OF IT. SO I'LL MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY GETS THE CONTRACTS THAT I HAVE. ANYTHING ELSE? COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS. NO, IT WAS REALLY AROUND INDEMNIFICATION AND MAKING SURE THAT VENDORS ARE BONDED AND LICENSED AS A PART OF ANY WORK THAT THEY WOULD BE DOING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, SO I WILL I'M SORRY, MADAM MAYOR, MAY I RESPOND? GO AHEAD. I WILL SAY THAT THE THE CITY HAS A STANDARD CONTRACT FOR SERVICES, AND IT IS ONE THAT I HAVE SEEN, I HAVE VETTED THAT HAS ALL OF THE NECESSARY LANGUAGE, WHICH INCLUDES INDEMNIFICATION. IT INCLUDES THE ONE YEAR TERM WITH SUCCESSIVE RENEWAL, ONE YEAR TERMS. IT HAS ALL OF THE BOXES CHECKED SO THAT OUR MASTER CONTRACT FOR SERVICES MEETS ALL LEGAL CRITERIA. OKAY, SO THOSE. 
          SERVICES THAT ARE PROCURED WHERE THE VENDOR IS WILLING TO SIGN OUR CONTRACT AS OPPOSED TO GIVING THEM, GIVING US THEIRS, I, 9.9 TIMES OUT OF TEN WILL PUSH BACK TO PROCUREMENT OR PROCUREMENT WOULD HAVE ALREADY. TAKEN OUR CONTRACT TO THAT VENDOR BECAUSE WE KNOW IT. IT'S GOOD. SO FOR ANYTHING THAT HAS HAPPENED SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE, THOSE CONTRACTS DO MEET. LEGAL STANDARDS. PLEASE UNDERSTAND, THOUGH, THAT THE CITY CANNOT INDEMNIFY ANYONE. THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE STATE LAW ALLOWS US TO DO BASED ON GRATUITY ISSUES. AND SO WHEN THERE'S A CONTRACT PRESENTED, MAYBE FROM A VENDOR, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE THEIR STANDARD CONTRACTS, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT'S NOTED IN LEGAL OBSERVATION THAT THAT TERM, THAT PROVISION CAN'T GO FORWARD. I WILL ALSO SAY THAT IF THERE IS ANY AGREEMENTS FOR THERE TO BE WORK ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, THAT DOES RAISE A GRATUITY ISSUE AS WELL. OKAY. AND JUST FOR MY PURPOSES AND PERHAPS OTHERS, THE STANDARD OR THE TEMPLATE CONTRACT OF WHICH YOU SPEAK, THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE SINCE WHEN. OKAY, SO IT WASN'T ONE THAT YOU MENTIONED EARLIER. 
          HAS THE CONTRACT ENDED AND IT HAS AN INDEMNITY CLAUSE. SO THAT'S AT LEAST 2022 IF NOT BEFORE. I'M SORRY MAYOR. THE FIRST PART I DID NOT HEAR THE RFQ THAT I'M NUMBER THAT I CALLED OUT EARLIER REGARDING MEN OF INTELLIGENCE, THE 2022 DASH 1774. IT HAS THE STANDARD CONTRACT THAT YOU'RE REFERRING, AND THE INDEMNITY CLAUSE IS SECTION H. I SEE THE CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT. STAFF COMING THIS WAY. MR. JONES, YOU WANT. CHAIRMAN LAWRENCE WILL WALK US THROUGH THAT ITEM. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THE STANDARD CONTRACT THAT CITY OF WIGGINS IS REFERRING TO WAS ESTABLISHED TOWARDS THE END OF 2022. IT WAS IT REVISED THE CONTRACT THAT YOU SEE WITHIN THAT ER ER Q WE HAD THE PREVIOUS CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED IT. OF COURSE WHEN ATTORNEY WIGGINS CAME, WE HAD HER APPROVE IT. WE HAD THAT. YOU SEE THOSE CLAUSES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. BUT AS FAR AS, AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT IN THE MOU, WE TRY NOT TO UTILIZE THAT GOING FORWARD, REPRESENTING THE CITY. WE TRY TO USE OUR STANDARD CONTRACT. 
          BUT IN REGARDS TO THE BECAUSE IT WAS AN RFQ THAT DID HAVE THAT INDEMNIFICATION CLAUSE IN THERE. BUT AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, IT'S TWO DIFFERENT STANDARD CONTRACTS THAT SHE'S LOOKING AT. THAT ONE WE REVISED. WE'VE ADDED SOME THINGS. LAWS HAVE CHANGED. THE ONES THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT NOW IS LITERALLY FROM 2021. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON ITEM SIX? MR. JONES? OH I'M SORRY. YES. THANK YOU. SO NOT TO HARP ON THIS ON THESE 
          [02:20:11]
SUBCONTRACTS THAT ARE BEING PUT OUT, BUT DO WE HAVE ANY KIND OF ORDINANCE OR POLICY THAT REQUIRES THAT IF THAT IF AN AGENCY USES A THIRD PARTY, THAT THEY ENSURE THAT THEY AT LEAST HAVE A BUSINESS LICENSE, THAT THEY'RE INSURED AND THINGS LIKE THAT? IS THERE ANY KIND OF PROTECTION THAT WE HAVE WITH THAT? I, I WILL SAY THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'LL, YOU KNOW, VERIFY TYPICALLY VERY CLOSE, VERY SIMILAR TO A GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND A SUBCONTRACTOR RELATIONSHIP WHERE YOU STILL REQUIRE BONDING REQUIREMENTS. AS FIRST THING THAT COMES TO MY MIND. SO WE SHOULD AND PROBABLY DO EXPECT THAT ANYONE WORKING FOR THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR HAS ALL OF THE PROPER REQUIRED DOCUMENTS, AND THAT EVEN THOUGH THEY SUBCONTRACTED, IT DOES NOT ABSOLVE THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR FROM ANY OBLIGATIONS THAT THEY HAVE WITH THE CITY. OKAY. AND. 
          I GUESS I'M I'M TRYING TO GET AT THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE, THE ORGANIZATION THAT WE HAVE HIRED AND THEN THE RULES AND REGULATIONS IN REGARDS TO THE RFP AND RFQ PROCESS, BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND THAT, YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE WOULD HAVE TO DO AN RFQ PROCESS WITH WITH MOY OR MOYA, BUT BUT IF THEY WERE TO THEN SUBCONTRACT OUT HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF WORK, WHAT WHAT ARE THE REGULATIONS WITH THAT? DO WE HAVE ANY CONTROL OVER IT OR. NO, I CAN ADD THAT STATE LAW FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACTS, THAT LAW RECENTLY CHANGED. BUT AT THE TIME OF THE WORK WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, STATE LAW REQUIRED THAT THERE BE A BOND, A PAYMENT BOND FOR ANY PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT, OVER 100,000. AND THAT PROTECTS THE SUBS. SO WE WERE REQUIRED TO ADHERE TO STATE LAW. THAT LAW RECENTLY CHANGED. AND SO PUBLIC WORK CONTRACTS AT 250,000 IS NOW THE THRESHOLD UP FROM THE 100,000. OKAY. AND THEN IT SOUNDS LIKE THAT THE MOU THAT WE HAVE FOUND IS FROM 2023, AND THAT WE'VE MADE LARGE PAYMENTS TO THEM BEFORE 2023. DO WE KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS WAS? WAS THAT PROCESS PROPER IN PAYING THEM THOSE LARGE AMOUNTS BEFORE THE MOU WAS ISSUED? YEAH, WELL, THAT'S SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT. BUT JUST GOING BY THE DATES THAT PROVIDED, CERTAINLY IF THE MOU IS CERTAINLY 2023, OUR FIRST PAYMENT GOES OUT IN 2021. THAT WAS $10,000 IN IN MARCH. IN SEPTEMBER 2021, THERE WAS A $30,000 OCTOBER OF 2021 AND ANOTHER $30,000 IN IN JANUARY OF 2022, THERE WAS A 60,000 PAYMENT. IN AUGUST OF 2022, THERE WAS ANOTHER $60,000 PAYMENT. AND THEN IN DECEMBER OF 2022, ANOTHER $660,000 PAYMENT. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND AND LOOK AT AND AGAIN, I'M REALLY AT THE BEGINNING, ONCE I CAN AT LEAST SAY, OKAY, THIS NUMBER IS AT LEAST CLOSE TO WHAT THE CONTRACT'S OBLIGATIONS ARE, THEN I CAN GO BACK AND THEN LOOK AT THE SPECIFICS OF EACH CONTRACT AND EACH TIME PERIOD TO KIND OF GET TO SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU'RE ASKING AS TO WHAT TYPE OF OBLIGATIONS WERE EITHER COMMITTED TO OR EVEN OR EVEN WHAT KIND OF SERVICE WAS BEING DELIVERED. AND THEN IF WE DON'T HAVE THINGS LIKE WHAT ADDRESSES WERE LIKE, I'LL HAVE TO LOOK AT THOSE INVOICES. IF IF THERE'S AN INVOICE THAT HAS IS BASED ON AN AGGREGATE AND MAYBE NOT BROKEN DOWN FOR EVERY PROPERTY 
          [02:25:04]
SERVICE, THEN THAT'S WHERE I WOULD SIT DOWN AND AND GO OVER THOSE KIND OF QUESTIONS WITH THE VENDOR AND, AND SEE HOW MUCH I CAN GET AS FAR AS HOW MUCH THEY KEPT THOSE RECORDS AND THOSE KIND OF THINGS, AND TRY TO FILL IN THE PIECES AT THAT POINT. BUT WE'RE STILL, YOU KNOW, EARLY ON TO GETTING THERE. AND AGAIN, I'LL MAKE SURE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY IS AT LEAST HAS THE THE CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS THAT I HAVE FOUND. AND THEY WEREN'T NECESSARILY EASY TO FIND. SO WE'RE STILL WORKING ON OUR SYSTEM, ON HOW THOSE KIND OF RECORDS ARE KEPT CENTRALIZED. SO IT DOESN'T HAVE TO TAKE SO MUCH INVESTIGATION JUST TO GET THOSE CONTRACTS. OKAY. AND THEN THE QUARTERLY REPORTS, YOU KNOW, FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, WHO THE CONTRACTORS ARE, THE BUSINESSES, THE BUSINESS LICENSES, THE BONDING, ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. 
          THAT QUARTERLY REPORT, WHO DOES THAT GO TO TYPICALLY, OR WHO SHOULD IT GO TO? I I'M GOING TO SAY THAT SHOULD BE ALSO MAINTAINED AT THE CONTRACT AND PROCUREMENT LEVEL. THAT'S REALLY THE BEST PLACE WHERE THAT SHOULD BE. I, I DON'T REALLY KNOW WHERE THEY ARE. SO I'LL BE FINDING THOSE KIND OF I'LL BE KIND OF RESEARCHING THAT. I KNOW THE, THE CLERKS HAVE HAS HAD SOME OF THESE RECORDS, WHICH I'M HAPPY THEY HAVE, BUT CONTRACTS AND PROCUREMENT IS, IS THERE FOR A REASON AND THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO PULL ALL OF THAT INFORMATION. 
          SO TO THE POINT WHERE THAT INFORMATION IS EITHER NOT FORWARDED TO THEM OR THAT'S NOT THE FINAL RESTING PLACE OF DOCUMENTS. THAT'S ONE OF THOSE INTERNAL CONTROLS THAT WE NEED TO STRENGTHEN. OKAY. AND LAST QUESTION. SO THE GRATUITY CLAUSE, I BELIEVE THAT ATTORNEY WIGGINS KIND OF TOUCHED ON THAT A LITTLE BIT. CAN WE DIG A LITTLE BIT INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE. AND YOU KNOW IS IS THIS A VIOLATION OF THE GRATUITY CLAUSE OR POTENTIAL OR WHERE ON THE CONTINUUM WOULD YOU PLACE THIS? I THINK ONCE I SEE THE CONTRACTS AND SEE HOW THIS WAS SET UP, I'LL BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT. OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON NUMBER SIX, WHICH WAS DATA TESTING THAT INCLUDED IDENTIFIED TWO VENDORS, MEN OF INTELLIGENCE ASSOCIATION AND NAACP. ALRIGHT. NUMBER SEVEN DEALS WITH CREDIT CARDS. AND THE AUDITOR IN FORENSIC AUDITOR IN THE REPORT INDICATED THEIR INABILITY, DESPITE MAKING EFFORTS, MULTIPLE EFFORTS TO GET RECORDS FROM THE BANK, REGIONS BANK AND WERE UNABLE AT THAT TIME BECAUSE OF THE UNAVAILABILITY OF THOSE RECORDS TO PROVIDE ACTUAL FINDINGS, AND ACTUALLY SUGGESTED THAT WE CHANGE BANKS. MR. JONES INDICATED WHILE THE FORENSIC AUDITORS WERE HERE, THAT THEY'VE HAD SOME FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH REGIONS BANK, AND NOW IT SEEMS THAT THE INFORMATION MAY BE AVAILABLE. AND SO I KNOW THEY STAFF NEEDS TO LOOK FURTHER INTO THAT. BUT IS THERE DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, CONCERNS OR ANYTHING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO ADD TO? THIS PART OF THE DISCUSSION? AS STAFF IS CONTINUING TO WORK WITH REGIONS BANK AND THE AUDITOR AROUND CREDIT CARDS. COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS. YES, I DIDN'T REALLY WRITE MY QUESTIONS DOWN BASED ON THE NUMBERS, SO I THINK THAT THIS DOES APPLY TO THE CREDIT CARD PIECE. YOU MENTIONED. CITY MANAGER JONES OF PERHAPS A FULL TIME EMPLOYEE WHO WOULD SERVE AS AN INTERNAL AUDITOR. AND IN THAT DISCUSSION, LIKE I SAID, I CAN'T REMEMBER THE NUMBER. YOU HAD ALSO MENTIONED SOME THINGS AROUND COMPLIANCE. SO DO YOU FORESEE THIS BEING SOMEONE WHO'S AN INTERNAL INTERNAL AUDITOR AND A COMPLIANCE OFFICER? BECAUSE NOT ONLY WOULD THEY NEED TO AUDIT, BUT JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE ACROSS THE BOARD ON A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WE SEEM TO NOT BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH. YEAH, I CERTAINLY HAD SOME CONVERSATIONS WITH PLANTE MORAN BECAUSE IN THEIR RECOMMENDATION, THEY DIDN'T THINK INTERNAL AUDITOR WAS NEEDED. BUT AFTER I KIND OF EXPRESSED SOME OF THE CHALLENGES THAT WE HAVE WITH OUR INTERNAL CONTROLS AND HAVING CROSS DEPARTMENTAL EFFICIENCIES, THEY KIND OF LIKE, YEAH, WE WON'T, WE WON'T TAKE WE WON'T SAY ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, YOU'RE YOU'RE IN THE 
          [02:30:05]
TRENCHES. YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT THE ORGANIZATION IS DEALING WITH. SO WE WON'T, YOU KNOW, DOVE INTO THOSE WATERS, DELVE INTO THOSE WATERS. BUT IT CERTAINLY IS COMPLIANCE. 
          ANYTIME YOU HAVE INTERNAL AUDITOR, THERE'S CERTAIN ASPECTS OF OF COMPLIANCE THAT WOULD BE NEEDED. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT THERE IS A LOT OF ROOM, MAYBE EVEN MORE, OVER THE 50% THRESHOLD OF COMPLIANCE FOR EFFICIENCIES AND PROCESSES. AND SO I THINK I'VE BEEN EXPERIENCED IN MY MY LAST ASSIGNMENT AS DEPUTY CITY MANAGER AND IOWA CITY, A LARGER COMMUNITY FOR CERTAIN, BUT THERE WAS ACTUALLY TWO INDIVIDUALS THAT DIRECTLY REPORTED TO ME AS THE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER THAT WAS FOCUSED ON INTERNAL INTERNAL AUDITING, AND SOME OF THAT CAME INTO CHANGING PROCESSES AND, AND SERVICE DELIVERY METHODS TO ACTUALLY GET A BETTER PRODUCT BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE TIME TO ASSESS SITUATIONS THAT THE ORGANIZATION, WHILE IN THE THRILL OF THE DAY TO DAY OPERATION, DON'T GET TO SIT BACK AND AND LOOK AT IF WE COULD BE DOING THINGS BETTER. SO THAT CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PERSON COULD ALSO BE THAT TITLE INSTEAD OF INTERNAL AUDITOR. BUT THAT CONTINUING IMPROVEMENT REALLY FELL, FELL ON THAT DIVISION IN MANY CASES, PARTICULARLY WHEN WE HAD OUTDATED FORMS, OUTDATED PROCESSES, THINGS THAT WE'RE MAKING OUR CITIZENS GO THROUGH, PROCESSES THAT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, THOSE KIND OF THINGS AN INTERNAL AUDITOR CAN BRING TO LIGHT AND LEAD TASK GROUPS TO GET SOLVED. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND I THINK THAT I HEARD YOU SAY THAT THIS WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER LOOKING AT FOR THE NEXT, NEXT FISCAL YEAR. IS THAT CORRECT? THAT IS CORRECT. YOU DO NOT THINK THAT THE ISSUES ARE SERIOUS ENOUGH FOR US TO LOOK AT THAT? I MEAN, WE'RE ONLY WE'RE GOING INTO OUR THIRD MONTH OF THIS FISCAL YEAR, SO WE'LL JUST CONTINUE FOR THE REST OF THE FISCAL YEAR TO ALLOW THOSE THINGS TO NOT BE CHECKED. OR DO YOU THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD OR YOU SHOULD LOOK AT MORE IMMEDIATE IMMEDIATELY? I, I WOULD I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A PERSON LIKE THAT. 
          IN OUR CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, I WAS JUST TRYING TO BE MY OWN DISCIPLINARY AND AND STAY WITHIN MY BUDGET FOR THIS FISCAL YEAR. SO THAT'S THE ONLY REASON. BUT CERTAINLY THAT WORK, I OBVIOUSLY JUST THE THE WORK THAT I'VE HAD TO TO PUT IN JUST TO GET US TO THIS POINT, I HAVE A WHOLE NOTHER SLEW OF THINGS LIKE PERFORMANCE BASED BUDGETING, LIKE OUR STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS, LIKE OUR, OUR, OUR SUMMIT THAT WE HAVE COMING UP WITH OUR I MEAN, THERE'S A WHOLE SLEW. I HAD TO PUT THOSE OFF TO GET UP TO SPEED ON THIS. AND SO AN INTERNAL AUDITOR WOULD HAVE GONE A LONG WAY IN HELPING ME GET SOME OF THESE DATA SET. AND AS YOU SEE SOME OF THOSE PIECES I STILL HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO GET BECAUSE I'VE SINCE HAD TO BE ESSENTIALLY HAD TO BE. CITY MANAGER SLASH COLUMBO TO GET TO SOME OF THE ANSWERS ON SOME OF THESE ITEMS. SO THAT KIND OF PERSON, TO BE ABLE TO RELY ON, THAT CAN DELVE IN AND GET THOSE DETAILS WHEN THINGS LIKE THIS COME UP WOULD BE INVALUABLE. BUT I'M ALSO TRYING TO BE RESPECTFUL OF OUR BUDGET THAT'S BEEN PASSED AS I TRY TO KEEP MY DEPARTMENTS TO DO THE SAME THING, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE PEOPLE LIKE A CYBER SECURITY PERSON AND THOSE THINGS THAT IS PRESSING AS WELL. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO OPERATE IN WHAT WE HAVE TO WORK WITH. OKAY. AND SO WITH THAT, WOULD WE ALSO BE WAITING TO DIGITIZE DOCUMENTS? I MEAN, I'M JUST THINKING OF EFFICIENCIES BECAUSE THERE COULD BE COST SAVINGS AND EFFICIENCIES. AND SO IF WE CONTINUE TO WAIT THEN WE MAY BE SPENDING MORE DOLLARS. AND AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE NOT BECOMING MORE EFFICIENT AND WE MAY RUN INTO EVEN GREATER ISSUES AND MORE ISSUES. I CERTAINLY LIKE AND APPRECIATE WHERE YOU'RE COMING FROM. AND IF YOU TASKED ME AS, AS, AS A COLLECTIVE TO LOOK AT BRINGING THAT POSITION ON FASTER, YOU WON'T YOU WON'T GET ME BUCKING AGAINST THAT AT ALL. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WHEN THE ROSALES GROUP DID THE INITIAL AUDIT THAT PROMPTED THE FORENSIC AUDIT, ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS, IN ADDITION TO THE FORENSIC AUDIT, WAS AN INTERNAL AUDITOR. AND IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE HAD PLACED ON THE AGENDA FOR SEVERAL MONTHS. BUT THEN WHEN WE DECIDED TO DO THE FORENSIC AUDIT, WE SAID WE WAIT TO SEE WHAT THE FORENSIC AUDIT FINDINGS WERE TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT AN INTERNAL AUDITOR WAS RECOMMENDED OR NEEDED. AND SO WE ARE NOW AT THAT TIME, BASED 
          [02:35:01]
UPON THAT INITIAL RECOMMENDATION, IT WAS INCLUDED IN THERE IN THE AUDIT THAT WAS DONE THAT RECOMMENDED THE FORENSIC AUDIT AND A NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS, INCLUDING AN INTERNAL AUDITOR. AND SO, YOU KNOW, A BUDGET AMENDMENTS CAN ALWAYS BE DONE. YOU KNOW, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT NOW THAT WE I MEAN, AND THERE'S STILL SOME WORK HAPPENING ON THE FORENSIC AUDIT REGARDING THE CREDIT CARD POLICY. BUT I THINK NOW WE ARE AT THE JUNCTURE THAT WE SAID WE WOULD HOLD OFF TO, WHICH WAS AFTER THE FORENSIC AUDIT TO MAKE THAT DECISION ON AN INTERNAL AUDITOR. AS A PART OF THAT AUDIT FROM THE ROSALES GROUP. SO, MR. JONES, I BELIEVE THAT WAS WITH THIS COUNCIL. I BELIEVE THERE'S LIKELY SUPPORT FOR IT. SO IF YOU COULD SHARE INFORMATION WITH US, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S SALARY SAVINGS THAT MAY BE AVAILABLE RIGHT NOW. 
          THERE WAS INITIAL DISCUSSION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE PERSON WOULD ACTUALLY BE A FULL TIME EMPLOYEE, OR ENGAGING A CONSULTANT TO SERVE IN THE INTERNAL AUDITOR ROLE. AND SO A COST ANALYSIS FOR THOSE WOULD BE HELPFUL. BUT WE'RE AT THAT JUNCTURE THAT WE SAID WE WANTED TO BE WANTED TO WAIT UNTIL, AS IT RELATES TO MAKING THAT FINAL DECISION ON INTERNAL AUDITOR, COUNCIL MEMBER. YOU STILL HAVE ANYTHING? NO COMMENTS. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. AND I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT POTENTIALLY GETTING AN INTERNAL AUDITOR, POSSIBLY SOONER RATHER THAN LATER. BUT IF THAT'S NOT THE CASE, THEN THAT'S NOT WHAT WE DO AT THIS POINT IN TIME. I THINK ONE OF THE KEY THINGS WOULD BE ALSO, IF WE MAYBE DO SOME SORT OF RETRAINING FOR ALL OF THE EMPLOYEES THAT DO HAVE THOSE CITY CREDIT CARDS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE COMPLIANT WITH, YOU KNOW, WITH REGARDS TO TURNING IN SPECIFIC DOCUMENTATION, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S SOME SORT OF UPLOAD PROCESS, YOU KNOW, WHEN PURCHASES ARE MADE OR WHATEVER, THAT SOME SORT OF WAY IT'S PUT INTO SOME SORT OF DIGITIZED SYSTEM SO THAT THOSE RECORDS ARE THERE. I KNOW THAT THE AUDITOR SAID THAT THEY HAD AN ISSUE WITH GETTING THOSE DOCUMENTS FROM THE BANK INITIALLY, BUT IF WE HAD SOMETHING ON OUR SIDE AS WELL, WHERE THEY COULD KIND OF GO TO TO BE ABLE TO LOOK FOR THAT DOCUMENTATION AS WELL. SO I DON'T KNOW, I THINK IT'LL BE A TRAINING COMPONENT THAT SHOULD COME OUT MOVING FORWARD WITH ALL CITY CREDIT CARD HOLDERS. I YIELD. THERE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, FEEDBACK, CONCERNS ON THE CREDIT CARD FINDINGS WHICH ARE STILL BEING INVESTIGATED AND WE'LL GET INFORMATION ON LATER. BUT ANY OTHER THING YOU LIKE FOR THE CITY MANAGER TO CONSIDER? OKAY. COMBINE EIGHT AND TEN. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS AROUND POSITIVE PAY? SAID THE BANK CAUGHT THEM, BUT INTERNALLY WE STILL HAD SOME CHALLENGES AND THE CITY MANAGERS SHARED WITH US WHAT HIS PLAN IS AROUND THAT. DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS REGARDING POSITIVE PAY? 11 I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANYTHING ON THAT, BUT POSITIVE. COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS YES, MR. CITY MANAGER, MY QUESTION AROUND POSITIVE PAY REALLY IS CURRENTLY, WHAT IS OUR ROUTING FOR APPROVAL? AND IS THAT DIFFERENT FROM THE TIME PERIOD OF THE AUDIT? SO TYPICALLY EACH ONE OF WHEN THE BANK KICKS THAT BACK FOR WHATEVER REASON, PARTICULARLY FOR THE REASON, IF IT'S NOT ON THE THE VENDORS LIST, THAT WE PROVIDE THEM, IT IS INDIVIDUALLY REVIEWED BY OUR AP PERSON AND THEN SHOULD BE SIGNED OFF BY FINANCE DIRECTOR OR THE CITY MANAGER IN IN THE CASE THAT WHERE I WAS IDENTIFIED THAT NEVER THAT NEVER HAPPENED. OR IF IT DID HAPPEN, IT WAS JUST SIGNED OFF ON AND POTENTIALLY A CITY MANAGER OR THE FINANCE DIRECTOR SIGNED OFF ON IT. SO IT EITHER AT THE AP LEVEL JUST DIDN'T GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF A FINAL REVIEW BY SOMEONE IN IN HIGHER MANAGEMENT OR SOMEONE IN HIGHER MANAGEMENT LOOKED AT A REPORT THAT SAID, HEY, THIS IS NOT THIS IS RAISING RED FLAGS. AND FOR WHATEVER REASON, THEY SIGNED OFF AND SENT IT OUT AND IT WOUND UP BEING INAPPROPRIATE PAYMENT. OKAY, SO WITH OUR NEW 
          [02:40:04]
RBS SYSTEM, IF IT GOT TO A CERTAIN LEVEL AND SOMEONE THROUGH THAT ROUTING PROCESS DID NOT SIGN OFF ON IT, DOES OUR SYSTEM CURRENTLY THEN FLAG THIS AND SEND A NOTIFICATION TO THE NEXT SIGNER IN THE ROUTING PROCESS THAT THIS ITEM IS WAITING FOR. APPROVAL OR SIGNATURE AT THIS LEVEL. IS THAT A PART OF OUR NEW SYSTEM? YEAH. SO ONE OF THE THINGS ALSO, IS CONCEIVABLE THAT WHEN THOSE SITUATIONS HAPPEN BEFORE, IT'S CONCEIVABLE THAT THEY WEREN'T IN THE AP SYSTEM OR IF THEY WERE, WASN'T PROPERLY DOCUMENTED WITH ALL OF THE DETAILS THAT IT SHOULD HAVE HAD. SO WHAT WOULD HAPPEN NOW? YOU'LL BE ABLE TO GO TO THE PO WHATEVER GENERATED THAT CHECK, AND YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO SEE ALL THE INFORMATION YOU WOULD NEED TO SEE TO IDENTIFY IF THIS IS APPROPRIATE. WHY WAS THERE A RED FLAG? WHY DID IT MAKE THE LIST? MAYBE IT GOT PUT ON THE LIST INAPPROPRIATELY AND YOU CAN SAY, NO, THIS IS GOOD MR. BANK, BUT APPRECIATE YOU DOING YOUR JOB AND FLAGGING IT BECAUSE WE GAVE YOU THE LIST OF PEOPLE TO FLAG IF IT SHOULD GO THROUGH NOW, YOU WOULD HAVE THOSE CHECKS AND THE INFORMATION AT HAND. WHEREAS BEFORE IT'S CONCEIVABLE THAT MAYBE THE SAME RED FLAG CAME UP, BUT YOU DIDN'T HAVE THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENT. AND IF YOU HAVEN'T FIGURED OUT ANYTHING IN MY PRESENTATION, HOW HARD IT IS TO FIND THE DOCUMENTATION, AND SOMEBODY SAID, OH, I'M JUST GOING TO SIGN OFF ON THAT OFF. I CAN'T SPEND ANOTHER FIVE DAYS TRYING TO FIND THE DOCUMENTS TO TO SUPPORT YES OR NO IF THIS IS LEGITIMATE OR NOT, WHICH I THINK FURTHER SUPPORTS THE EARLIER NOTION OF BRINGING ON SOMEONE TO HELP DIGITIZE DOCUMENTS AND SOMEONE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THOSE THINGS AND AUDITING. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER BUTLER, I WAS GOING TO ASK, WHAT IS THE PROCESS FOR SOMEONE THE BANK FLAGGING THE ITEM AND FOR US TO APPROVAL FOR APPROVAL FROM THE CITY. SO THE THE BANK WOULD HAVE FLAGGED THE ITEM, KICKED IT BACK TO US, OR GAVE US SOME KIND OF NOTIFICATION THAT THIS IS ON THE LIST, THAT WE PROVIDED THEM AS A RED FLAG. SO THAT'S I THINK THAT'S WHERE I'M WHERE I'M CONFUSED. WHAT IS THE BANK'S PROCESS IN TERMS OF KICKING IT BACK? IS THERE AN EMAIL? IS THERE A TEXT MESSAGE? AND HOW LONG BEFORE YOU HAVE TO MAKE THAT APPROVAL? DURING THAT POSITIVE PAY, WE SEND THE BANK A FILE. IT'S A LIST OF VENDORS THAT APPROVED THAT THE FINANCE APPROVES FOR PAYMENT. YOU CAN HAVE WHERE. A PERSON THAT ALTERS A CHECK AND TRY TO PRESENT THAT CHECK AT SOME LOCATION, WHETHER IT'S A LOCAL RETAIL OR ANOTHER BANK. AND THE BANK WILL FLAG THAT PARTICULAR TRANSACTION, THAT CHECK AND SAY, HEY, WE FLAGGED THIS. WE DON'T. 
          IT'S NOT ON YOUR LIST, SO YOU NEED TO DENY IT. AND WE HAVE STAFF THAT THAT DO THAT, THAT REVIEWS THAT AND DENY THAT WHEN IT COMES TO THOSE TRANSACTIONS, WE USUALLY YOU YOU'LL USUALLY SEE A SPIKE IN TRANSACTIONS AROUND CERTAIN TIMES OF THE YEAR. AROUND THE HOLIDAYS IS WHERE PEOPLE GET SPICY WITH THIS. SO STAFF IS MORE DILIGENT AROUND THAT TIME. SO DOES IT COME TO YOU VIA EMAIL? IT DOES COME VIA EMAIL. I'M SORRY. YES. AND HOW LONG DO THEY HAVE? WHAT'S THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS TIME. WITH THAT. WE HAVE TO APPROVE THAT CHECK. WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT BEFORE IT, BEFORE THEY PAY ON IT. LIKE THE BANK WILL WILL HOLD IT UNTIL WE REVIEW IT. SO THE BANK WILL HOLD IT FIVE DAYS. TEN DAYS. IT DOESN'T MATTER UNTIL YOU SAY YES OR NO. CORRECT. OKAY. AND WITH THE INSTANCE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, WAS THIS A CHECK THAT WAS APPROVED THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN APPROVED? IT WAS A I HAVE NOT SEEN THE CHECK, BUT YES, FROM WHAT THE AUDITOR SAID, IT WAS A CHECK THAT WAS APPROVED THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN APPROVED. OKAY. AND SO JUST WHAT WHAT ARE WE DOING TO CORRECT THAT ERROR NOW? WELL, WE WE ENHANCED OUR POSITIVE PAY. SO WE GOT TWO NEW TOOLS THAT IT HAS TO BE THE EXACT PAYEE. SO IT AUTOMATICALLY FLAGS THAT. AND WE DON'T HAVE TO LOOK AT IT. THAT PARTICULAR VENDOR. HOWEVER WE ALSO HAVE WHAT'S CALLED INTEGRATED PAYABLES WHERE WITH FINANCE WE DO GENERATE CHECKS IN-HOUSE. BUT IN THIS INSTANCE THE BANK WILL GENERATE THE CHECK FOR US WITH THE MAJORITY 
          [02:45:04]
OF THE FILE. SO THAT CUTS DOWN ON THE CHECK WASHING THAT WE USUALLY HAVE. OKAY. THANK YOU. 
          YOU SAID CHECK WASHING. YES, MA'AM. IT'S WHERE THEY TAKE THE CITY'S CHECK. A CRIMINAL OR NEFARIOUS PERSON TAKES THE CHECK AND THEY WIPE IT AND THEY PUT THEIR INFORMATION OR SOME OTHER INFORMATION, CHANGE THE DOLLAR AMOUNT, CHANGE THE PAYEE AND PRESENT THAT TO AN ESTABLISHMENT FOR PAYMENT. AND SO NOW, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT VENDOR, IT WOULD FLAG IT CORRECT VERSUS YEAH, POSITIVE FLAGS THAT VENDOR BECAUSE THAT'S NOT ON OUR VENDORS LIST. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AROUND POSITIVE PAY. ANY QUESTIONS. OR REGARDING THE OUTGOING WIRE THAT OCCURRED AROUND THE SAME TIME AS THE FISHING IS INCIDENT. 
          THE AUDITOR FORENSIC AUDITOR HAD NO RECOMMENDATIONS. THE CITY MANAGER SAYS SHARE IT WITH US. THE POLICY OR PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES THAT THEY PUT IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE WE'RE DOING WIRES RIGHT. YES, MA'AM. EIGHT AND TEN AND THE DISCUSSIONS ARE PRESENTATION BY THE CITY MANAGER ON NUMBER EIGHT AND BOTH THE CITY MANAGER AND THE FORENSIC AUDITOR ON NUMBER TEN REFERENCED A COUNCIL MEMBER. AND SO AT A PREVIOUS MEETING, AGAIN, IT WAS BROUGHT UP DURING PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT 20 DASH 4010 THAT THE COUNCIL MAY BE IN VIOLATION OF THAT. AND THE CITY ATTORNEY ADDRESSED IT AT THAT TIME. I THINK IT WAS TOWARDS THE END OF THE MEETING, THOUGH, SO I'M NOT SURE IF THAT MAY IF YOU ALL MAY RECALL IT, BUT I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO THE CITY MANAGER. CITY ATTORNEY BEFORE WE GO INTO DISCUSSION OF EIGHT. AND THEN WE'LL GO INTO TEN. YES, MADAM MAYOR, SO THERE IS AN ORDINANCE IN OUR CODE FOUND AT SECTION 2-4010. I DO BELIEVE THE CITY MANAGER REFERENCED THIS ORDINANCE IN HIS PRESENTATION. THE ORDINANCE PROVIDES THAT TO AVOID THE APPEARANCE OF ANY IMPROPRIETY AFTER ANY PUBLIC SERVANT OR PARTNER IN INTEREST IS DETERMINED TO HAVE A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN ANY MATTER. AND ONCE ALL QUESTIONS RELATING TO THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST HAVE BEEN ANSWERED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE DECISION MAKER, THE PUBLIC SERVANT SHALL IMMEDIATELY LEAVE THE ROOM, EXCEPT THAT IF THE MATTER IS BEING CONSIDERED AT A PUBLIC MEETING, THE PUBLIC SERVANT MAY REMAIN IN THE AREA OF THE ROOM OCCUPIED BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC. IF A PUBLIC SERVANT WHO HAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN A MATTER IS. 
          PRESENT AS A MEMBER OF THE BODY, WHICH IS TO CONSIDER THE MATTER, THE PUBLIC SERVANT SHALL LEAVE HIS OR HER REGULAR SEAT AS A MEMBER OF THE BODY, AND NOT RETURN TO IT UNTIL DELIBERATION AND ACTION ON THE MATTER IS COMPLETED. NOTHING HEREIN SHALL REQUIRE MEMBERS OF VOTING BODIES TO LEAVE THEIR SEATS, WHILE ACTION IS TAKEN REGARDING ANY ITEM CONTAINED ON A CONSENT AGENDA. WHAT'S IMPORTANT HERE IS THAT THERE MUST BE A DETERMINATION BY THE DECISION MAKER, GIVEN THAT THE CITY MOVES AS A BODY BY MAJORITY VOTE, I WOULD OPINE THAT THE DECISION MAKER IS A MAJORITY OF THE COUNCIL. THE DETERMINATION WOULD HAVE TO BE AS TO WHAT. 
          PLEASE, PLEASE REPEAT, WHAT WOULD THE MAJORITY OF COUNCIL NEED TO MAKE A DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST? AND MAYOR, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY MY PRESENTATION DEALT WITH THE DISCLOSURE, WHICH IS ACTUALLY 2-4012 AFTER AFTER THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY JUST SHARED. 
          RIGHT, IS DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT. SO THEY'RE ALL CONNECTED. THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST DISCUSSION. THE THAT'S CORRECT FORENSIC AUDITOR TALKED ABOUT CONFLICT OF INTEREST GENERALLY, WHETHER THERE'S A POLICY, WHETHER IT EXISTS. IT'S IN THE CHARTER. STAFF DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT IT, RECOMMENDED TRAINING. AND THEN YOU AND YOUR PRESENTATION TALKED ABOUT THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST PROVISIONS AND THE DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS. SO THERE'S STILL ALL CONNECTED 
          [02:50:03]
TO CONFLICT OF INTEREST. COUNCIL MEMBER FREELY QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY, YOUR READING JUST NOW IS CLEAR THAT, YOU KNOW, THE MAJORITY MAKES IF THE MAJORITY MAKES A DECISION, THAT'S THAT'S HOW IT'S DETERMINED. THAT DOESN'T PRECLUDE THE COUNCIL MEMBER FROM ELECTING TO RECUSE OR STAND DOWN. CORRECT. IT'S THEN IT WOULD BE NO NEED FOR THE FOR THE DECISION MAKER, THE CITY COUNCIL, TO MAKE A DECISION. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ITEM EIGHT THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST AGAIN THE. THE AUDITORS TALKED ABOUT A POLICY WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE A POLICY. AND. THAT THE FACT THAT EMPLOYEES WERE NOT AWARE OF THE POLICY AND THAT IT'S ACTUALLY IN THE CHARTER AND RECOMMENDED TRAINING. THE CITY MANAGER AND HIS PRESENTATION TALKED ABOUT CONFLICT OF INTEREST, REFERENCED A COUNCIL MEMBER, AND ALSO TALKED ABOUT DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS OR ACTION AROUND THOSE ITEMS? THAT ITEM. RIGHT. COUNCILMEMBER CUMMINGS. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. AND THIS QUESTION IS FOR THE CITY MANAGER. I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT THE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY AT THIS TIME. SO ONE OF THE THINGS YOU MIGHT DOWN A LITTLE BIT, I'M SORRY, HAVE WE CONSIDERED DOING SOME SORT OF FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FOR ALL EMPLOYEES? IT'S SOMETHING I KNOW WE SAID DON'T TALK ABOUT. BUT IN ATLANTA, WE IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S ACROSS THE BOARD FOR EVERY CITY EMPLOYEE. IT'S THE FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT. SO BASICALLY YOUR CITY EMPLOYEE AND IF YOU DO ANY TYPE OF BUSINESS WITH THE CITY, THERE'S A PORTION THAT'S ON THAT FORM THAT THAT'S ON THAT FORM. AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE CAN HAVE AND IT GOES ACROSS THE BOARD FOR EVERYONE. ANYBODY THAT DRAWS A PAYCHECK FROM THE CITY, THEY'RE REQUIRED TO FILL THAT FORM OUT. SO IS THAT SOMETHING THAT WE MAY CONSIDER IN THE FUTURE? AND I THINK THAT MAY HELP TO CUT DOWN ON SOME OF YEAH, I KNOW WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THAT. I'M CERTAINLY OPEN TO THAT. I THINK IT'S SOUND I'VE BEEN PART OF ORGANIZATIONS THAT HAVE DONE THAT. I'VE HAD TO DO THAT IN, IN SOME OF THE ORGANIZATIONS I'VE BEEN RELATED WITH. SO IT'S A TESTED A PRACTICE THAT CERTAINLY WE COULD DO. OKAY. I'LL GET SOME INFORMATION FORWARD IT TO YOU AND THE CITY ATTORNEY TO KIND OF VET IT, AND THEN WE CAN MOVE IT FORWARD WITH COUNCIL TO GET THEIR INPUT ON IT AS WELL. 
          THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST FINDING AND RECOMMEND COUNCILMEMBER FREELAND? YEAH, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE RECUSE HERSELF FROM THESE DISCUSSIONS IN WHATEVER MANNER SHE CHOOSES. SO THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. COUNCILMEMBER, FREELY, I WANT TO REMIND YOU THAT THE THE ORDINANCE SAYS DETERMINES THAT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OR POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTS. THAT'S THE DETERMINATION THAT COUNCIL MAKES. AM I CORRECT, MADAM CITY ATTORNEY? OKAY, THEN I THEN I WILL REVISE MY MOTION TO SAY THAT I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION, THAT THERE'S A DETERMINATION THAT A CONFLICT OF INTEREST EXISTS FOR COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE IN THE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS. IS THAT THE APPROPRIATE WORDING THAT CAPTURES THE TERMINOLOGY? TWO DASH 4012 I'M SORRY. YES 4010. MOTION ON THE FLOOR. IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED. COUNCILMEMBER MITCHELL SECONDED. 
          ANY DISCUSSION? COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS AND COUNCILMEMBER THANK YOU. AND WE'VE SEEN IN THE AUDIT REPORT AND ALSO THE CITY MANAGER'S REPORT THAT THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER COUNCIL MEMBER THAT PROBABLY SHOULD REMOVE THEMSELVES FROM THE DISCUSSION AS WELL. LET'S BE EQUITABLE. ACROSS THE BOARD. THERE WAS ANOTHER COUNCIL MEMBER MENTIONED IN THE FINANCIAL AUDIT REPORT. SO THEY SHOULD ALSO REMOVE THEMSELVES AS WELL. CITY ATTORNEY STILL IN. 
          OH NO, I'M SO SORRY. COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE. THANK YOU. AND YOU KNOW, I KNEW THIS WAS 
          [02:55:07]
GOING TO COME UP AND I KNEW THAT THEY WERE GOING TO TRY THIS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO SILENCE ME. BUT IN THE REPORT, THERE'S A LOT OF MISSING INFORMATION IN THERE WERE PAYMENTS MADE ON THIS ACCOUNT. AND WHAT THE CITY MANAGER FAILED TO TELL WAS THERE WERE WATER LEAKS ON THIS ACCOUNT AS WELL. THEY HID THE RESIDENT'S IDENTITY. AND AGAIN, I'M NOT THE AND I'M NOT THROWING MY MOTHER UNDER THE BUS. I'M NOT THAT ACCOUNT HOLDER. SO THEY THERE WERE WATER LEAKS ON THE ACCOUNT THAT CAUSED THE BILL TO SPIKE. AND THEIR PAYMENT INFORMATION. WHAT WAS FAILED WAS THERE HAD BEEN MORE THAN PAYMENTS MADE THAN WHAT WAS REPORTED, BECAUSE I HAVE A RECORD OF THAT. THERE WERE PAYMENTS MADE AND WHAT WAS JUST REPORTED. SO I'M GOING TO DEFEND MY MOTHER, AND MY MOTHER IS HERE. I'M GOING TO I'M GOING TO DEFEND HER, AND I'M NOT GOING TO LET ANYBODY JUST TRY TO MANIPULATE THE PROCESS OR ACT LIKE WE DID SOMETHING WRONG, BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOPLE UP HERE WHO HAVE AN ISSUE WITH ME, AND THERE ARE PEOPLE OUT THERE WHO HAVE AN ISSUE WITH ME, AND I'M GOING TO DEFEND MY MOTHER, AND I'M NOT GOING TO LET ANYONE MISUSE HER, TALK ABOUT HER, HURT HER, SHAME HER, OR EMBARRASS HER. COUNCIL MEMBER ZIEGLER. OH, AS A REMINDER THAT WE DO HAVE A CIVILITY PLEDGE THAT WE. WE ALL HAVE, WE ALL WALK PAST THE CIVILITY PLEDGE EVERY DAY IN REGARDS TO WHO SHOULD BE RECUSED AND WHO SHOULD NOT BE RECUSED. THE ONLY REASON WHY A SECOND COUNCIL MEMBER WAS MENTIONED IN THE AUDIT WAS BECAUSE IT WAS COMPARISON ON WHO HAS AN EXTREMELY HIGH UTILITY BILL, AND THEN WHO HAS THE NEXT HIGHEST UTILITY BILL IN THE AUDIT. IT DOES NOT SAY THAT THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER HAS ANY WRONGDOING OR ANY KIND OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST, AND THAT IT SAYS IN THE FORENSIC AUDIT REPORT THAT THAT AMOUNT OF THAT UTILITY BILL IS IN IT IS COMPARABLE TO SOMEONE ELSE'S UTILITY BILL WHO IS NOT ON CITY COUNCIL. THOSE ARE THE WORDS IN THE FORENSIC AUDIT. AND I AND THAT THAT'S JUST WHAT THAT SAYS. 
          THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS. YES. AND I DON'T WANT TO SPLIT HAIRS HERE. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A COMPARISON IN THE FORENSIC AUDIT. HOWEVER, THERE IS STILL A SECOND COUNCIL MEMBER THAT HAS A BILL IN QUESTION. SO WHETHER WE'RE COMPARING OR NOT, THAT PERSON IS MENTIONED IN THE AUDIT REPORT. SO THEY SHOULD BOTH BE RECUSED. THAT IS ALL I AM SAYING. I WANTED TO TURN IN THE FORENSIC AUDIT REPORT FOR WHAT IT SAYS SPECIFICALLY. 
          AND UTILITY BILLING ALLEGATIONS. IT'S FOUND ON PAGE NUMBER 28. 
          IT TALKS ABOUT THE BALANCES OBTAINED. IT HAS TWO PEOPLE REDACTED THE NEXT HIGHEST BALANCE FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER AS OF THE SAME DATE IS $811, WHICH APPEARS TO ALIGN WITH MANY OTHER ACCOUNT BALANCES IN THE CITY, HOWEVER. THEY ARE ALSO MENTIONED IN THIS REPORT. THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE CONVERSATION OR DIALOG ABOUT THIS AS WELL. THEY'RE STILL IN THE REPORT. 
          AND THEN MY OTHER ADDITIONAL QUESTION, MR. CITY MANAGER, HOW MANY OF OUR BILLS WERE LOOKED AT AS FAR AS AS FAR AS THIS FORENSIC AUDIT IS CONCERNED? BUT WE CAN CIRCLE BACK TO THAT REGARDLESS. IT'S IN THE AUDIT REPORT. COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE, THANK YOU. AND I DO HAVE QUESTIONS BECAUSE THAT WAS NOT PART OF THE SCOPE OF WORK. SO THEY WORKED OUT OF THEIR SCOPE AND IN AND INVESTIGATED A PRIVATE CITIZEN, A PRIVATE POINT OF ORDER RULE. RULE. HOLD ON JUST A MOMENT. I KNOW THAT I REMEMBER THE MORE ABOUT NUMBERS THAN LETTER. HOLD ON JUST A 
          [03:00:15]
MOMENT. 
          RULE PROFESSIONALISM AND STANDARDS FOR COUNCIL, COMMITTEE AND PUBLIC MEETINGS. 
          THE PROFESSIONAL AND PERSONAL CONDUCT OF COUNCIL MEMBERS MUST BE ABOVE REPROACH AND AVOID EVEN THE APPEARANCE OF IMPROPRIETY. COUNCIL MEMBER SHALL REFRAIN FROM ABUSIVE CONDUCT, PERSONAL CHARGES OR VERBAL ATTACKS UPON THE CHARACTER OR MOTIVES OF OTHER COUNCIL MEMBERS OF COUNCIL BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS, EMPLOYEES AND THE CITIZENS COUNCIL MEMBER SHALL PERFORM THEIR DUTIES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROCESSES AND RULES OF ORDER ESTABLISHED BY THE CHARTER CODE AND THESE RULES, COUNCIL MEMBER SHALL PREPARE THEMSELVES FOR PUBLIC ISSUES. LISTEN COURTEOUSLY AND ATTENTIVELY TO ALL PUBLIC DISCUSSIONS BEFORE THE BODY AND FOCUS ON THE BUSINESS AT HAND. THEY SHALL REFRAIN FROM INTERRUPTING OTHER SPEAKERS, MAKING PERSONAL COMMENTS NOT GERMANE TO THE BUSINESS OF THE BODY, OR OTHERWISE INTERFERING WITH THE ORDERLY CONDUCT OF MEETINGS. COUNCIL MEMBERS ARE EXPECTED TO HAVE READ AND REVIEWED ALL RELEVANT MATERIALS IN ADVANCE OF THE MEETINGS, AND TO BASE THEIR DECISIONS ON THE MERITS AND SUBSTANCE OF THE MATTER AT HAND. COUNCIL MEMBERS SHALL SHARE SUBSTANTIVE INFORMATION THAT IS RELEVANT TO A MATTER UNDER CONSIDERATION BY THE COUNCIL OR BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS. CITY MANAGER AND CITY ATTORNEY, WHICH THEY MAY HAVE RECEIVED FROM SOURCES OUTSIDE THE PUBLIC DECISION MAKING PROCESS. COUNCIL MEMBERS SHOULD NOT WITHHOLD SUBSTANTIVE INFORMATION OR RELEVANT FACTS TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE CITY AND ITS CITIZENS. I DON'T EVEN RECALL THE STATEMENT AT THIS TIME THAT COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE WAS MAKING. I THINK IT WAS REGARDING. THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME OTHER ALLEGATIONS, AND I CAN'T REALLY ASK HER THE QUESTION DURING THE DEBATE ON A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE, THE COUNCIL MEMBER HAS STATED THE RULE. I DON'T FIND THAT THERE WAS UNPROFESSIONAL CONDUCT IN THE STATEMENT THAT WAS MADE, OR THE COMMENTS THAT WERE BEING MADE AT THE TIME. ANY FURTHER ACTION ON THE POINT OF ORDER. ALL RIGHT, COUNCIL, YOU MAY FINISH YOUR COMMENTS AND THEN I'LL CALL FOR THE QUESTION. THANK YOU, MADAM CITY CLERK, DO YOU KNOW WHAT I WAS SAYING BEFORE I WAS INTERRUPTED? NO. SO I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT I WAS SAYING BEFORE I WAS RUDELY INTERRUPTED. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN. ROGER. YEAH. AND GOING BACK GOING BACK TO PAGE 29. PLANTE MORAN A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, WHETHER ACTUAL OR PERCEIVED, IS PRESENT WHEN A COUNCIL MEMBER IS DELINQUENT IN THEIR DEBTS, DEBTS TO AN ORGANIZATION ON THE BOARD SLASH COUNCIL FOR WHICH THEY SERVE. 
          FURTHER UNDUE INFLUENCE IS POSSIBLE BY THE COUNCIL MEMBER OF A CITY EMPLOYEE WHO CAN ADJUST DELINQUENT ACCOUNTS. SO AGAIN, THERE ARE TWO COUNCIL MEMBERS IN THE REPORT. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO HAVE THIS STUDY. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT ONLY ONE BILL IS DELINQUENT. I THINK THAT'S A A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. IF SOMEONE IS ON A PAYMENT PLAN OR MAKING CONSISTENT PAYMENTS, I BELIEVE THAT IS COULD BE SEEN AS THE PERCEIVED DIFFERENCE AND WHY THE AUDITOR FOUND ONE TO BE PERCEIVED CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND THE OTHER JUST TO BE A HIGH BILL. BUT THEY WERE MAKING GOOD FAITH EFFORTS TO PAY IT. SO THANK YOU. ATTORNEY, CITY MANAGER. YEAH, I JUST WANT TO 
          [03:05:04]
HAVE A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. IT'S NOT A PAYMENT PLAN. IT'S ACTUALLY A BUDGET BILL. A BUDGET BILL IS A PROGRAM THAT WE ACTUALLY ASK PEOPLE TO PARTICIPATE IN. IT'S ACTUALLY IN OUR ORDINANCE. SO THIS BUDGET BILLING PROCESS WILL SHOW THINGS, PARTICULARLY IN PEAKS, THAT IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S NOT BEING PAID. IT'S ACTUALLY ACCOUNTING FOR PEAKS AND VALLEYS AND GIVING ACROSS THE BOARD AVERAGE. AT THE END OF THE YEAR, SHOULD THERE BE OUTSTANDING. OUTSTANDING AMOUNTS OWED, THEN THE NEXT YEAR, THEN THOSE THINGS GO INTO THE EQUALIZATION PROCESS OF ESTABLISHING THAT LINE, GOING ACROSS THE PEAKS AND VALLEYS OF THE NEXT 12 MONTHS. THE ONLY WAY TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT PROGRAM IS TO BE IN GOOD STANDING. SO THE I ONLY TAKE JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION ON THE CHARACTERIZATION. IT'S ACTUALLY NOT IN, IN, IN IN THE DEFICIT, YOU ACTUALLY HAVE TO BE IN GOOD STANDING TO EVEN PARTICIPATE IN THE PROGRAM. AND THEN THE PROGRAM ITSELF, YOU HAVE THINGS THAT, IF YOU LOOKED AT FROM AN AUDITOR'S STANDPOINT, WOULD LOOK LIKE IT'S A DEFICIT. BUT I THINK THAT'S WHERE THE AUDIT REPORT SAYS IT WAS REFLECTIVE OF MANY OTHER ACCOUNTS IN THE CITY, BECAUSE MANY OTHER ACCOUNTS ALSO PARTICIPATE IN THE CITY SPONSORED PROGRAM, WHICH IS BUDGET BILLING. SO I NOTICE YOU INCLUDED THAT ON THE SLIDE WHERE YOU MENTIONED YOU HAD THE LANGUAGE ABOUT THE OTHER 800 AND SOMETHING DOLLARS FOR A COUNCIL MEMBER. ARE YOU SAYING THAT THE OTHER COUNCIL MEMBER IS ON BUDGET BILLING? THAT'S THAT CONNECTION THAT THAT WAS THAT WAS THE CONNECTION. BUT I ONLY BROUGHT IT UP BECAUSE COUNCIL DIRECTED ME TO HIT POINT BY POINT BY POINT. AND THAT WAS ONE OF THE POINTS. I'M JUST MAKING SURE THAT THE CONNECTION IS THAT COUNCIL MEMBERS ON BUDGET BILLING. CORRECT. OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE. ALRIGHT. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER LIGHTS. MADAM DEPUTY CITY CLERK, WHAT'S THE MOTION? ARE WE SPEAKING OF THE MOTION THAT COUNCIL MEMBER FREELY MADE ABOUT RECUSING, ABOUT COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE. CORRECT. CLEAR MOTION IS. DO YOU HAVE IT? NO. PLEASE. CAN YOU RESTATE THE MOTION REGARDING THE DETERMINATION? HE WITHDREW THE INITIAL MOTION REGARDING RECUSAL. THE MOTION WAS THAT THERE WAS A FINDING OF A DETERMINATION OF A CONFLICT OF INTEREST, OF INTEREST? THAT WAS THE SECOND MOTION AS TO COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE'S PARTICIPATION IN THE DISCUSSION OF THIS ITEM. SO THAT'S THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR. IT WAS SECONDED BY COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL THOSE OPPOSED? NO. ROLL CALL, PLEASE. COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE. OKAY. NOT VOTE ON THIS, OKAY. COUNCILMEMBER FRIEDLEY. YES. COUNCIL MEMBER. ZIEGLER. I. COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS. COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          ATKINS. AYE. COUNCIL MEMBER. MITCHELL. COUNCIL MEMBER. CUMMINGS. COUNCIL MEMBER. 
          BUTLER. MOTION PASS. ALL RIGHT. NOW THAT THE DETERMINATION HAS BEEN MADE, IT SAYS THE PUBLIC SERVANT SHALL IMMEDIATELY LEAVE THE MEETING ROOM. EXCEPT THAT IF THE MATTER IS BEING CONSIDERED AT A PUBLIC MEETING, THE PUBLIC SERVANT MAY REMAIN IN THE AREA OF THE ROOM OCCUPIED BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC. SO, COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE, THAT WOULD MEAN YOU WOULD YOU COULD LEAVE OR YOU COULD SIT IN THE AREA WITH THE GENERAL PUBLIC. OKAY. ALRIGHT. WE ARE 
          [03:10:14]
ON THE DISCUSSION ABOUT CONFLICT OF INTEREST. THE DID WE DO CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND GO TO UTILITY I CAN'T REMEMBER WE'RE ON CONFLICT OF INTEREST. RIGHT. OKAY. THE BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE I'VE SAID THIS IS MY THIRD TIME THE FORENSIC AUDITOR TALKED ABOUT IN THEIR FINDINGS. 
          THEY SAID THERE WASN'T A POLICY OR THAT THE STAFF DID NOT KNOW WHETHER OR NOT IT WAS CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY. BUT THERE'S IN THE CHARTER. THE CITY MANAGER TALKED ABOUT CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND REFERENCE. COUNCIL MEMBER SHROPSHIRE, AS WELL AS DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS. 
          IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST FINDING IN THE AUDIT POLICY? I SHOULD SAY COUNCIL MEMBER YES, THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER, AS IT RELATES TO THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST, I THINK IT WAS ALREADY DISCUSSED THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE TRAINING AROUND THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY FOR THE CITY. CAN YOU ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE FREQUENCY, HOW THAT WOULD HAPPEN FOR THE CITY, OR HAVE YOU GOTTEN THAT FAR AS IT RELATES TO OUR POLICY? CERTAINLY. SO THERE WERE, I GUESS, A COUPLE OF OF ISSUES REGARDING THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. CERTAINLY TALKED ABOUT THE CITY COUNCIL, BUT THE OTHER PIECE OF IT WAS FOR CITY STAFF, AND THAT WAS PARTICULARLY AROUND HAVING AND UTILIZING FAMILY MEMBERS AS VENDORS. AND SO THAT PRESENTS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST THAT WOULD REQUIRE DISCLOSURE SHOULD THAT SITUATION OCCUR, BUT ALSO THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE TYPICALLY WOULDN'T RECOMMEND. 
          AND THAT KIND OF OF TRAINING NEEDS TO HAPPEN. SO WE CERTAINLY HAVE HAD A SITUATION WHERE THAT HAS OCCURRED AND ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN TERMINATION OF THAT EMPLOYEE, BECAUSE THERE WEREN'T ANY DISCLOSURES. AND IT WAS DONE IN A WAY THAT IT WAS KIND OF BEING HID. BUT THERE NEEDS TO BE TRAINING AS TO WHAT ACCOUNTS FOR CONFLICT OF INTEREST FROM AN EMPLOYEE STANDPOINT AND WHAT ARE REQUIRED. SHOULD YOU SAY, LEARN OF A SITUATION WHERE A FAMILY MEMBER MIGHT BE A VENDOR AND HAVE ARM'S LENGTH FROM ANY INTERACTIONS RELATED TO THAT TRANSACTION WITH THE CITY? SO THAT IS A PART OF THE ONGOING TRAINING REGIMEN THAT WOULD INCLUDE THAT IN OTHER ISSUES RELATING TO THE VARIOUS CONTROLS IN IN OUR ORGANIZATION. 
          OKAY. SO MY QUESTION IS ALSO AROUND SORT OF THE FREQUENCY AND HOW THAT HAPPENS. SO A PART OF A ANOTHER ORGANIZATION, ETHICS TRAINING WAS REQUIRED FOR EVERYONE IN THE ENTIRE ORGANIZATION ANNUALLY. AND IT WAS FACILITATED BY AN OUTSIDE FIRM THAT WAS MANAGED BY THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. SO WHEN I'M ASKING ABOUT THE TYPE OF TRAINING, DO YOU FORESEE A SIMILAR TYPE OF SITUATION FOR THE CITY? NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE TRAINING, AND THIS WAS FROM THE OFFICERS ALL THE WAY DOWN. SO NO MATTER WHO YOU WERE IN THE ORGANIZATION, PRESIDENT, VICE PRESIDENT, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT, ANYONE, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT TRAINING ANNUALLY AND SIGN AN AFFIDAVIT THAT YOU PARTICIPATED AND YOU UNDERSTOOD ALL OF THE THINGS THAT WERE REVIEWED AS IT RELATES TO ETHICS, WHICH WOULD BE CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS. SO THAT'S REALLY THE QUESTION WHEN I'M ASKING, HAVE YOU DECIDED HOW THAT WILL BE OR WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE? I'LL EVALUATE THAT. I BELIEVE THAT I WENT THROUGH SOMETHING VERY SIMILAR WHEN I FIRST CAME ON, BUT I'LL DOUBLE BACK WITH HR TO FIND OUT WHERE WE ARE, WHAT WE DO, AND HOW OFTEN WE DO IT. OKAY. YEAH. IT WAS. I UNDERSTAND ONBOARDING AND HAVING THE NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT. BUT THIS IS THIS WAS DONE IN GROUPS. SO IT WAS ANNUAL TRAINING. YOU HAD TO REGISTER CALENDAR REGISTRATION TO GET INTO THE TRAINING, AND YOU HAD TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU TOOK THAT COURSE AND SIGN THE AFFIDAVIT. 
          SO PERHAPS YOU CAN COME BACK TO US WITH WHATEVER YOU COME UP WITH AS IT RELATES TO MAKING SURE THAT EVERYONE IN THE ORGANIZATION HAS HAD THAT TRAINING AROUND ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST. COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER YES, THIS QUESTION IS FOR THE CITY 
          [03:15:06]
MANAGER. WHEN IT WAS DISCOVERED THERE WAS A CONFLICT OF INTEREST WITH EMPLOYEES, USING THE FAMILY MEMBERS AS VENDORS, WAS THERE A POLICE INVESTIGATION? TO MY UNDERSTANDING, YES. AND THIS WAS ALSO BEFORE MY TENURE. BUT YES. AND DO YOU RECALL WHAT THE POLICE DETERMINATION WAS? THAT I, I, I RECALL THAT IT WAS FOUNDED AND I RECALL IT RESULTED IN TERMINATION. I RECALL THAT AT THE TIME THERE WAS A CONSIDERATION OF THE EMPLOYEE TO APPEAL IT TO THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION AND SUBSEQUENTLY WAS RETHOUGHT AND AND NEVER APPEALED. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER. MARTIN. YES. AND MY QUESTION IS FOR THE CITY MANAGER AND ALSO THE CITY ATTORNEY. I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, BUT A CONCERN THAT CAME IN IN THAT EMAIL FROM THE MEN OF INTELLIGENCE ASSOCIATION, IT DID DISCUSS OR TOUCH ON A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST. HOWEVER, IF YOU LOOK AT SECTION 2-506, MR. CITY MANAGER, IT TALKS ABOUT THE INELIGIBILITY OF ELECTED OFFICIALS. IT GOES ON TO STATE NO FORMER MAYOR AND NO FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER SHALL HOLD ANY COMPENSATED OR APPOINTED OFFICE IN THE CITY UNTIL ONE YEAR AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THE TERM FOR WHICH SUCH OFFICIAL WAS ELECTED. SO IS THERE ANY WAY THAT I GUESS STAFF COULD ALSO BE INFORMED OF THIS AS WELL? BECAUSE THAT WAS MENTIONED IN THAT AUGUST 7TH EMAIL TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL FROM THE MEN OF INTELLIGENCE THAT THE AUDITOR WAS NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE, BUT ALSO SECTION 2506. AND SHOULD THAT MARY OR SHOULD THAT BE JOINED TOGETHER, MADAM CITY ATTORNEY NOT JOINED TOGETHER, BUT IT WOULD TAKE ONE TO JUST LOOK THROUGH OUR CHARTER TO SEE WHAT A MAYOR AND COUNCIL WOULD BE IN ELIGIBLE FOR ONCE THEY LEAVE OFFICE. SO I THINK WHAT I UNDERSTAND YOU SAYING IS THAT. 
          THE MEN OF INTELLIGENCE ASSOCIATION AND ITS RELATIONSHIP WITH. I CAN'T REMEMBER THE COUNCIL MEMBER, THE FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER'S NAME, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE GETTING AT HERE? SO THE THE SECTION THAT YOU JUST REFERENCED SAYS NEITHER THE MAYOR NOR ANY COUNCIL MEMBER SHALL HOLD ANY OTHER ELECTED OR COMPENSATED APPOINTED OFFICE. 
          IN THE CITY OR OTHERWISE BE EMPLOYED BY CITY GOVERNMENT OR ANY AGENCY THAT COULD APPLY. I DON'T THINK THAT THAT COUNCIL MEMBER WAS ELECTED OR COMPENSATED IN AN APPOINTED OFFICE. IT COULD BE ARGUED IF THERE IS SOME RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE ORGANIZATION AND THAT FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER, THAT THERE. I MEAN, IT'S NOT A GREAT ARGUMENT THAT HE WAS AN EMPLOYEE. I DON'T I DON'T THINK THAT AN EMPLOYEE AND A CONTRACTOR ARE THE SAME. AND SO THERE MAY BE SOMEWHERE ELSE, AND I CAN SEARCH WHETHER OR NOT GETTING A CONTRACT FROM THE CITY POST SERVICE IN AN ELECTED OR APPOINTED OFFICE IS A VIOLATION OR PROHIBITED. I HAVE SEEN THAT TO COUNCIL MEMBER CUMMINGS POINT. THAT IS CERTAINLY SOMETHING THAT ATLANTA HAS, IS THAT ONCE YOU LEAVE THE EMPLOYEE OF THAT CITY, YOU ARE INELIGIBLE FOR ANY CONTRACTS, DO ANY WORK WITH THE CITY POST OR EMPLOYMENT OR YOUR ELECTED OFFICE. SO I'LL LOOK AND SEE IF WE HAVE SOMETHING MORE ON POINT. AND SO AGAIN, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, MR. CITY MANAGER, THIS THE FORENSIC AUDIT FINDING FOR THIS ITEM ACTUALLY TALKS ABOUT, AS YOU MENTIONED, PUBLIC CONTRACTS. 2-40 11 AND 2-40 12 DISCLOSURE. AND THIS WAS TALKING ABOUT AS YOU MENTIONED. POTENTIALLY RELATED PARTY VENDORS IN YOUR PRESENTATION. YOU ALSO 
          [03:20:07]
REFERENCED THE COUNCIL MEMBER, WHICH IS WHY I ASKED THE CITY ATTORNEY TO ADDRESS TWO DASH 4010 BEFORE HAVING THIS DISCUSSION, BECAUSE THAT WAS IN YOUR PRESENTATION. LIGHTS HAVE COME ON. COUNCIL MEMBER. BUTLER. COUNCILMEMBER ATKINS. YES, MA'AM. MADAM MAYOR, THE THE ONLY THING ABOUT HAVING STAFF WAIT A YEAR IS IF THERE'S A SITUATION WHERE THE POLICE CHIEF HAD RETIRED AND THERE WAS CONSIDERATION FROM HIM COMING ON TO HELP TRAIN IN A CONSULTING CAPACITY. SO THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS WHEN WE HAVE TO HAVE PROFESSIONALS AT THE AND THEY COME ON AND THEY HELP BY CONSULTING AS OPPOSED TO. THAT'S WHY I UNDERSTAND WHY IT WOULD BE A CONFLICT FOR A CITY COUNCIL PERSON OR MAYOR TO HAVE A CONTRACT AFTER THEY LEAVE. 
          BUT THERE ARE MANY INSTANCES WHERE PEOPLE MAY RETIRE FROM THE CITY, BUT THEY COME BACK TO HELP OUT A CONSULT, ESPECIALLY IN THOSE SPECIAL AREAS WHERE THEY'RE NEEDED. COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS YES, I'LL GO AHEAD AND SPEAK TO THAT. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT YOU WERE GOING TO BRING THAT UP. THAT IS CORRECT. AND THAT DOES HAPPEN. COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER HOWEVER, I THINK THAT SHOULD BE THE EXCEPTION AND NOT THE NORM. AND SO IN SITUATIONS WHEN THAT INCIDENT HAPPENS, I'LL SPEAK FOR THE CITY OF ATLANTA. THE PERSON THAT DOESN'T PROHIBIT THE PERSON FROM COMING BACK. THE CITY COUNCIL AS A BODY HAS TO TAKE A VOTE. SO IF THE POLICE CHIEF IS PROVIDING A LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT WE WOULD NEED DURING A TRANSITION OR ANY OF THOSE THINGS AFTER RETIREMENT, AND THE BODY DEEMS THAT THAT IS APPROPRIATE, THEN IT WOULD COME BACK TO THE BODY FOR A VOTE. SO IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY PROHIBIT THE CHIEF FROM COMING BACK OR ANY OTHER DIRECTOR LEVEL OR EMPLOYEE AFTER THEY'VE RETIRED. BUT I THINK IT SHOULD BE THE EXCEPTION AND NOT THE NORM, BECAUSE THAT WILL THEN, I THINK, OPEN THE FLOODGATES FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE TO RETIRE AND THEN COME BACK. AND SO THEY'RE RECEIVING A PENSION, AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO RECEIVING OTHER PAYMENT FROM THE CITY FOR THE SERVICE. AND SO I THINK IT CAN STILL HAPPEN, THOUGH. MY QUESTION WAS WE TALKED ABOUT CONFLICT OF INTEREST FOR EMPLOYEES MOSTLY IN THIS DISCUSSION. AND THIS IS A QUESTION FOR MADAM ATTORNEY, FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS. WOULD THAT BE COVERED IN OUR OATH OF OFFICE AND OR WOULD WE NEED SOME TYPE OF IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REGULAR TRAINING FOR EMPLOYEES, WHAT WOULD BE THE RECOMMENDATION OR THE STANDARD PRACTICE? AS YOU'VE SEEN IT ACROSS OTHER MUNICIPALITIES FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS AS IT RELATES TO CONFLICTS OF INTEREST? IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK HAS BEEN COVERED, LIKE ON THE GMA LEVEL, WHERE THEY'VE HAD CLASSES AT THEIR VARIOUS CONVENTIONS THAT WILL COVER A CONFLICT OF INTEREST OTHER THAN ORDINANCES THAT ADDRESS IT AND YOUR ETHICS ORDINANCE. I HAVEN'T SEEN LIKE A CITY PROVIDE THE TRAINING TO ITS ELECTED OFFICIALS. OKAY. 
          ALL RIGHT. NOT SAYING IT CAN'T BE DONE. I JUST HAVEN'T SEEN IT. GOTCHA. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS. THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. AND TO SPEAK A LITTLE BIT MORE WITH ON WHAT COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER AND ATKINS SPOKE OF, I KNOW COUNCIL MEMBER MARTIN ROGERS ALSO MENTIONED THERE'S A ONE YEAR COOLING OFF PERIOD, AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH DOING BUSINESS AS A PARTICULAR VENDOR. BUT WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT REHIRING FORMER EMPLOYEES, BECAUSE THAT'S THE SITUATION WITH OUR FIRE CHIEF RETIRED, BUT THEY DID BRING THEM BACK. SO IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENCE IN DOING BUSINESS, DOING BUSINESS WITH THE CITY AS OPPOSED TO REHIRING, JUST LIKE COUNCIL MEMBER BUTLER MENTIONED. IF WE WERE IF THE FIRE CHIEF, IF THE POLICE CHIEF WERE TO RETIRE AND WE BROUGHT HIM BACK ON A CONSULTING BASIS, THEN THAT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE IN THOSE TWO, AS OPPOSED TO DOING BUSINESS AS A VENDOR AND HAVING A VESTED INTEREST WITH THAT REGARDS. COUNCIL MEMBER MITCHELL THANK YOU. SO I DO REMEMBER THIS INSTANCE IN PARTICULAR, AND I DID REACH OUT TO HIM. HE I THINK SINCE WE ARE HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT TIGHTENING UP OUR CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICIES, I THINK IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE. AND MADAM CITY ATTORNEY, CORRECT ME, BUT IT'S ALLOWED AS LONG AS HE WAITS A YEAR. IS THAT HOW THAT READS? IF THE COUNCIL, THE FORMER COUNCIL MEMBER, IS ALLOWED TO WORK WITH THE CITY? AND ARE YOU LOOKED AT UP TO COUNCILMAN ATKINS POINT? I DO 
          [03:25:02]
UNDERSTAND. HOWEVER, I THINK IT JUST WE MAY NEED TO TIGHTEN UP OUR OWN POLICIES IF THAT'S TRUE. 
          IF THAT'S ALLOWED, I WOULD SAY SO, YEAH. THE THE CODE SECTION THAT COUNCILWOMAN DOCTOR MARTIN ROGERS READ FROM INDICATED THAT NO COUNCIL MEMBER CAN HOLD ANY ELECTED OR COMPENSATED APPOINTED OFFICE OR BE EMPLOYED BY THE GOVERNMENT. RIGHT AFTER SAID COUNCIL MEMBER OR MAYOR WAS IN THEIR ELECTED OFFICE. OR I'M SORRY, DURING THE TERM IN WHICH THEY ARE ELECTED. SO THIS OR IN AND I'M SORRY ONE YEAR AFTER THE QUESTION WAS WHETHER OR NOT YOU CAN CONSIDER THIS FORMER COUNCIL MEMBERS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CITY AS A CONTRACTOR TO MEET THIS CODE SECTION, AND I HAVE NOT FOUND YET SOMETHING THAT SAYS DO BUSINESS WITH THE CITY AS A VENDOR OR A CONTRACTOR. SO TO YOUR POINT, YES, IF IT DOESN'T EXIST, THAT MAY BE AN AREA WHERE WE WANT TO IMPROVE OUR ORDINANCES TO INCLUDE AND NOT BE A CONTRACTOR OR VENDOR DURING YOUR TERM AND ONE YEAR AFTER. OKAY. YEAH, YEAH, IT WAS LONGER THAN A YEAR. SO, SO THAT THAT WAS I THINK THAT'S KIND OF THE CONFLICT NOW THAT IT WAS MISREPRESENTED. SO I'M NOT SURE WE CAN WHAT WE CAN DO ON OUR END. BUT WHILE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IT AND IF IT'S THE WILL OF COUNCIL, WE MIGHT WANT TO TIGHTEN THAT UP MOVING FORWARD. THANK YOU. YEAH. SO IT'S A CHARTER PROVISION. 2-506. SO IT WOULD EITHER HAVE TO BE TIGHTENED UP THROUGH HOME RULE LEGISLATION OR THROUGH THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. THIS MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT COULD BE DONE BY HOME RULE. IT DOES NOT MENTION ANYONE OTHER THAN MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS DURING THE TERM, OR FORMER MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS AFTER THE TERM IS OVER. AND SO THIS DOESN'T IN ANY WAY IMPACT EMPLOYEES, DIRECTORS, CHIEFS, ANY EMPLOYEE SPECIFICALLY IS TITLED INELIGIBILITY OF ELECTED OFFICIALS. BUT IF THERE'S A DESIRE TO ADDRESS IT, IT IS A CHARTER PROVISION WHICH WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE THROUGH THE HOME RULE OR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON CONFLICT OF INTEREST? ALL RIGHT. THE LAST ONE, THE UTILITY BILLING. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? THE FORENSIC AUDITOR HAS DONE DID THEIR PRESENTATION ON THIS ITEM AND SUGGEST IN THEIR RECOMMENDATION IS THAT. THE CITY SHOULD WORK WITH ALL ACCOUNT HOLDERS TO COLLECT DELINQUENT OUTSTANDING BALANCES, AND THOSE PROCESSES SHOULD BE DOCUMENTED AND CONSISTENTLY FOLLOWED. THE CITY MANAGER SHARED INFORMATION REGARDING THE THREE ACCOUNTS INDICATED IN THE AUDIT REPORT, AS WELL AS THE COUNCIL MEMBER THAT HAD THE NEXT HIGHEST BALANCE OF 811, $811.42, AND INDICATED THAT THAT WAS BUDGET BILLING. ANY QUESTIONS? UP ON THAT ITEM? COUNCILMEMBER ZIEGLER. YES. THANK YOU. SO. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE'S BEEN SOME DISCUSSIONS ABOUT THAT. THERE WAS A WATER LEAK FOR THE COUNCIL MEMBER WITH THE HIGH UTILITY BILL. DO WE I KNOW FOR MY UTILITY BILL, IT SHOWS THERE'S A GRAPH ON THE BOTTOM OF THE UTILITY BILL THAT SHOWS THE USAGE. HAVE HAS ANYBODY GONE BACK TO LOOK AND SEE IF THERE WAS A WATER LEAK, OR IS THERE ANY INFORMATION THAT CAN BE PROVIDED AROUND THAT? MR. JONES SO I WILL SAY, AS I SHARED AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING, THERE'S ASPECTS OF THIS THAT IS UNDER INVESTIGATION. THERE ARE THERE ARE NOTES IN THE HISTORY THAT WOULD INDICATE WATER RELATED LEAKS, BUT THERE ARE INDICATED THERE INDICATED THAT CREATES SOME SOME QUESTION AND I'LL LEAVE IT AT THAT. I THINK GOING TOO MUCH INTO THE DETAILS OF WHEN THEY SHOW UP AND HOW THEY SHOW UP MIGHT, MIGHT HINDER ANY KIND OF INVESTIGATION MOVING FORWARD. SURE. OKAY. AND WE KNOW ABOUT THE THE DEBT OF THIS 
          [03:30:07]
ACCOUNT. DO WE KNOW IF THERE WAS IF THERE WERE ANY CREDITS THAT WERE GIVEN ON THIS ACCOUNT? OR ANY ADJUSTMENTS? THAT'S ANOTHER ITEM. I WOULD ALSO SAY ONGOING. YES. OKAY. THAT'S THAT'S FAIR. AND CURRENTLY THE ONLY THING THAT WE HAVE IS A LIEN IS A POTENTIAL LIEN ON THE PROPERTY. CORRECT. NOW THE LIEN PROCESS WAS A SEPARATE ITEM. WE HAVE NOT EXERCISED OUR RIGHT AND RESPONSIBILITY AS PER THE ORDINANCE. ANY LIEN ON ANY PROPERTY, WE WILL BE MOVING FORWARD WITH LIENS AUTOMATICALLY AS PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY ORDINANCE. THERE ARE SOME MECHANICS TO IT SINCE IT'S NEVER BEEN DONE BEFORE THAT WE'RE IRONING OUT. WE DO EXPECT THAT IT WILL BE IRONED OUT AND WE WOULD BE ABLE TO MOVE ON A CITYWIDE STRATEGY IN NOVEMBER. 
          OKAY. AND I GUESS JUST BIG PICTURE WHEN I THINK ABOUT OTHER UTILITIES FROM OTHER CITIES OR, YOU KNOW, LIKE UTILITIES, THINKING OF CELL PHONES OR CABLE OR REALLY ANY KIND OF BILL THAT TENDS TO GO TO COLLECTIONS. AND THEN A COLLECTIONS AGENCY HELPS COLLECT THE DEBT. ARE WE IN ARE IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THAT WE DO OR ARE CONSIDERING OF DOING. 
          THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TO DO. CERTAINLY WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS. WE DO PLAN ON LOOKING AT THAT WITH THE LEAN PROCESS IS IN PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE LIENS ARE ONLY EXERCISED AGAINST HOMEOWNERS. WE HAVE SIMILAR SITUATIONS WITH RENTERS WHERE COLLECTIONS MAKE MUCH MORE SENSE TO BE OUR ARM TO PURSUE THOSE THOSE OUTSTANDING BALANCES. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANYONE ELSE? COUNCIL MEMBER ATKINS. YES, MR. CITY MANAGER, MY QUESTION IS MORE GLOBAL. I THINK IN YOUR YOUR PRESENTATION, YOU HAD CASE NUMBER THREE. AND I BELIEVE THAT THAT WAS THE ACCOUNT THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ABOUT $55,000. THAT WAS TWO. THERE WAS I THINK THAT IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, THE CITY ATTEMPTED TO DO A WELLNESS CHECK AND THEY WERE PREVENTED FROM ENTERING. 
          IS THAT IS THAT THE CASE? THAT'S CORRECT. SO THAT THAT WAS THE THE AMOUNT FOR THAT ONE WAS $31,480.98. OKAY. THAT'S A SITUATION WHERE THE RESIDENT IS A RENTER AND ALSO IS A RENTER IS A RENTER. OKAY. AND THAT ALSO THAT EXHIBITED SOME SOME ISSUES OF CONFUSION, NOT TO BE ANY KIND OF DIAGNOSIS, BUT WE DID SEND OUT FOLKS TO DO A WELLNESS CHECK. THAT PERSON IS STILL OKAY, BUT THEY'RE CONSCIOUSLY MAKING LIVING WITHOUT UTILITIES OKAY. SO IN TERMS OF LIVING WITHOUT UTILITIES. THAT WOULD POSE HEALTH AND SAFETY HAZARDS AND ISSUES. AND SO, MADAM ATTORNEY, DO WE HAVE ANY TYPE? I KNOW THAT THE STATE OF GEORGIA HAS RECENTLY PASSED, I WANT TO SAY LAST YEAR AND MAYBE CALLED LIKE HOME SAFE OR SAFE HOME ACT, BUT I THINK IT IS GEARED TOWARD LANDLORDS AND NOT HOMEOWNERS. BUT AS IT RELATES TO HEALTH AND SAFETY HAZARDS FOR THE CITY, HOW DO WE ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES, NOT ONLY FOR THE RESIDENT, BUT IF, FOR INSTANCE, DURING THE WINTER MONTHS THEY ARE TRYING TO HEAT WITH ALTERNATIVE HEATING MECHANISMS OR MEASURES, HOUSE CATCHES FIRE, COULD POSE DAMAGE, POSE DANGER TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, EVEN FOR THE PERSON LIVING WITHIN. SO HOW ARE WE ADDRESSING THAT AND DO WE HAVE ANY WAY TO DO THAT WITHIN THE CURRENT LAW? SO YES, THERE IS STATE LAW THAT REQUIRES A HOME TO BE HABITABLE, WHICH INCLUDES WATER AT THE VERY LEAST. BUT THAT WOULD BE A RIGHT, A CAUSE OF ACTION THAT THAT TENANT HAS AGAINST THE LANDLORD. THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PROVIDING A HABITABLE HOME STRUCTURE, LIVING ARRANGEMENTS IS ON THE LANDLORD. AND SO I'M 
          [03:35:02]
NOT SURE WHAT THE CITY'S ROLE WOULD BE IN ASSISTING A PRIVATE CITIZEN WITH PURSUING THAT. 
          WE'RE BACK TO THE GRATUITY ISSUE, BUT THERE IS A REQUIREMENT BY THAT LANDLORD TO PROVIDE HAD A HABITABLE LIVING ARRANGEMENTS, ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE GOING TO RENT THAT UNIT. 
          SO IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT IS OF NO FAULT OF THE LANDLORD. IT IS THE WELL, YOU KNOW WHAT? I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LEASE IS. RIGHT. BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW. 
          IT COULD BE THAT UTILITIES ARE INCLUDED. SO I DON'T KNOW THAT. BUT I KNOW THAT THE ACT THAT THE STATE PASSED WAS GEARED TOWARD LANDLORDS AND MAKING SURE THAT THE THE STRUCTURE OF THE UNIT IS HABITABLE, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE UTILITIES. I JUST GET CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY AND AND THE HEALTH AND SAFETY AND THE HAZARDS THAT THEY POSE FOR THE PERSON LIVING WITHIN THE STRUCTURE AND AS WELL AS THOSE AROUND, PARTICULARLY FOR OUR IN-TOWN NEIGHBORHOODS, WHERE FIRE COULD JUMP EASILY FROM HOUSE TO HOUSE. SO IT POSES A THREAT FOR OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS AS WELL. ONE CONSIDERATION IS TO HAVE CODE CITE THE PROPERTY RIGHT, BECAUSE IT LIKELY IS IN VIOLATION OF SOME CITY CODE VIOLATIONS. IT'S NOT HABITABLE, OBVIOUSLY, AND IT COULD BE DEEMED A NUISANCE. HOWEVER, YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT RESULT MAY REQUIRE THE INDIVIDUAL TO LEAVE THAT PROPERTY, WHICH NOW CREATES ANOTHER CONCERN OF THEM BEING UNHOUSED. AND SO THE POLICE POWER THAT THE CITY HAS TO CITE THE LANDLORD FOR MAINTAINING AN UNINHABITABLE STRUCTURE AND RENTING IT OUT IS AN OPTION. 
          BUT IT COULD CERTAINLY LEAVE THE PERSON LIVING THERE, YOU KNOW, HAVING TO BE EVICTED. 
          OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THOSE ARE THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD AROUND THAT. THANK YOU. I JUST HAD A COUPLE OF FACTS THAT I WAS REMINDED OF WITH THIS CASE. THE RESIDENT IS ALSO BEING SUPPORTED BY NEIGHBORS FOR SOME OF THE DAY TO DAY THINGS LIKE WASHING AND ACCESS TO TEMPERATURE, TEMPERATURE, CLIMATE CONTROLS. ON THOSE DAYS WHERE IT'S NOT COMFORTABLE IN IN HER SPACE. ALSO, CODE ENFORCEMENT HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN THE CONVERSATION. THEY'RE ALSO THE OFFICE OF. OF OF EQUITY. EMPOWERMENT IS ALSO INVOLVED IN THE CONVERSATION. 
          AND SO I KNOW THERE IS SOME CONVERSATIONS EVEN THAT INCLUDED THE LANDLORD. BUT AGAIN, WE'RE VERY LIMITED. AND THIS IS MORE OF MAKING SURE THAT THE RESIDENT IS OKAY IN HER REGIMEN. IN IN LIVING IN IN THE CITY. ANYONE ELSE ON THE UTILITY BILLING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS? OR PRESENTATION? YEAH. COUNCILMEMBER ROGERS, I SENT AN EMAIL EARLIER AND I'LL RESEND IT A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO. I KNOW THAT THE CITY DOES NOT NECESSARILY HAVE A HARDSHIP POLICY, BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR US TO LOOK AT SOMETHING CENTERED AROUND THIS, BECAUSE, I MEAN, SOMEONE LIVING IN THEIR HOME RIGHT NOW, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES THAT WERE JUST DISCUSSED, I THINK AS A CITY TYING IN THE OFFICE OF EQUITY AND INCLUSION IN OTHER RESOURCES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO INDIVIDUALS LIKE THIS WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO ALL. RESIDENTS ACROSS THE BOARD. ALSO MADE MENTION. I KNOW THE LAST TIME I SERVED ON COUNCIL, WE PROVIDED SENIOR RESIDENTS WITH THE $7 DISCOUNT. KEEPING IN LINE WITH WHAT THE CITY CAN AFFORD TO PROVIDE TO THOSE SENIOR RESIDENTS. I WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION ON THAT. AND THERE WAS A THIRD THING. I JUST CANNOT REMEMBER IT RIGHT NOW. 
          BUT TYING IN THIS WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR YOU, MADAM CITY ATTORNEY. DO WE HAVE A MEDICAL ORDINANCE OR SOMETHING THAT ALSO ADDRESSES ISSUES SUCH AS UTILITIES, WATER, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, SERVICES THAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE? BUT MAYBE SOME PEOPLE JUST CANNOT AFFORD TO HAVE THOSE SERVICES PROVIDED. SO I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A DEEPER DIVE IN THAT, AND I'LL FOLLOW WITH THAT. AND I'LL FOLLOW UP TOMORROW WITH THOSE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT I HAVE 
          [03:40:05]
SURRENDERED SURROUNDED AROUND THIS, BUT SOME SOME SORT OF HARDSHIP POLICY ACROSS THE BOARD FOR INDIVIDUALS THAT MAY BE EXPERIENCING FINANCIAL. YEAH, I CAN CERTAINLY RESEARCH THAT I'VE LOST SOME POWERS, WHICH IS WHY I MOVED OVER THERE. BUT I CAN CERTAINLY RESEARCH THAT. 
          ANYONE ELSE? I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER LIGHTS. DO WE HAVE. THAT CONCLUDES THE DISCUSSION ON THE ALL OF THE FINDINGS IN THE AUDIT BY OUR FORENSIC AUDITOR, AS WELL AS OUR CITY MANAGER'S PRESENTATION AS WELL. THERE'S STILL SOME ONGOING WORK SPECIFICALLY AROUND THE CREDIT CARD ISSUE, THE POSITIVE PAY AND THE UTILITY ISSUE, ALONG WITH OTHER POLICIES OR INTERNAL CONTROLS THAT HE'S WORKING THROUGH AS WELL. DO WE HAVE ANY EXECUTIVE SESSION ITEMS FROM LEGAL? CITY CITY MANAGER? NO, I DO NOT. COUNCIL? NO. GREAT. CAN I GET A MOTION TO ADJOURN? SO MOVED. IS THERE A SECOND? IT'S BEEN MOVED AND PROPERLY SECONDED. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? ALL THOSE OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. AND, MADAM CITY CLERK, MAKE SURE FORENSIC AUDIT UPDATE IS ON THE. FIRST MEETING OF THE
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.