Summary of Finance Committee Meeting of 21 February 2006

Present:

            Finance Committee:  Phyllis Benaman, John Frisch, Sanya Ham, Don Horan, Jim Pierce, Jean Strub

            Board of Directors (BoD):  Mal Malo, Bill Nosal, Jackie Richards

The draft Contract Guidelines created by Paul Rankin and Sanya Ham were discussed at length.  It was felt that the draft guidelines are generally good, but there are a couple of points that need additional thought.  The draft guidelines say that all procurements exceeding $500 will be competed.  This precludes simple renewal of an existing contract in which the supplier is providing acceptable service at a fair price, so some words are needed to give the Board of Directors (BoD) some leeway on which procurements will be obtained through competed contracts.  The draft guidelines could be interpreted to imply that a statement of work is not needed if a contract will not be competed.  This will be reworded to say that a statement of work will be needed for any significant procurement.  The statement of work will serve as a partial basis for the BoD’s decision to compete a contract or not.  Modification of wording concerning a contractor’s liability insurance was also suggested, and this will be incorporated.  After rewording the draft guidelines, the Finance Committee will submit the proposed guidelines to the BoD for their approval.

 Sylva Southwell of Koger Management has responded to our request for verification that our contracting alert list shows all contracts in force.  There are a few contracts that are not on our list, and our list will be corrected.  It was noted that Sylva’s information carries a different cost for the Shenandoah Landscape Services contract.  Her cost figure excludes options, and our cost figure includes options.  Although we have access to an unsigned copy of the Shenandoah contract, we will need a signed, dated copy to know whether the options are included or not.

 Many of the contract copies we have are undated or unsigned.  It is important that we get a signed, dated copy of every contract in force.  We will start working on this.

 Sanya Ham has been doing a financial analysis of the contracts in force.  This will continue.

 The Finance Committee was asked to look at the Assessments Section of the C, C, & Rs to see if revision is needed.  The consensus was that references to “neighborhoods” and “declarant control” should be eliminated, but this was already done by the BoD with their 28 February revision.  It was suggested that it might be good to point out in the Assessments Section that the Villas - specific assessment was controlled by the Villas BoD, and not the Falls Run Community Association BoD.

 There has been no action on the task of monitoring the Community Center account.  A meeting with Ann Jones is scheduled for 22 February to begin this process.

 The 31 January 2006 Balance Sheet, Budget Comparison Report, and Purchase History provided by Koger Management was discussed, based on a detailed analysis of the reports provided by Jean Strub.  A substantial number of invoices, 32 of the 67 items on the Purchase History, need additional information and/or verification to insure they were not duplicate payments, charged to incorrect accounting period/year or charged to incorrect expenditure account.  More complete explanations for expenditures to individuals are also needed, primarily for the protection of the individuals receiving the payment.  It was agreed that there should be a meeting with Sylva Southwell of Koger Management so we could better understand the procedures by which incoming invoices are received, reviewed, approved, coded against budget categories, paid, and entered into the data base.  Then we would go to the Koger offices in Fairfax to examine specific invoices.