Mayor Lee Harris and members of the Shelby County Commission have hashed out a framework of proposed reforms to the county’s community grant system.
Under the current system, commissioners have no oversight of grants once they are awarded. Furthermore, with no “guidelines” for use, a recipient organization is free to spend the grant money however it pleases.
“They’re not obligated to do anything. They can just give themselves a bonus … merely reporting they gave themselves an end-of-year bonus, there’s no reason they couldn’t do that,” Harris said during a subcommittee meeting March 19. “They get the money, and they are free to do with it what they want to do with it, which is how grants normally work.”
Part of the reason for a lack of oversight is because grants are not contractual. They are “agreements.” The only signature required on the check is the applicant’s. They are approved by the commission via resolution. The administration simply cuts the check.
“The overall problem you have is you have no checks and balances. If you do everything from one branch of government, most people would argue that sooner or later, that’s going to go sideways. Because there is no other branch of government involved in the process to check and hold accountable what one branch is doing,” Harris said.
Members slated an upcoming meeting for April 2 to discuss adding a layer of oversight. The proposed language would ensure the grant money is being spent for its intended purpose.
“It really is the end result. What are we looking at in the end to make sure it’s being used as it was said it would be? And with strong guidelines, making sure it’s not used for reasons other than what was applied for,” said Commissioner Shante Avant.
The reforms are part of a larger discussion about ethics underway in the commission. Interest was spurred by the Feb. 28 arrest of Commissioner Edmund Ford Jr. on bribery and kickback charges related to grants he sponsored. The awarded nonprofits allegedly funneled money back to Ford-owned businesses, including the purchase of laptop computers. Ford has also been indicted on six charges of tax evasion related to the matter.
The behavior allegedly occurred during Ford’s time on the commission and on the Memphis City Council. Ford briefly served on both government bodies before his council term expired in 2018. He served on the council for 11 years.
“This is a situation where we are hearing that an individual, sadly a part of this body, allegedly did something,” said Subcommittee Chair Charlie Caswell Jr.
As a result, colleagues are currently crafting an ordinance that would revive the defunct Shelby County Ethics Commission. Created in 2011 by a commission resolution, the ethics panel has never gathered enough of its volunteer members in meetings to have a quorum. As a result, no vote or action could officially take place.
To simplify the problem, the administration has sponsored an ordinance to decrease membership from 13 to seven members. Harris also supports language to remove a requirement that three members be retired judges and another three be attorneys.
Commissioner Amber Mills took issue with the proposal. Its introduction on March 5 was only a week after Ford’s arrest. The issue is about “Lee Harris versus Edmund Ford Jr. Another commission and administration should take it up at a later date,” she said.
Harris denied the accusation.
“One of the priorities when I came into office was a review of the ethics chapter,” Harris defended. “That slate of reforms has never been brought before the commission.”
The main reason, according to Harris, was a lack of interest on the part of commissioners.
“The commission didn’t necessarily want to go down that road at that time. But if the commission is prepared now, or sometime in the future, to hear those proposals, we would be enthusiastic about bringing those proposals forward,” Harris said.
According to Harris, the proposals were put together over the course of “several years,” following talks with “every expert in Memphis and Shelby County.” The administration also reached out to ethics experts throughout the state. They also held one-on-one discussions with commissioners.
Another ordinance under consideration would incorporate the state’s definition of “conflict of interest” into the county charter. The proposed charter amendment would apply to elected county officials, officers and employees.
Its language would also reflect the state law’s definition of “indirect interest” and a “controlling interest” of a company, as well as how both are presented in a contract.
