Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sdi Funds Forensic Audit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council directs manager to pursue SDI records, schedule SDI committee meeting and await forensic‑audit results before fiduciary changes
Summary
Council and the SDI advisory group discussed a long-running review of SDI funds, requested additional document collection for a forensic audit and agreed to wait for the audit’s findings before pursuing any transfer of funds to a public fiduciary.
The council and members of the city’s SDI advisory committee used an Oct. 14 agenda item to press for documents and clarity about SDI (Special Development Impact) funds and to establish next steps for a forensic audit already underway.
SDI committee member Selena Coleman told the council the SDI ordinance requires quarterly reporting and other disclosures that the committee has not consistently received. Committee members said quarterly SDI reports due in June and September had not been provided in a timely manner and asked the council to direct staff and outside vendors to produce the documents needed for the ongoing forensic audit. Committee members recommended the city obtain documents from banks and brokers that have worked with SDI funds, including US Bank, Duncan Williams, South State Bank and others listed in the staff packet.
City Manager Chris Lopez said staff would work with outside contractors as necessary. After discussion the council gave direction to the city manager to pursue the SDI documents from outside vendors and to schedule an SDI committee meeting to review findings. Councilmembers and committee members agreed the next prudent step is to wait for the forensic audit report to be completed before initiating a request to transfer funds to a public fiduciary; several speakers said such a transfer would require filing a motion with the federal court that retains jurisdiction over the SDI settlement.
Members of the public and SDI committee emphasized transparency, record retention, an updated SDI investment policy and clarity on which tracts are covered by the SDI fund. The committee cited roughly 22,000 SDI parcels (the majority in the “second community”) and said the SDI fund was intended to serve water and street improvements for specific tracts. Committee members asked the city to clarify the current per-tract status and to ensure SDI investment policy reviews occur annually consistent with the municipal code.
Ending: Council directed staff to pursue outstanding SDI documents needed for the forensic audit, to schedule the SDI committee meeting and to wait for the audit’s conclusions before pursuing more significant fiduciary changes or court filings.
