Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the ARPA Spending topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident warns Royal Oak commission of ARPA spending deadline, flags procurement risks
Summary
A resident urged the Royal Oak commission to accelerate and document spending of $28 million in ARPA funds, warning of U.S. Treasury deadlines and possible disallowed expenditures if procurement rules were not followed.
Royal Oak — During public comment at the Aug. 11 City Commission meeting, resident Janice Wegman urged the commission to provide clearer tracking and accountability for roughly $28 million in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds.
Wegman told the commission that ARPA requires not only that money be committed but that funds be spent — "checks written" — by the end of next year or the city could be required to return unspent funds to the U.S. Treasury. She cited specific allocations that she said have stalled or changed since they were approved, including a Farmers Market restroom ($200,000 allocation referenced in the meeting materials) and an animal shelter project for which she said there is a separate $1,100,000 allocation.
"I'm concerned about the city's progress in spending our 28,000,000 in our American Rescue Plan Act funds," Wegman said. "We have to actually spend it and have the checks written by the end of next year." She also raised procurement concerns, saying some architectural contracts and consultant work for ARPA-funded projects may not have been competitively bid and could therefore be ineligible under Treasury guidance.
Wegman urged the commission to review ARPA allocations now, confirm that procurement for each contract complies with Treasury rules, finalize a clear project list, and accelerate work to avoid clawbacks or disallowed costs. She asked that ARPA allocations be added to a future meeting agenda rather than only appearing as a spreadsheet in the consent packet.
The comment received no direct response during public comment. Staff and commissioners discussed ARPA-funded projects at later agenda items but did not provide a specific timeline in response to Wegman's request during the meeting. The comment is a procedural request for follow-up and documentation rather than a formal assertion of wrongdoing.
