Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the ARPA Allocations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Legislature begins ARPA outside-agency allocation process; members demand transparency on evaluator scoring and pay
Summary
Legislators introduced a plan to allocate $35 million in ARPA outside-agency funds using outside evaluators and a spreadsheet-based process; a dispute arose over whether evaluators were paid, prompting calls for transparency and possible auditor review.
Jackson County legislators on Dec. 15 introduced a process to allocate a portion of the county's remaining American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds to outside agencies and debated evaluator selection, transparency and compensation.
Legislator Sean Smith described the process as one in which external evaluators reviewed applications against agreed criteria and produced scored recommendations. He said the legislative auditor's office and outside evaluators compiled average scores and that each legislator would receive a spreadsheet listing applicant names, a summary description of each request and the evaluators’ averaged score to use as a starting point for allocating up to $35 million for outside agencies.
Smith and other legislators emphasized the intent to provide each legislator the same materials used by the evaluation teams so members could independently weigh requests. “The spreadsheet will list the agency, the general description of the request, along with access to all the documentation associated with the request and what the evaluators scored,” one sponsor said.
A contentious exchange followed about whether external evaluators had been paid. Legislator Smith said he found entries in Workday that appeared to show four checks for $5,000 each dated Dec. 4. The county’s auditor’s office responded that purchase orders to encumber funds had been cut in anticipation of possible payment but that, to the auditor’s knowledge, no disbursements had been made; purchase orders had been canceled after the number of evaluators changed. An auditor’s representative told the body purchase orders were canceled and that no evaluator had been paid. The auditor later said future compensation was under discussion and that an amount of $2,000 per evaluator had been considered.
Lawmakers asked for fuller documentation of the scoring criteria and for the auditor and evaluators to provide transparency about their methodology before the legislature finalizes funding decisions.
Separately, the county executive asked the legislature to formally request a Missouri State Auditor review of ARPA spending (an idea some legislators supported as a way to increase public confidence).
Legislators planned to receive the summary spreadsheet and linked application materials immediately and expected to meet again in a special session to finalize outside-agency allocations after input from each member.
