Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Oversight Grant Pecom topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and some board members press for review after grant-funded PECOM position resigns; audit release vote also fails
Summary
Multiple public commenters and several board members raised detailed concerns about spending, mileage claims and lack of oversight related to a part-time PECOM position funded by grant dollars; the board also voted down a motion to release a dive-team forensic audit.
Public comment at the Shelby County Board meeting focused heavily on oversight questions tied to a part-time PECOM position and other recent county spending.
Several residents and at least two board members described invoices and receipts for equipment and services (including a desktop, laptop, Starlink mobile internet, and a ChatGPT subscription) they said were purchased under a grant for the PECOM position and questioned whether the purchases were necessary or properly documented. "There are receipts. There are receipts," one board member said, urging investigation and inventory. Another said the position logged mileage and time irregularities and worked from home without standard supervision.
Board member Julie (last name on roll) said she and the clerk inventoried items after the employee resigned and found a desktop that had been turned on once; she asked whether grant purchases were inventoried and whether reimbursements could be denied if audits fail. The state's attorney and county staff confirmed some grant audits remained incomplete; the county risked being unable to serve as a grantee until FY24 audits are finished.
In a related vote the board considered whether to release a forensic audit of the county dive team conducted by Benford & Brown in 2024. Proponents argued taxpayer-paid audits should be public; opponents said portions of the draft included material unrelated to the dive team. The motion to release the audit failed on a roll-call vote (five yes votes; motion failed).
County officials said the sheriff referred allegations to the state police for investigation. CFS staff and the county's attorney advised that some grant items bought for the PECOM program belong to the grant recipient (CFS) and should be returned or otherwise reconciled during audit.
Board members and public commenters asked for clearer procedures for claims processing, greater oversight of grant-funded positions, and timely completion of audits. The board did not take a personnel action as part of public comment; county staff said any criminal investigation would be handled by law enforcement.
The county will continue reconciling grant inventories and audit records and members urged more formal documentation of oversight procedures.
