Kyle City Council directs staff to outline options for independent forensic audit after heated debate

The Kyle City Council voted on June 2 to direct the city manager to return with options for a third‑party forensic audit of city finances, authorizing staff to present proposed scope, timelines and cost estimates.

The motion, approved 5–2 after nearly two hours of exchange, will require the interim city manager to solicit proposals and report back to council. Council members who supported the measure said the step is intended to restore public confidence and identify the causes of the city’s recently disclosed budget shortfall.

“Trust but verify must become the new standard moving forward,” resident Alicia Hill told the council during public comment, urging a forensic review that would examine possible misuse of taxpayer funds. Council Member Melissa Medina, who led the item’s introduction, said the request “does not presume wrongdoing” but would let professionals examine transactions and controls that a standard financial audit typically does not cover.

Opponents said the idea risked politicizing city resources and could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars without clear probable cause. Council Member Harris called the approach an “exceptionally expensive fishing expedition” and said the city’s independent annual auditors and the finance director had not identified fraud during regular audits.

Supporters questioned whether sampling‑based annual audits could robustly address the questions raised by residents and several council members. “We’re $14 million below our budget and we need to know why,” one supporter told the council during the hearing.

Council’s motion directs staff to return with: proposed scopes of work for one or more forensic review firms, cost estimates and timelines for a range of reviews (limited scopes through wide, retrospective reviews), an estimated public‑report timeline, and recommended procurement steps. The city will evaluate whether to pursue a focused engagement (for example, credit cards, procurement, select contracts) or a broader financial forensics engagement.

The action was procedural: staff must present options and cost estimates; no contract was awarded at the June 2 meeting. The City Clerk recorded the roll‑call vote as 5 in favor and 2 opposed; the council asked staff to bring proposals back for public consideration before any contract award.

Next steps: staff will issue an internal request for scoping options and expected fees and present them to council at a future meeting, at which time council may authorize procurement and contract awards.