The Amarillo City Council provided an update on the allegations of misuse of funds with the Amarillo Economic Development Corporation at Tuesday’s city council meeting.
The city council talked with the city’s auditor, the AEDC executive director and the city manager about steps forward for the AEDC.
The allegations began when a concerned citizen brought forth claims that the AEDC mishandled money when paying dues to a nonprofit called The Range.
Mayor Cole Stanley and Council Member Les Simpson highlighted what that means as the city and AEDC try to move forward.
“If we tried to project and said, hey, this is the only thing that we’ve seen, then it makes it very peculiar in its nature, which makes it more important, I think, to hold in a corrective measure for that one item,” said Stanley. “If we had a business practice, then we would need to go back and look at why are we doing business that way? So, I think it’s both good and bad in what we’re seeing.”
The AEDC also discussed two new policies they put in place at their board meeting.
“Any line item is budgeted, any we go over that by $50,000. Anything over that, we have to be approved by our board and the city council, and then there’s not a line item budget,” said AEDC Director, Scott Bentley. “We could anything over anything that’s not line item budget, $50,000 more has to be approved by our board and the city council, and other thing we approved was any expenditure at all, no matter what it is, it’s over, if it’s over, half a million dollars has to be signed off by our board chair, and then it’ll go to the city to be paid.”
Bently added that they want to do what’s best to make sure the right procedures are in place so that AEDC Board Members know what can and cannot be done.
A major point of discussion surrounded if AEDC’s budget for the next fiscal year should be approved and if it should have stipulations.
“I’m going to tell you straight out, until we get to the bottom of this, this is ugly. The citizens do not like it, it looks like business as usual downtown. And me, as one, will not approve, I will vote against any budget until we get it fixed,” said Tom Scherlen, councilmember for the city of Amarillo.
“We’ll have a constrained budget with a few additional policy measures the AEDC brought in, as well as recommendations from our staff that will go ahead and pass Sept. 30, which is Monday, and so the budget we could put behind us, and then we’re going to focus on financial review and potential corrective action,” said Stanley.
“I’m fine with approving the budget as is. I trust the EDC to do it. Of all the times to think that the EDC would try to do something when all this attention is on them, that just doesn’t make sense to me. I trust the people. I trust the staff. I trust the board, the the and that’s the way that I felt about it,” said Simpson.
According to the city of Amarillo’s Internal Auditor, U’neill Gerber, 98 hours were spent auditing AEDC’s budget over the past three years with no inconsistencies.
Gerber said he should have a rough draft competed next Friday for council and the AEDC to look over.
Simpson asked what the end goal was. “Are we looking to eliminate the AEDC? Are we looking to clean house? Are we looking to get a pound of flesh? What are we looking to do here?” He cited the council removing $200,000 from the AEDC budget for funding the WT Enterprize Challenge in 2023 and shifting money away from AEDC incentives as examples.
“Are there not more serious problems that we have to be spending council time and staff on than this? I mean, of all the challenges we face, water and sewer lines older than any of us, wastewater treatment plants. Does the AEDC even rank on the first page of that list of problems that we’re facing?” Simpson said. He expressed concern that the council appearing to be at odds with the AEDC might impact their ability to recruit businesses to Amarillo.
Scherlen said that he didn’t think they were against the AEDC, but they needed to hold them accountable. He felt that the AEDC lost the respect of the taxpayers. Stanley agreed that they were not at odds with the AEDC and that this was not personal. Councilmember Place 2 Don Tipps said that the council had a duty to the taxpayers and that policy needs to be implemented so this doesn’t happen again.
It sounds like there’s quite a bit of tension and concern regarding the AEDC. The council members seem to be debating the best way to handle the situation, especially after the $750,000 wire transfer to The Range without council approval.
Simpson’s comments highlight a broader concern about prioritizing issues that directly impact the community, like infrastructure, over internal financial disputes. On the other hand, Scherlen and Stanley emphasize the need for accountability and transparency to maintain public trust.
It seems like the council is trying to find a balance between holding the AEDC accountable and ensuring that their actions don’t negatively impact Amarillo’s ability to attract new businesses.
On one hand, Simpson’s focus on prioritizing community-impacting issues like infrastructure is crucial. It’s essential for the council to address immediate needs that directly affect residents’ daily lives.
However, ensuring accountability and transparency, as emphasized by Council Members Scherlen and Stanley, is equally important. Public trust is foundational for any governmental body, and maintaining it requires strict adherence to legal and ethical standards3.
Balancing these priorities is challenging but necessary. The council’s efforts to implement tighter financial policies and conduct thorough audits are steps in the right direction2. This approach not only addresses the immediate concerns but also sets a precedent for future operations, ensuring that the AEDC can continue to attract new businesses without compromising on accountability.
What are your thoughts on this situation?
