discretionary funds http://wfpl.org en Committee to Amend Discretionary Funds Policy http://wfpl.org/post/committee-amend-discretionary-funds-policy <p>The Louisville Metro Council Accountability and Ethics Committee is voting Tuesday on more changes to the policy that governs the distribution of taxpayer dollars to non-profit groups.</p><p>A recent audit found that half of the <a href="http://wfpl.org/post/audit-finds-poor-documentation-council-discretionary-funds">discretionary grants given out by city lawmakers lacked proper documentation</a> to determine if the funds were being spent properly.</p><p>Councilman Jerry Miller, R-19, is chairman of the accountability committee and a co-sponsor of the proposal along with Council President Jim King, D-10. He says the amendments being proposed give non-profit groups clear guidelines and should help restore public trust.</p><p>"The resolution that we’re going to hear today will start us on the path of restoring public confidence in this process, regardless of what individual council people—including myself—think of the overall process we have to be able to restore confidence that public funds are being used appropriately," says Miller.</p><p> Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:47:23 +0000 Phillip M. Bailey 1700 at http://wfpl.org Council Committee to Discuss Discretionary Fund Audit Report http://wfpl.org/post/council-committee-discuss-discretionary-fund-audit-report <p>The Louisville Metro Council&rsquo;s Government Accountability Committee will meet Tuesday to discuss recommendations from a <a href="http://wfpl.org/post/audit-finds-poor-documentation-council-discretionary-funds">troubling audit report that found a lack of oversight in discretionary grant</a> spending.</p><p>Last month, a review of Neighborhood Development Fund grants from the past two fiscal years showed half of the $1.9 million grants awarded during that period lacked proper documentation. It also found inconsistencies and a vague criteria for non-profit groups receiving city funds, including over $6,500 in funds that were spent out of compliance with Metro Government rules.</p><p>The audit specifically mentioned Councilwoman Barbara Shanklin, D-2, who faces an ethics complaint after a series of controversies were reported about her office&rsquo;s discretionary spending.</p><p>Councilman Jerry Miller, R-19, is chairman of the government accountability committee. He says the panel will address the community&rsquo;s growing concerns about how those grants are approved and monitored, but told WFPL the committee will avoid any mention of the Shanklin case specifically.</p><p>&quot;I think it will be good for the public to hear the recommendations and the findings, and how we are going to begin making the changes in the process to hopefully restore the public&rsquo;s confidence,&quot; he says.</p><p> Mon, 30 Jul 2012 20:46:22 +0000 Phillip M. Bailey 1167 at http://wfpl.org Audit Finds Poor Documentation of Council Discretionary Funds http://wfpl.org/post/audit-finds-poor-documentation-council-discretionary-funds <p>An internal audit has found half of the grant from the Louisville Metro Council lacked sufficient documentation to determine if the discretionary funds were spent as intended.</p><p>Last year, Council President Jim King, D-10, ordered the review in the wake of the ethics controversy involving former Councilwoman Judy Green, who was booted from office over misuse of Neighborhood Development Funds.</p><p>The audit looked at 117 grants over the past two fiscal years totaling more $1.9 million in taxpayer dollars and found no wrongdoing. However, it showed the majority of the council&rsquo;s Neighborhood Development Funds had missing proof of payment, unallowable expenditures or poor documentation to account for the grants.</p><p>&quot;The audit was difficult to conduct in that there was a lack of monitoring in place prior to the new administration being there,&quot; says Internal Auditor Ingram Quick, adding the lack of documentation of the grants is troubling.</p><p>Among the findings are approximately $238,000 of expenditures in which proof of payment was not provided to the city. It also found inconsistencies and a vague criteria for non-profit groups receiving city funds, including over $6,500 in funds that were spent out of compliance with Metro Government rules.</p><div><p> Wed, 27 Jun 2012 21:12:46 +0000 Phillip M. Bailey 822 at http://wfpl.org