Funds not meant for use statewide, senator argues
Posted on Wednesday, January 30, 2008
State Sen. Gene Jeffress argued before the state Athletic Commission on Tuesday that $ 100, 000 he helped get last year for the commission to benefit Boys and Girls Clubs was meant only for two clubs, both in his district, and not for any of the other clubs in the state.
The bill appropriating the money from the state’s General Improvement Fund had to be worded without those specifics to avoid conflicting with a December 2006 Supreme Court decision that said appropriating state funds to specific local projects was unconstitutional, Jeffress said.
Faced with Jeffress’ argument, the commission voted Tuesday to rescind its October decision to distribute the money equally to the 33 Boys and Girls Clubs in the state.
The commission again will take up the issue of how to distribute the money at a special meeting in a couple of weeks.
A good bit of the 2007 legislative session was taken up with the Legislature deciding how it would respond to the Supreme Court, which said the state constitution’s prohibition of local and special legislation banned appropriating state funds to specific local projects.
At one point, lawmakers considered setting up a commission, largely controlled by legislative appointees, to dole out money.
But in the end, they decided to honor the traditional system by appropriating money to executive branch agencies, with legislators having to make their pitch for support for particular projects and accepting the executive branch decision about whether to grant the legislators’ wishes.
State Sen. Bob Johnson, DBigelow, whose $ 400, 000 appropriation for Bigelow led to the Supreme Court ruling, said last February that lawmakers would have to accept the separate authority of the executive branch and that agencies wouldn’t “necessarily” do what legislators wanted.
“They have their responsibilities, and I wouldn’t expect them to simply fall in line,” Johnson said. “They’re going to look at these things in a scrutinizing way.”
Jeffress, D-Louann, told the Athletic Commission on Tuesday he was approached by representatives of the Boys and Girls Clubs in Camden and El Dorado. They said there was a need for improvements.
So he sponsored a bill appropriating $ 125, 000. The bill became Act ©6 of 2007 and is titled: “An act to make an appropriation to the state Athletic Commission for grants to various Boys and Girls Clubs in Arkansas; and for other purposes.” It did not specifically mention any particular club.
But Jeffress told the commission that his intent all along was to benefit the two clubs, with $ 75, 000 going to the El Dorado club and $ 25, 000 to the Camden club. Only $ 100, 000 of the $ 125, 000 appropriation was actually funded.
“We have to run our funds through a state agency or commission,” Jeffress told commission members, explaining why the appropriation mentioned the athletic commission instead of going directly to the two local clubs.
He said he was surprised to find that the commission decided at its October meeting to equally distribute the money. He should have been given the opportunity to speak to the commission at that time, he said.
“We didn’t have any direction as to how the money was to be distributed,” Commission Chairman Francis O’Brien of Midway explained Tuesday. “We just did what we thought was fair.”
Jeffress responded: “I’m here pleading my case. I’m telling you what was the intent.”
“I’m not here to be the big bully,” the senator said.
Jeffress said other legislators could have asked for General Improvement Fund money to benefit clubs in their districts, but they didn’t.
Commission Secretary John Mattingly said he was told that the commission risked a lawsuit if it distributed the money only to clubs in Camden and El Dorado.
“I was advised that we had to be careful of what we did so we didn’t get sued by another Boys and Girls Club,” Mattingly said.
“I think you can get sued either way,” Jeffress said. “And that’s not a threat.”
After the meeting, Mattingly said that advice came in a conversation with someone at the state Department of Finance and Administration.
“What’s the fair thing to do ?” Commissioner James Massey asked Jeffress. “What about these other 31 clubs ? What about their needs ?”
Jeffress said he understood the commission could do whatever its members decided with the money, but said other legislators had the same opportunity he did.
“I did not seek $ 3, 000 for each one,” he said. “I sought $ 75, 000 and $ 25, 000.”
“Do you think I would have sent $ 100, 000 this way if I didn’t expect to get it back ?” he asked. “I’m sorry, but I don’t represent Corning or West Helena. I got the money for the district I represent.
“ My concern is for my district first,” he said.
Commissioner Richard Anderson said he felt as if Jeffress was trying to strong-arm the commission.
“I’ve been punching and kicking for 39 years, and I don’t understand it clearly yet,” he said. “But I feel like my arm is being twisted.”
Jeffress responded: “I feel like I’m fighting for my folks in El Dorado.”
The commission decided to ask for documentation from the state Senate as to the legislative intent of the law.
“Once we have that material, we should distribute the money according to the intent,” Commissioner James Gilbert said in his motion.
Mattingly said that he had already told two or three other clubs that the money would be equally distributed.
“We’re supposed to comply with what the state says,” Mattingly said. “We’re the one that has to take the heat if the decision is wrong. We have to take that into account.”
After the meeting, Jeffress said the Supreme Court decision was the reason the legislation didn’t mention specific clubs.
“It was just the way it had to be written,” he said.
Jeffress said he was disappointed with the commission’s decision to put off a decision for two weeks “and I hope they do the right thing.”
FEEDBACK:
Something to say about this topic? Submit a Letter to the Editor online
