Part 4: National Park City Data Dump & TCA Violations
- FOH Admin
- May 5
- 4 min read
FOH recieved a new ORR DATA DUMP on the National Park Cities see attached files.
(files at the bottom)
The investigation continues and more groups are joining the DEEP DIVE into this investigation, laws, NGOs tied this organizations which are interesecting in other investigations around brown fields and more. Just a review of the relationships, NGO and public assets involved against Tennessee Law and City of Chattanooga Code a number of things come to light.
The use and movement of tax payer resources/assets without public oversight/participation is very concerning.
More deeper dives coming.
Here is a cursory analysis, but encourage other investigators, journalist, district attorneys and others groups to review the information for their own investigation and the networks.
Issue area | Observations | Statutes/Rules Implicated | Why it matters |
A. Conflict‑of‑interest & self‑dealing | • Mayor Tim Kelly (Chair) and Councilor Isiah Hester (Vice‑Chair) sit on, direct, and potentially fund‑raise for NPC while simultaneously appropriating or overseeing City assets that benefit NPC/FOC activities. • City Parks Administrator is an ex‑officio board member of FOC (City–FOC MOU, ¶12). | T.C.A. § 12‑4‑101 (municipal officers “indirect interest” in contracts); T.C.A. § 8‑17‑101 et seq. (Municipal ethics requirements); Chattanooga Code § 2‑761 et seq. (City Ethics Ordinance). | Holds officials to a fiduciary duty; indirect control over a 7 % fee stream to FOC may constitute a prohibited pecuniary benefit. |
B. Use of public resources for a private 501(c)(3) | City promises free office/meeting space, mail services, brochure placement and “operational support, such as the use of equipment or staff” for FOC programs (City–FOC MOU, ¶¶8‑10). | T.C.A. § 6‑54‑111 (prohibits use of municipal time, facilities, equipment or supplies for personal or non‑governmental gain); T.C.A. § 39‑16‑402 (Official misconduct—misuse of property); Chattanooga Code § 2‑430 (disposal of City property) & § 2‑506 (in‑kind contributions require Council approval). | Providing rent, staff time and mail service without appropriation or fee schedule may be an unlawful gift of public assets. |
C. Disposition of City‑funded equipment | Equipment purchased with private dollars but maintained by City until end‑of‑life is to be “returned to FOC” (City–FOC MOU, ¶7). | T.C.A. § 12‑2‑421 (surplus personal property—public sale requirement); Chattanooga Code § 2‑434 (surplus procedures). | Returning assets directly to a private entity may bypass mandatory public auction, violating surplus‑property law. |
D. Non‑binding / unsigned MOUs | The City–FOC MOU states it “does not constitute … a contract,” yet obligates the City to provide resources; signature block shows no date for FOC. The NPC fiscal‑sponsorship MOU is likewise designated “Non‑Binding.” | T.C.A. § 9‑21‑109 (obligations must be duly authorized); City Charter § 13.19 (contracts require execution and approval). | Lack of enforceable agreement and missing signatures expose the City to audit findings and reputational risk. |
E. Fiscal‑sponsorship fee & fund‑flow opacity | FOC will assess a 7 % fee on all NPC monies and “segregate on FOC’s balance sheet” the NPC funds. City officials (who chair NPC) could influence fundraising that generates fees for FOC, a private group on whose board a City employee sits. | T.C.A. § 9‑3‑207 (Uniform Financial Procedures); T.C.A. § 12‑4‑101(b) (indirect financial benefit); TN Comptroller “Audit Manual for Non‑profits Receiving Public Funds.” | Potential steering of public or grant dollars through a third party that keeps a fee without competitive procurement. |
F. Grant‑seeking & marketing approvals | MOU lets FOC “jointly develop projects” and pursue foundation, state or federal grants using City programming (City–FOC MOU, ¶4) while all media releases “will be agreed and approved by both parties” (¶11). | T.C.A. § 12‑3‑1209 (competitive grant management & reporting); TN Open Records & Sunshine laws T.C.A. § 8‑44‑101 (public meetings). | Risk of opaque grant submissions and non‑public decision‑making—possible Sunshine‑law exposure. |
### 2 Additional Red‑Flags
Segregation of Duties – NPC fund approval and expenditure oversight are both controlled by the same small circle (Mayor, Parks staff, FOC executives). No independent City Finance review evident.
Lack of Council Ratification – Neither MOU references Chattanooga City Council approval, appropriation ordinance, or bid waiver.
Title VI & Equity Questions – If City assets are used to support programs administered by a private fiscal sponsor, it triggers federal nondiscrimination and single‑audit requirements; no clauses found.
Public‑Private Branding – Joint marketing may give an impression of official City endorsement of NPC fund‑raising solicitations; could violate TN “Little Hatch Act” restrictions on the use of governmental insignia in private fundraising.
Record‑Retention & Open Records – FOC is not expressly required to keep records in a format subject to the TN Public Records Act, yet it is holding and spending resources on City‑related projects.
Priority | Action | Rationale |
High | Obtain City Council resolutions, procurement files, or legal opinions that authorized the in‑kind support bundle to FOC/NPC. | Validate legal basis under T.C.A. § 6‑54‑111 and City Code. |
High | Demand full, audited schedules of NPC‑related revenue & expenses, including the 7 % fee accruals, and verify segregation on FOC’s ledgers. | Detect any commingling or unallowable costs. |
High | Review conflict‑of‑interest disclosures for Mayor, Councilor, Parks staff; confirm they filed statements per Chattanooga Ethics Ordinance. | Identify prohibited indirect interests. |
Medium | Examine surplus‑property logs to see whether City equipment has been “returned” to FOC without auction. | Potential disposition violation. |
Medium | Require written, binding agreements drafted in compliance with City Charter § 13 and vetted by City Attorney; ensure termination, indemnity, audit‑access clauses. | Reduce liability and improve enforceability. |
Medium | Perform site‑visits to confirm extent of free office, storage or mail services provided; estimate fair‑market rental value for possible restitution. | Quantify any unlawful gifts of public property. |
Low | Survey other TN cities for benchmark practices on fiscal sponsorships to validate or critique the 7 % fee arrangement. | Governance best practice. |
### 4 Statutory & Code References (non‑exhaustive)
T.C.A. § 6‑54‑111 – Misuse of municipal property; misdemeanor offense.
T.C.A. § 12‑4‑101 – Conflicts of interest in municipal contracts.
T.C.A. § 8‑17‑101 et seq. – Municipal Ethics Policy Act.
T.C.A. § 39‑16‑402 – Official Misconduct (improper benefits, misuse of property).
T.C.A. § 12‑2‑421 – Disposal of surplus personal property.
Chattanooga City Code § 2‑430 – 2‑434 – Surplus property procedures.
Chattanooga City Code § 2‑761 et seq. – Ethics Ordinance; disclosure & recusals.
City Charter § 13 – Execution of municipal contracts.
Comments