Prosecuting attorneys do not file charges in the majority of cases referred to them by Arkansas Legislative Audit officials, legislators were told Friday.
Of the cases prosecutors have reviewed from state auditors, fewer than one-quarter have led to criminal charges since 2014, Arkansas Legislative Audit officials told the Joint Audit Committee on Friday.
Lawmakers were concerned that dishonest government workers would not be deterred by the work of state auditors if it isn't followed up with criminal prosecution.
"The credibility of Legislative Audit -- for this institution as a whole -- we have got to be able to maintain that so that whenever these [matters] come before you, these people have got to know that there are consequences to those actions," said Sen. Jimmy Hickey, R-Texarkana. "We're watchdog over billions of dollars."
But prosecutors said there often isn't enough evidence for a jury to be sure of wrongdoing.
"Our job is not to win at all costs," said Cody Hiland, the prosecutor for the 20th Judicial Circuit, which includes Faulkner, Searcy and Van Buren counties. "Our job as prosecutors is to seek justice and that requires us to adhere to ethical responsibilities and standards as it relates to evidentiary matters. We have to have evidence to build a case."
Of the 259 matters referred between Jan. 1, 2014, and Sept. 18, 2015, prosecutors filed charges in 50 instances and 44 matters were under review.
Prosecutors said there was insufficient evidence to sustain a criminal case for 87 matters. In other cases, they said they decided not to prosecute because it would not be in the public interest.
A 100-page report reviewed by the committee Friday listed the status of the matters referred by the Legislative Joint Auditing Committee.
In many cases, legislative auditors find individuals under investigation repay missing money and leave government employment.
For example, no action has been taken by prosecutors against former Lt. Gov. Mark Darr. The matter was instead handled by the state's Ethics Commission.
Darr put $2,648 in personal expenses on a state credit card, spent $2,755 in taxpayer money without providing supporting documentation to justify the purchases and made $10,302 in transactions that violated state travel regulations.
The state's Ethic Commission fined Darr $11,000. Darr also reimbursed the state $10,973.
Darr and his wife filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection in June.
Legislators were particularly interested in problems in Texarkana, where former City Manager Harold Boldt improperly waived building permit fees and reduced water rates for a water park that the city had agreed to subsidize up to $250,000 a year for 20 years, according to an Arkansas Legislative Audit report.
Among other issues, Boldt also improperly requested $584,500 be transferred from the Arkansas Infrastructure Fund to pay for furniture, fixtures and other equipment at a privately owned hotel-convention center, the report stated. The fund is supposed to be used to pay "capital needs of the City," according to the report.
Arkansas State Police investigated Boldt and found what it considered three misdemeanor actions -- perjury, abuse of office and violation of a water reduction statute.
The water statute violation and abuse of office carry a punishment of removal from office. Carlton Jones, the prosecuting attorney for the 8th Judicial Circuit-South, declined to prosecute because Boldt left office, the report states.
The perjury charge was referred to prosecutor Larry Jegley in the 6th Judicial Circuit because it is alleged to have occurred in Little Rock in front of the audit committee.
Asked by Rep. Mary Hickerson, R-Texarkana, why no charges had been brought, Jegley said he had reviewed the case and did not believe Boldt had committed perjury.
Roger Norman, a legislative auditor, told lawmakers that it isn't surprising prosecutors file charges in only a fraction of cases.
"There are different burdens. Their standard is high, which it should be. Ours is low, which it should be," he said. "If it's questionable, I'm required by law to refer it to the prosecutors and then the prosecutors have the responsibility to make a determination of whether or not there's been a criminal violation. The two are totally separate."
Norman said, for example, auditors will find money has been taken -- a criminal offense -- but multiple people had access to the safe.
Establishing, beyond a reasonable doubt, who actually pocketed the money may not be possible, he added.
Jegley said in an interview that the same questions are raised by legislators every year.
He said when he charges someone with a crime, he wants to make sure he can prove it.
"We're talking about ruining people's lives even if they get acquitted. It's serious stuff," he said. "I think we do a pretty good job prosecuting, but there's an impression or misimpression that with everything we get, somebody ought to be charged."
Metro on 10/10/2015