NASHVILLE, Tenn. (WTVF) — Next month, Metro Councilwoman Joy Kimbrough will face a hearing before the city's Ethical Conduct Board.
As NewsChannel 5 Investigates first reported, Kimbrough is accused of demanding half a million dollars from a Nashville business owner to get her support for his project in her district.
Last week, we told you how the Metro Legal department had weighed in on the case and recommended a hearing on the matter.
And Thursday, the Ethics Board agreed to move forward with the case.
Metro Councilwoman Joy Kimbrough refused to talk with us about the allegations against her as she left Thursday's meeting of the Metro Ethical Conduct Board.
But next month, on October 24, she'll have the opportunity to explain to the Board exactly what happened last April during a phone call with Nashville businessman Ryan Moses.
As we have reported, the CEO of Best Brands filed a sworn complaint last month, claiming Kimbrough demanded half a million dollars from him to support his company's plan to expand its corporate headquarters and build a liquor distribution warehouse in Kimbrough's council district at the corner of Ashland City Highway and Briley Parkway.
Moses did not show up for the board meeting while Kimbrough sat in the front row as board members discussed the allegations and the Metro Legal Department's recommendation that the board call a hearing on the complaint.
And in the end, they did vote unanimously for that hearing.
The Metro Code says employees, including councilmembers, cannot accept or solicit anything of value intended to influence an employee in their official capacity.
The complaint against Kimbrough accuses her of trying to use her office for personal benefit and coercion or quid pro quo by insisting on the payment and tying it to the rezoning needed for the warehouse project to move forward, which, according to Metro Legal, if true, would be "a violation of the Standards of Conduct."
During the board's discussion of the case at Thursday's meeting, Board chair Diane Diianni suggested, "People can misconstrue and misunderstand what is appropriate."
And while boardmembers had only what was stated in the complaint, and were only supposed to be deciding whether or not to move forward with the hearing, Diianni went on to state, "Well, I didn't see any allegation of a bribery in this complaint."
She also repeatedly questioned whether Kimbrough had simply been asking for money for her district through what's known as a community benefit agreement, adding, "I mean, that's what district council members do, I understand," suggesting that Kimbrough perhaps was just doing her job.
"I don't see any evidence that anybody was talking about pocketing any money," she also later offered up.
According to the complaint, though, while Moses and Kimbrough were in fact discussing how Best Brands would give $150,000 to the Bordeaux community, Moses alleges that Kimbrough then suddenly insisted that he instead pay five hundred thousand dollars directly to her.
Yet here's the twist. Last month, Kimbrough insisted to us that it never even happened.
"Did you or did you not ask Ryan Moses for $500,000?" we asked Kimbrough.
"I absolutely did not," she replied.
"You did not?" we asked again.
"Absolutely," Kimbrough said.
After some discussion, board member Kinika Young said, "I think it (the allegation) warrants the hearing, you know, just to get those questions and gather more facts about those allegations," and she made a motion to vote on whether to hold the hearing.
Both sides will be able to give testimony and present evidence and witnesses at the hearing.
NewsChannel 5 Investigates plans to be at that hearing and will let you know what the board determines.
Meanwhile, we did reach out to Ryan Moses, the one who filed the complaint, for comment, but he did not respond.
PREVIOUS RELATED REPORTING:
Metro Legal Department recommends hearing on ethics complaint against Councilwoman Joy Kimbrough
Metro councilwoman goes on the defensive after ethics complaint alleges she demanded money for support
Metro Councilwoman accused of using office for personal gain and coercion in formal ethics complaint
