Local
CMS contracting probes center on consultant’s work, board oversight and payments
Federal and state investigators are examining Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools after allegations about contracts involving law firm Poyner Spruill and consultant Raki McGregor. Public records raise questions about what work McGregor performed and whether district procedures were followed, but they have not established wrongdoing.
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools is facing investigations by the FBI, the State Bureau of Investigation and the state auditor after allegations surfaced about contracting and payments involving a politically connected consultant. So far, public records have raised questions about oversight and the work performed, but have not shown that a crime occurred.
The controversy began with a memo from then-Superintendent Crystal Hill, who described concerns about Poyner Spruill’s hiring of Raki McGregor for consulting work connected to a teacher-housing initiative. The law firm had been retained by CMS. The school board voted 5-4 to fire Hill the following week.
Records show that Poyner Spruill signed a CMS contract on Feb. 4 for legal work on the affordable-housing effort. The same day, law firm billing records list discussions about hiring a consultant through the firm, including a conversation with board chair Stephanie Sneed. Two days later, partner Katie Cornetto sent McGregor a letter setting a $30,000 monthly retainer for his company, Qonnect. The letter said payment depended on CMS reimbursing the law firm.
Hill said she did not know McGregor had been hired when the contract was made. Poyner Spruill has not publicly explained why it selected him, and Sneed has not described her role in the arrangement.
McGregor had previously advised Hill and worked on the housing project for CMS. He is a former Novant Health executive and has been active in local politics, including donating $500 to Sneed’s 2025 reelection campaign. The two also worked together on a consulting proposal to the Mecklenburg County Sheriff’s Office this spring; the office declined it. No evidence has surfaced that Sneed personally profited from the CMS contracts.
The consulting agreement describes broad duties, such as advising on political and regulatory dynamics and stakeholder engagement, but does not specify reports, deadlines or minimum hours. Poyner Spruill’s records list three calls with McGregor totaling three hours in March and four pieces of correspondence. CMS has said it has no records of work products from McGregor on the housing initiative. The district also has no records of a $220,000 compliance assessment that Poyner Spruill was hired to conduct beginning in June; McGregor was set to receive $132,000 under that arrangement.
A separate concern involves contracting rules. In August, CMS finance officials told Hill they could not find a contract or purchase order supporting a Poyner Spruill invoice. Sneed had said in an email that she did not know documentation was missing. Board members have said they were unaware of the contract and McGregor’s involvement.
District policy permits contracts of up to $250,000 without a full board vote, with the board chair and finance officials able to sign smaller agreements. A March 4 revision extended the law firm’s contract by 11 months, potentially taking its value above that threshold, though the full board does not appear to have voted on or been informed of the extension. CMS records show the arrangement was revised again weeks later for a shorter compliance review.
Hill alleged that Sneed intentionally worked around district contracting requirements to conceal McGregor’s role. Available records do not establish that she did so intentionally. It also remains unclear why invoices did not follow normal procedures and how the work moved through CMS, where the finance department reports to the superintendent while the contracts originated in the general counsel’s office, a separate chain of command.
Charlotte attorney and former federal prosecutor Jonathan Vogel, who said he has no inside knowledge of the case, described the contracting practices as suspicious based on what he had reviewed. He said investigations would need to distinguish poor governance—such as recommending a friend, overpaying or keeping inadequate records—from a deliberate plan to pay public money for services that were not performed.
A fraudulent scheme could draw prosecutorial interest, Vogel said, but no evidence has emerged to establish one. Investigators could interview people with direct knowledge and seek district, consultant and law-firm records. If they suspect money was paid for work not done, they could also seek bank records, he said. Such investigations often take six to 12 months, in part because of the volume of documents involved.
The central questions remain why McGregor was hired, what he delivered, how extensive his business relationship with Sneed was and whether CMS policies were violated. Investigators have not announced findings or charges.