Washtenaw County commissioners slow to repay county for expenses deemed ineligible in audit
Local attorney Tom Wieder, who first raised concerns about improper county commissioner per diem payments in October, isn't happy with how the county has responded to the issue. He's now raising concerns about an auditor's report on the payments, saying it justified expenses that should have been deemed ineligible.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
Three weeks after an independent audit showed 10 Washtenaw County commissioners improperly billed the county for nearly $25,000, four of them have repaid the county.
Six others have yet to cut checks, and it doesn't appear county administrators or the board are placing priority on pursuing collection of the $10,500-plus still owed.
"Really, we haven't talked to anybody about it, and I have not given it thought over the last several weeks," said Board Chairman Conan Smith, D-Ann Arbor.
County Administrator Verna McDaniel said it's up to the board to decide whether to ask commissioners to repay the county. As far as she's concerned, her role is done.
"The work is complete by the auditors. That was my commitment," she said. "There is no other action from the office of administration that I'm taking. I feel that I've done my job because we have better procedures, we have checks and balances, and everyone is crystal clear on what's acceptable and what's not. So that was what I wanted to have accomplished."
Smith still hasn't reimbursed the county for the $591 in per diem and mileage payments the audit showed he improperly collected between 2005 and 2010. Expressing disapproval of the process, he said he's unsure whether he's going to repay it.
Conan Smith
"Honestly, I don't know. I haven't done anything with it," he said of the issue, acknowledging he hasn't looked at the auditor's entire report yet. "I don't know if it's a lack of interest so much as just it's a low priority, given the other things we've got to deal with right now."
McDaniel's office initiated the audit of per diem expenses and mileage reimbursements for all 11 sitting commissioners last fall. The request came after allegations of financial misconduct were levied against Commissioner Mark Ouimet, R-Scio Township.
Ouimet, who left the board in December after being elected to the state House, cut a check to the county last month for $14,386 — the full amount of payments deemed ineligible in the audit.
Commissioners Kristin Judge, D-Pittsfield Township, and Leah Gunn, D-Ann Arbor, paid the $25 they each owed. Rolland Sizemore Jr., D-Ypsilanti Township, paid the $65 he owed.
The county has yet to receive checks from Commissioners Barbara Levin Bergman, D-Ann Arbor, or Wesley Prater, D-York Township, each of whom improperly collected more than $1,800, according to the audit by the Rehmann Robson accounting firm.
"That's my business," Bergman said, declining to comment on the issue. "That's between me and the county, so I just do not choose to discuss it."
Prater said he's still questioning the auditor's report.
"I'm kind of disappointed in the process because I believe it didn't really address all of the issues," he said. "I intend on paying back every dollar owed if they're ineligible. As of now, there are some that are in question in my mind."
Prater acknowledges he has at least some ineligible per diems to repay.
"In retrospect, part of it was my fault because, even though I turned the vouchers in in good faith, I didn't ask administration the question: Is this eligible?" he said. "So I didn't do that. That was my fault, and I take responsibility for that."
Three others who no longer serve on the board also owe the county money, according to the audit. At least two of them say they're planning to repay the county.
Ann Arbor Democrat Jeff Irwin, who now serves in the state House, said he'll pay the $100 he owes. And Ken Schwartz, who lost his county board race in November and now serves a new role on the Road Commission, said he'll pay the $1,055 he owes.
"I can say the people of the county got their money's worth out of me, and now they're going to get a little bit more," said Schwartz, who intends to run for office again in the future.
Saline Republican Jessica Ping, who decided not to run for re-election last year, still owes more than $5,000, according to the audit. Ping could not be reached for comment on Monday.
AnnArbor.com filed a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain the full report from the auditor, showing which meetings were deemed ineligible.
Tom Wieder, a local attorney who first raised the per diem issue at a county board meeting in October, said he isn't happy with how the process has played out.
Verna McDaniel
He notes the audit didn't look at payments made to five former commissioners who served during the review period — between 2005 and 2010 — but were no longer on the board at the end of last year. He argues singling out the 11 sitting commissioners was unfair.
McDaniel responded to Wieder's concern.
"I realize that was an opinion of some, but there was no interest and no direction to go after non-sitting commissioners," she said. "So they weren't in the scope of the work."
Wieder claims the auditor's report was too generous with commissioners and deemed many meetings eligible when they shouldn't have been. He takes special exception with the fact that almost every commissioner claimed $25 per diems for attending Ways and Means Committee meetings — at least 673 meetings totaling $16,825, exclusive of mileage costs.
While technically a committee, Ways and Means is simply a meeting of the entire board under a different heading, Wieder argues.
"Per diems for committee meetings are eligible 'when the member has been properly appointed to that committee.' Of course, no member is appointed to the Ways and Means Committee, since it’s just a meeting of the board," Wieder said, calling it "offensive" to pay commissioners an extra $25, plus mileage, just to do "the most basic work of the board."
"If their $15,500 salaries don’t cover this, what do they cover?" he said.
Wieder also questions why commissioners have been allowed to collect per diems for meetings like administrative briefings and appointment caucuses.
Commissioners voted on new board rules last month, including a new list of meetings they can collect per diems for attending. Some commissioners wanted to put an end to per diems for working sessions and Ways and Means Committee meetings, but the county attorney determined it would constitute revising the board's compensation mid-term and would not be legal. So commissioners still can take those per diems should they choose.
Under board rules in place since last year, each commissioner gets about $3,500 a year for per diems, mileage and travel expenses.
After reviewing the auditor's report, Wieder said he thinks it contains several errors and inconsistencies, including instances where it was deemed appropriate for Ouimet to collect two separate $25 per diems for back-to-back meetings of the board and Ways and Means Committee on the same date.
The auditor also deemed eligible several instances where it appears Ouimet claimed separate per diems for attending multiple meetings of a single board on the same date:
- "WCERS Pre-meeting" and "WCERS" on July 25, 2007
- "WCERS Luncheon" and "WCERS" on Sept. 26, 2007
- "WCERS Planning" and "WCERS Board" Jan. 23, 2008
- "WFD Board Meeting" and "WFD Retreat" on Jan. 28, 2008
- "MPPP Review" and "MPPP Meeting" on Feb. 6, 2008
- "Road Commission - W/S" and "Road Commission" on Oct. 21, 2008
- "Road Commission Working Sess." and "Road Commission" on Nov. 18, 2008
- "Road Commission - Budget" and "Road Commission" on Dec. 16, 2008
- "Adm" and "Adm/Appointments" on Jan. 14, 2009
Ouimet said he couldn't speak to those specific per diems, but he said he relied on the auditor to make a determination and has repaid the county for any per diems that were red-flagged.
"I said I would pay the county back, and I did what I said I was going to do," he said. "The third-party independent auditor looked through it all and came to a number. I wrote a check that day and paid them. My focus is in Lansing now on working on the state budget."
The auditor determined Ouimet was eligible to collect per diems for attending meetings of organizations like MSU Extension, Washtenaw County 4-H and the Eastern Leaders Group. However, the auditor determined Schwartz's per diems for meetings of the Eastern Leaders Group were ineligible. No explanation for the decision is given in the report.
"I was under the impression that I was doing that for the county and doing that under assignment of the chair," Schwartz said of those meetings. "And that's why I took per diems on that, but apparently that wasn't the case."
Several commissioners declined to give an opinion when asked if they thought those who haven't yet repaid the county should be asked to do so.
"I have no comment," Gunn said. "It's up to each commissioner. However it works out, it works out. But I've paid my 25 big bucks, and I'm done."
Judge said she's more interested in making sure the county has solid internal financial controls in place, and the county is in the process of hiring a company to do an internal audit.
"I don't think there ever was intent by any commissioners to misuse the system, but there was an attitude within the county that commissioners were in charge and you don't question a commissioner," she said. "That's what I disagree with. We need to change that culture, and we're in the process of doing that."
County Clerk Larry Kestenbaum said he's disappointed that the board has not yet eliminated per diems, which he said are a "whole lot of hassle."
"The whole controversy demonstrates to me why there shouldn't be per diems for commissioners who already receive a salary," he said.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529.
Comments
Diagenes
Sat, Mar 5, 2011 : 6:40 p.m.
#1 eliminate "per deim" expense reimbursement. Let Commissioners deduct eligible expenses on their personal income tax form. #2 deduct from their paycheck the amount owed to the county. #3 recall any commissioner who complains.
Roadman
Mon, Mar 7, 2011 : 9:33 p.m.
(1)Per diems cannot be eliminated for the 2011-12 term but can be by Board vote thereafter. (2)You cannot simply deduct amounts owed from their paycheck as state law protects employees from such arbitrary conduct. (3)a recall movement is a great idea.
Tom Wieder
Sat, Feb 26, 2011 : 10:13 p.m.
@Jennifer Edwards - You are right, of course. Until 2010, however, it was the fox guarding the henhouse. The Commissioners run the county, and they were paid for whatever they submitted, with no review or limit. As of 2010, all submissions had to be approved by the County Clerk, and each Commissioner had a limit of $3550 per year for per diems, mileage, travel and conferences.
Jennifer D. Edwards
Fri, Feb 25, 2011 : 6:17 p.m.
As an accountant and auditor, I find it ludicrous that the responsibility for these "ineligible" expense payments aren't put squarely on the shoulders of the county itself. It's up to the county to convey to the commissioners what expenses are eligible for reimbursement, and then, when submitted, they MUST be reviewed and approved by someone in responsible charge, prior to reimbursement. Even at Fortune 5 companies, expenses submitted by officers for reimbursement are reviewed, and approved, according to company policy, prior to reimbursement by accounting staff. If not eligible, reimbursement is denied. Folks, have we heard of a handbook, to convey this information to the commissioners, or is this like the fox guarding the henhouse?
Treelover
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 9:12 a.m.
Who keeps voting them BACK into office??? Hmmmm.... Some of you need to look in the mirror... If this were you or I we would be charged...
Roadman
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 10:23 p.m.
Thanks for keeping this story in the media. The fact that two more commisssioners have forked over cash - Ms. Judge and Rolland Sizemore - is showing that public pressure is working to collect these per diems that were not properly payable. The county executive needs to authorize legal action against recalcitrant commissioners who are not even disputing they owe these funds back. This is the same county that has commenced legal action for libel using a private law firm against a formerly homeless veteran who criticized the Sheriff's Department.
Ron Granger
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 9:47 p.m.
Ethical is as ethical does... The decision to give the exiting commission members a pass also doesn't pass muster. So what is it going to take to get the commission to do the obvious right thing and ask the administration to request repayment from commissioners who need to be reminded? Send it to a collection agency. Send it to the prosecutor. Always remember, "Where there's smoke, there's fire."
Roadman
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 10:13 p.m.
Ron: The County Commission funds the prosecutor's office. Don't expect Brian Mackie to do anything.
John B.
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 9:18 p.m.
@WWBoDO: That's a stretch (the first two sentences). Prior to 2010, the expense requests were not audited or reviewed in any way. Now they are. The amounts in question arose from an independent third-party analysis of five years' worth of pre-2010 payments. That said, it just seems dumb to me that anything but Ms. Ping's amount hasn't already been repaid in full. Conan Smith owes $581? If I were him, I would have written a check so darn fast once this subject was presented to me, it would have set a land-speed record! You last sentence is more appropriate: remember details like this (among others) when you vote. That's how our system works.
Roadman
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 3:39 a.m.
Wrong, John B. They were annual audits of the entire yearly budget year-by-year, along with all other receipts and disbursements by the County. I suspect if the auditor would have compared the per diem reimbursement criteria rules with the vouchers that were being submitted, it would have been discovered long ago that many disbursements for per diems were not properly payable. That's why I believe some blame should inure to the auditing personnel. There were no prior audits that specically focused on the per diems alone.
WWBoDo
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 7:05 p.m.
Hard for me to distinguish between Kwame Kilpatrick and the delinquent, irresponsible Commissioners other than on the basis of magnitude. The principles are indistinguishable even if the relative amounts of money are substantially different. What a shame! Time, once again, to send a message next time we get the opportunity to vote these rascals out of office!
Vivienne Armentrout
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 6:35 p.m.
The phrase "per diem" is used differently by the BOC and the IRS. Its use is governed by the BOC Rules, which lay out in detail which meetings are eligible for reimbursement. (Again, I support Larry Kestenbaum's position that all per diems should simply be eliminated.) The county per diem is simply a payment for attending a listed meeting. One can have several meetings in one day and legitimately claim separate per diems for them, even if they were held sequentially in the same location. (But that very rarely happens.) When I was on the BOC, per diem payments were included on the pay statement in a lump sum together with the regular stipend. They were subject to all appropriate withdrawals, including tax, Social Security, Medicare, and the MPPP county withdrawal (the pension plan that will not die). I doubt that this has changed. So whether or not those per diems were improperly claimed, the IRS should have no interest in the matter. It is really just a case of proper adherence to the rules the BOC sets for itself. And, of course, how much individual commissioners behave appropriately and gracefully. I'd have thought that any seasoned politician would just say "I'm sorry" and pay up without all this embarrassing fuss.
Tom Wieder
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 6:17 p.m.
@a2citizen - I don't think that you should be sending anything to the IRS. You have absolutely no information that any commissioner failed to pay any taxes due. You have information that some of them received compensation that they shouldn't have received, but the IRS doesn't care about that, IF they paid taxes on it. I don't honestly know if filing an unfounded report of a person violating tax laws could subject you to any sort of liability from the government or the person, but I don't think you should go ahead with this without knowing that. Also, I don't think it's fair to the commissioners. They may deserve criticism for taking money they weren't entitled to, but we have no basis for saying that they violated tax laws. The fact that the IRS and the county use the term "per diem" differently is no basis for complaining about the commissioners to the IRS.
a2citizen
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 6:02 p.m.
@Tom Wieder: Thanks, Tom. According to IRS Publications per diem is money paid to an employee while away from home on travel. I'm not a lawyer so I'll just fill out the Form 3949A as "Improper use and claiming of per diem by government officials". I'll let the IRS sort it out. FYI Conan Smith: When the IRS starts looking they are not going to stop with your per diem expenses.
John B.
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 9:22 p.m.
I think that would be unwise, for multiple reasons. Plus, if they pay back the money, they will likely get an Income Tax refund on the tax that was already paid on that income, fwiw....
John B.
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 5:46 p.m.
It appears to me that the third-party auditor was very generous in what he/she allowed to be considered valid expenses. With the exception of Ms. Ping, who owes $5K, why would anyone else not have fully repaid these funds by now? I don't get it. And why did Ouimet and Ping account for $45K of expenses, of which nearly $20K were inappropriate? Coincidence? I doubt it.
Tom Wieder
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 5:09 p.m.
@a2citizen - I have no personal knowledge of how the county, or the individual commissioners, handled these funds for tax purposes. The per diems, however, are not reimbursements for expenses; they are fees for attending meetings. As such, they are taxable compensation, and I would be very surprised if they were not properly reported as such to the IRS by the county. If commissioners repay some of that compensation, because they shouldn't have received it, they aren't in any tax trouble. In fact, if they included that compensation on their returns at the time, they may be able to claim a current deduction for some or all of the amount they repay. If they repay actual mileage reimbursement, which wasn't taxable in the first place, that should have no tax consequences, whatsoever.
Tom Wieder
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 4:43 p.m.
How is this a "witch hunt?" No one was being unreasonably pursued and persecuted. I raised a question at a public meeting, and the Commissioners' own appointee, the County Administrator, obtained an independent report finding that Commissioners received funds they weren't entitled to. How is it that Ouimet, who was, by far, the biggest abuser of the system, deserves to be commended because, now that he has been caught and wants to stay in political office, he pays back what he owes? As for his "prompt" repayment: On October 6, 2010 he promised to pay what the County Clerk said he owed, then he dissed the Clerk's report, said he'd escrow the disputed amounts pending an audit and never did that. One has to wonder if, had he lost in November and wasn't looking at a re-election campaign next year, whether he would have repaid. @jondhall - The Prosecutor doesn't need me to send anything over to him. He's well aware of all the facts, as well as the law. As I've written here before, getting criminal convictions in these circumstances is quite difficult, and the effort may not be worth it. But take that up with him, not me; I have no control over that. As for this "hoopla" being a precurser to me running for political office - no way, nowhere, at no time, under any conceivable circumstances. I like being retired. Unfortunately, under state court decisions, it is difficult, if not impossible, for a citizen to bring a civil suit seeking repayment of county funds (oddly, that's allowed for townships and school districts). Otherwise, I'd be likely to file such a suit, and I'm still looking to see if there's any way it can be done. That will all be moot, of course, if all the commissioners eventually pay up.
DonBee
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 1:48 a.m.
And you raised the issue right before a tough election. Would waiting a couple of weeks until the election was over a big deal?
Bertha Venation
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 4:41 p.m.
I feel Mr. Smith should "think about it." Wouldn't that be nice?
a2citizen
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 4:31 p.m.
Can Tom Wieder or Larry Kestenbaum tell me if these reimbursements were taxed? I have IRS Form 3949A sitting on my desktop right now and I need to check the correct boxes. Form 3949A is used to turn in tax cheats to the IRS. <a href="http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f3949a.pdf" rel='nofollow'>http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f3949a.pdf</a>
Garrett
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 4:30 p.m.
That's the greatest poll ever! I voted 'no' just because it's so ridiculous.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 3:59 p.m.
DonBee wrote: "The leaders of the witch hunt still have not paid. . . . Seem [sic] to me that this was an attempt to create a political issue prior to an election. Business as usual in Washtenaw County." To quote Captain Renault in the film Casablanca, "I'm shocked, SHOCKED to find gambling going on here" Any evidence that the people who have not paid their bills led the "witch hunt"? Sounds to me like a lawyer not on the board was behind the very reasonable request that commissioners justify their expenses. Those who continue to stonewall on the repayment ought be recalled. If they cannot afford to cut a check for the full amount, they should arrange a repayment plan that charges the same interest rate that we peons pay on our credit cards. Good Night and Good Luck
jondhall
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 4:11 p.m.
We agree for the first time does that mean the World is ending?
Larry Kestenbaum
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 3:50 p.m.
I'm the county clerk. Prior to 1/1/2010, every per diem and mileage request went straight to Payroll and was paid, under the authority of each individual commissioner. My office did not have the authority to review or reject them. At the beginning of 2010, the Board voted to change the rules. I believe this change was motivated by an awareness that per diems had been paid for ineligible meetings. Since then, every per diem and mileage claim has been reviewed by my staff, and rejected if ineligible. I continue to maintain that per diems for commissioners should be done away with altogether, but certainly the new rules are better than the old rules.
Jennifer D. Edwards
Fri, Feb 25, 2011 : 6:37 p.m.
Th"straight to payroll" practice should have been aired in public much sooner--completely unacceptable.
Harley B. Rider
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 4:25 p.m.
Larry, I wasn't being critical of your department - your staff does a fine job and they have always been great to work with. I was just commenting on the process of payment on expenses without adequate review. I'm glad to know that the process has been changed.
eyeonthenews
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 3:21 p.m.
Mr. Smith's comment on repayment, what arrogance! Knowing he was paid money he shouldn't have gotten and saying he doesn't like the audit process and may not repay it is unacceptable. He hasn't bothered to read the whole report because he isn't interested and/or it's a low priority to him. $591 isn't chump change. He and all the rest need to repay the County. Washtenaw county residents need to take note of the results here and vote in some new people in next election.
fredric
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 3:14 p.m.
The county should do the following: 1: anyone owing the county funds and not paying, no future payments until all debts paid in full. 2: elected official owing the county funds, not be allowed to serve in that capacity until all funds . paid. Don't these people understand that they actually work for us. the tax payers , the ones that supply the money to pay their expenses. . Time for all of them to wake up. In the future,prior to serving, maybe at the start of every year, have them sign a statement that they have read and understand the rules . This is like going back to school but maybe this is what they need to understand that we are tired of this type of actionactions by our elected officials. The old days are over!!
Harley B. Rider
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 3:12 p.m.
First, kudos to those commissioners who promptly paid back, with a special tip of the hat to Mark Ouimet for keeping his word. Second, this is strictly a technical issue, but last I checked, "per Diem" was Latin for "per day". So, how can one collect multiple "per Diem" in one day? I know, "per Diem" has morphed into a term for "per meeting", rather than "per day". Finally, it seems to me that once an expense has been submitted for reimbursement - and approved - the responsibility shifts to the approving party. In earlier articles, County Clerk Larry Kestenbaum said his office basically just approves what is submitted. This is no slam on Larry or his very competent staff, just a comment on the process. I would have thought the county's internal auditing process would have caught these before they were paid, or at least before an annual audit. If the internal controls missed these, what else has been missed?
dotdash
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 3:05 p.m.
No big deal. Of course they should repay and they know that and they probably will do it. These are people who continue to be reimbursed for current expenses, so they can just "work off" the past due. In one sense, I agree with Smith: let's move on to the really challenging issues before the county.
tlb1201
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 2:55 p.m.
"I don't know if it's a lack of interest so much as just it's a low priority, given the other things we've got to deal with right now." Low priority? The county needs the money. You owe the money. Pay up, Conan and all of the rest. How much of your valuable time does it take to write a check?! Put it to rest now before it becomes a bigger issue. It isn't going away! Character matters in public office and yours is coming into question with an attitude like that.
Some Guy in A2
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 1:50 p.m.
I am not sure why this is that hard. If they don't contest the debt and they don't pay up, there are other ways. Surely they have other expense reports coming in--just garnish those until the debt is satisfied.
Go Blue
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 1:48 p.m.
I thought taking of funds that you are not entitled to is illegal, is it not? Illegal means pay it back or suffer the consequences. What is this nonsense no one is enforcing this and there are no consequences? Taxpayer money in the pockets of those not entitled to it should be remedied immediately and those that should be enforcing this need to quit trying to sweep it under the rug. Pay up now. Not acknowledging the error and not making restitution immediately sends a strong message. Sounds like the old "if I look the other way and ignore it long enough, maybe it will go away." No so.
jondhall
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 3:03 p.m.
Totally Agree!
DBH
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 1:42 p.m.
As of now, in this poll there appear to be 3 NO votes (out of 159) on the question of mandatory reimbursement of the county for these expenses. There also are 3 or 4 commissioners who are either opposed to, or are noncommittal about, reimbursement. Coincidence?
DonBee
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 1:28 p.m.
Ouimet who this witch hunt targeted promptly paid his bill and apologized to the public. Like I would expect a true public servant to do. He followed what he understood the rules were and donated the per diem to charity. Then he paid back the country. The leaders of the witch hunt still have not paid. Not a surprise at all, after all they can talk about how they will spend a millage before it passes and then do something completely different with it. Remember the jail and public service? Seem to me that this was an attempt to create a political issue prior to an election. Business as usual in Washtenaw County.
DonBee
Wed, Feb 23, 2011 : 1:42 a.m.
In reading the various county rules from the time periods in question. I am not sure I would know when to submit or not submit a request. I have you read the rules Matt?
Matt Cooper
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 6:17 p.m.
If these people didn't take illegal per diems there'd be no political issue to be made. Whose fault is that? Certainly not the county tax payers. And not Mr. Wieders.
Jafo04
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 1:25 p.m.
I would suggest that they all be given one week to repay us taxpayers or come up with a payment plan or …. Charge them 29% interest (Just like a credit card company would), and Issue a fines that would persuade them or anyone else from every doing this again. Prosecute them for Fraud. Report the overpayment to the IRS. Fire them for stealing from us. -Jafo
InsideTheHall
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 1:07 p.m.
Come on Bergie cough it up!
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 12:56 p.m.
"That's my business," Bergman said, declining to comment on the issue. "That's between me and the county, so I just do not choose to discuss it." who does Mr. Bergman think "the county" is?
Craig Lounsbury
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 7:42 p.m.
I'd fix it but I can't find the edit button.
lugemachine
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 4:40 p.m.
Minor point of clarification: Mr. Bergman's name is Barbara.
Edward R Murrow's Ghost
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 3:42 p.m.
Obviously not the people who elected him! Good Night and Good Luck
Carole
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 12:54 p.m.
All I can say, is please pay up. I wonder how many others in the public sector abuse the system with per deims. Hopefully, with all of the cuts going in city, state, schools, this is one area that should really be looked at.
jondhall
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 11:59 a.m.
If local attorney Tom Wieder has a case then quit Whining and have it sent over to the Prosecutor. All this hoopla then the next thing you know Local attorney Tom Wieder is running for some office. We all know how this all plays out get your name in the newspaper game, that is why I'm writing this now, I want to be famous beyond belief someday over the rainbow. I appears everyone that was deemed "over paid" has paid back the bankrupt county except two need I name , names? Come on you two step up to the plate, give us the money back make Local attorney Tom Wieder happy. It appears that all made some mistakes some appear to have made more than others I suggest we have Tom review all expenses in the future so he can deem what is fair, seems the rules are very "vague". Ok ready for the next world problem to solve.
Matt Cooper
Tue, Feb 22, 2011 : 6:15 p.m.
Why do you seem to have such an issue with Mr. Wieder? Someone's gotta keep the Board honest. You wanna do it?