Accountability and transparency are a must if Washtenaw County commissioner keep per diems
It pays to be a Washtenaw County commissioner. In these tough budget times, we‘re disappointed that commissioners aren’t willing to lead by example and do away with the per diem pay they collect on top of their already generous salaries.
At their last meeting, commissioners balked at a proposal to reduce per diems and travel reimbursements, a move that would have reduced their direct compensation by about 9 percent. The issue may be revived in January, after the new board is seated, though commissioners would only be able to address mileage reimbursements at that point.
For the current Board of Commissioners, the unwillingness to do away with per diems was a missed opportunity to make the kind of tough but necessary sacrifices that the county will continue to ask of its employees going forward.
Commissioners receive a salary of $15,500 and also can collect a per diem of $25 and mileage each time they attend a board meetings or meetings of certain committees they serve on. These per diem payments, while small, add up over time. In 2008 and 2009, commissioners combined to claim almost $34,000 in per diems.
Per diems became an issue this fall when Mark Ouimet ran for state office and was accused of collecting per diems and mileage he wasn’t eligible for as a county commissioner. A review by the office of County Clerk Larry Kestenbaum reported that Ouimet, R-Scio Township, had collected more than $10,000 in per diems and mileage that were not within the county’s policy. Other commissioners had ineligible reimbursements ranging from $4,226 to $30.
Commissioner Leah Gunn, D-Ann Arbor, who stopped collecting per diems in 2008, proposed in November that the board eliminate per diem pay, but commissioners turned that down by a 6-5 vote. They also rejected her call to eliminate travel spending by commissioners. Earlier this month, Commissioner Conan Smith, D-Ann Arbor, tried to revive the issue, but dropped the effort when it became clear that there wasn’t support for his call to reduce per diems and mileage reimbursements.
In a previous editorial, we called on commissioners to do away with per diems, which are a vestige of a time gone by. The base salary that commissioners earn is more than reasonable compensation. While it is true that the pay of commissioners hasn’t been increased since 2001, many other local elected officials serve on city councils and school boards for far less pay, or no pay at all.
The unwillingness of commissioners to give up per diems is particularly misplaced at a time when they’ve been seeking concessions from county employees, and will have to ask more in the future. Last week, sheriff’s deputies approved a contract that included wage concessions. Prior to the vote, the president of their union said it was a tougher sell because commissioners hadn’t made concessions on the issues of per diems or travel spending. He said deputies understood the need for concessions, but thought “the board should do the same.’’ We agree.
Since per diem pay isn’t going away, it becomes more important than ever for the county to resolve questions about improper per diem payments collected in the past, and to prevent such abuse from reoccurring.
A senior auditor from the Rehmann Robson public accounting firm has completed an independent, non-partisan review of per diem and mileage payments, and the results will be released on Monday. Commissioners who are found to have collected improper payments should reimburse the county. Commissioners Gunn and Barbara Levin Bergman, D-Ann Arbor, already have written checks to the county, based on what they expected to owe.
County Administrator Verna McDaniel, who requested the review, also has said she will provide a new process for approving per diem and mileage requests from commissioners. The previous system lacked accountability. Reimbursement requests went to a staff member in the county clerk’s office, who simply put them through to be paid.
Such a lack of financial controls is an invitation for abuse. Reimbursement requests should be reviewed by someone who has clear authority to challenge any questionable spending. We look forward to what new system McDaniel proposes.
Meanwhile, we welcome the additional transparency that the county has added to the process. The Board of Commissioners’ website now includes a report that shows what each commissioner is collecting by month for per diems, mileage and travel reimbursement.
Earlier this year, commissioners put a $3,550 annual limit on such reimbursements. While that was a step in the right direction, it fell short of doing away with per diems altogether. Once the new board is seated in January, they won’t be able to consider eliminating per diems, because it’s illegal to cut the pay of elected officials during their term in office.
Still, if commissioners are interested in doing they right thing, they have the option of simply not collecting per diems. Commissioners Gunn and Ronnie Peterson, D-Ypsilanti, have made it a practice to not accept per diems, and other commissioners should do the same in 2011. In these belt-tightening times, those who ask their employees to make sacrifices must be willing to do the same.
(This editorial was published in today's newspaper and reflects the opinion of the Editorial Board at AnnArbor.com.)
Comments
Roadman
Tue, Dec 21, 2010 : 9:04 p.m.
Thank you for your edtorial, which I concur in. I would like to add a a few more points. Firstly, there have been statements made that politics would prevent a full and fair criminal investigation regarding the wrongful presentation of per diem requests and receipt of county funds as a result of payments by the payroll department. I find such averments, which have come from Tom Wieder, to be only partly accurate. There are a number of factors that would affect commencement and maintenance of an impartial and complete investigation in these regards. The initial impediment would be a conflict of interest. The Washtenaw County Sheriff's Dept. and the Prosecutor's Office are both funded by the County Commission. The matter would have to be referred out to the State Police and another County Prosecutor or perhaps the Department of Attorney General. Another obstacle would be proving that offending commissioners knew that their presentation was wrongful. Given the number of commissioners who have received clearly improper per diems without having anyone in the county step in and say "Whoa, Mr. Commissioner those requests for per diems are out of line!" indicates that the system was broken and led to confusion. The sheer number of "questionable" per diems lends color to the claim that the rules governing per diem reimbursement were unduly vague and never put anyone on proper notice as to what was and was not covered. There is no doubt that Mark Ouimet and others have suffered untold embarrassment from these public revelations. The only real thing that is definite is that clearly non- payable items of reimbursement should be recouped by the county from the offending commissioners. The last issue that needs discussion is the abolition of per diems. For those who contend that a new resoulution barring per diem payments cannot be effective until January of 2013, I say - BUNK! Pending the 2013 enforcement of such a resolution, the County Commisssion members need not apply for per diem payments to the payroll office during the upcoming 2-year term.
David Briegel
Sun, Dec 19, 2010 : 8:03 p.m.
Tony, You are so biased that you claim Dr. Ouimet was "accused". Tony, He did it. He hasn't denied it! He just hasn't paid it back as of yet. And YOU endorsed HIM! Have you ever even commented on the fact that it was an HONOR system? Did that fact not bother YOU in the least? Before your endorsement? Tony, Do you seriously wish to limit service to our County Govt to your wealthy Republican friends. Is that really your goal? The total allowed compensation is now $19,050. Boy, that will really balance the budget. Right Tony? I am fully confident in the current BOC and County Admin McDaniel to halt the abuses that have occurred. You might want to support their efforts. Bob, I always found Professional Associations to benefit me and my performance and thus my employer. My employer always encouraged participation in such organizations. I think Kristin Judge has clearly demonstrated how our County has benefited from her travel. Clearing the cobwebs of the petty nonsense of the day to day humdrum has always allowed an individual to focus more cleary on the issues at hand and gain from the experience of others. You and I benefit! Ostriches don't provide such benefits!
Basic Bob
Sun, Dec 19, 2010 : 1:24 p.m.
It's hard to characterize $15,500 as an 'already generous salary', even for part-time work. The commissioners have created a double standard: Attending local board and committee meetings are to be done on your own time and expense, while travel to vacation resorts like Reno and Traverse City are fully reimbursable expenses. Ask yourself, how is each activity necessary for the functioning of county government?
Mike D.
Sun, Dec 19, 2010 : 12:17 p.m.
Wait, did I fall asleep and wake up in Kolkata? Because, Mr. Dearing, I don't know how much you make, but I'd bet it's a heck of a lot more than $15,500. Yes, this isn't a full-time job, but these commissioners do an awful lot of work. It frankly sounds a bit rich for you to sit there in your fancy office with your fancy salary and complain about public servants collecting reimbursements for work related travel. The ineligible expenses have to stop, and it seems we're long past that and there's real transparency into who's collecting what, so let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. People shouldn't be expected to pay out of pocket to do their jobs. If you disagree, I'd like you to post your own T&E expenses for the last 3 months. Just the total would be fine. That's what I thought.