" There doesn't seem to be any justification for reimbursing civilian employees for ordinary shopping trips such as t-shirts for the IT guy or new shoes for a County Commissioner's wife. And Spangler's argument that employees have to go to court sometimes so the county should pay for their suits is ridiculous. How many people who work in offices with a business suit dress code get a clothing allowance?"

...the article reveals that civilian employees are also getting a clothing allowance, including Commissioner Paul Pinkston's wife, a KCSO administrator who went on a Belk's shopping spree with her allowance. You may recall that it was Pinkston who started the whole P-Card brouhaha.

I found these expenses just ridiculous on the surface, however giving the IT people t-shirts with company names doesn't sound very unusual. As much as I want my taxpayer dollars to go for hardcore necessities, I also have no desire to see our city and county employees receiving less for their services than other private or public sector employees.

Because of some of the really ridiculous things that have been paid for with P-cards, a lot of scrutiny and a lot of emotion have charged the examination of expenditures with incredible intensity.

Any good job I've had has offered me things that weren't actual necessities. They weren't all that extravagant, but they did help worker morale. An office pizza party, a nice dinner once a year at the best restaurant in town, shirts with the organizations name on them, pens and pencils with logos, coffee cups, even an occasional living plant or two, movie passes, annual hotel accomodations and gas expenses for group retreats, these things probably did add up in the larger organizations, but they meant a lot to us employees. I'd hate to see our city or county employees prohibited from receiving any of these kinds of percs because of a few shocking abuses.

It does seem like some of the P-card purchases that have sounded bizarre have proven to be legit.

As someone once employed by city and state organizations, I know abuse and wasteful spending can get out of hand. I am 100% for oversight and I think the taxpayers should demand fiscal responsability, but it seems the problems stem mostly from lax systems and a lack of concern about verification procedures by the people administrating them.

If the system itself has a flawed design and poor oversight, you can be sure employees will never stand up and say no to anything nice offered to them. Mostly they don't question these things.

It seems to me, most of the focus on the P-card scandal should be on correcting the system itself, demanding documention of expenses, and insuring continual oversight by people that can be trusted, not on smaller issues like employee T-shirts.

Sorry, looks like I messed up the link to the article. That's fixed, and here's the relevant part about T-shirts.

Among charges at niche retailers, an information technology staffer who's a certified officer paid $73.98 at Banana Republic for two pairs of pants; a court security officer paid $400 for a suit at Coachman Clothiers; and Ronnie Kidd, who oversees the sheriff's fleet, spent $144.93 at the Tommy Hilfiger outlet in Sevierville for clothes including four T-shirts and three knit shirts.

I was wrong, the IT guy bought pants at Banana Republic. Someone else bought t-shirts at Tommy Hilfiger. I don't think these stores carry t-shirts with custom company names/logo except their own.

It is well established that the sheriff can do anything he damn well pleases with drug forfeiture booty, and he need not even tell the public how much of it there is, much less how he spends it. That the Sentinel was able to learn this much about spending by KCSO suggests that there may be reform priorities even more urgent than opening holes in the sunshine law large enough for halfwits to stumble through without bumping their heads.

We know Republicans are moral and upstanding because they say so, and the President has worked hard to liberate politicians from accountability. The Sentinel needs to get with the program and stop snooping around in the public business and stick with wholesome, American themes like going shopping and filling wetlands.

but I also understand Scott Moore's wife gets the clothing allowance and I have been told both Moore and Pinkston's wives have county vehicles.

Billy Haslam parked all the city take home vehicles and the county should do the same. Working for the county is not a coronation, it's a job and if nobody wants to work for a descent wage, some benefits, utilizing THEIR OWN CLOTHES AND THEIR OWN CAR, then go do something else besides live on the public trough. Has anybody verified that the $500 per year was actually for clothes that fit the county employee, I'm sure if they look hard enough they'll find some kids sizes and other items that cannot be worn.

The culture of the local government has got to change before there is nothing left in Knox County but a pile of government jobs, a bunch of non-profit hospitals, and nobody to pay the taxes as they've all moved to Anderson, Roane, Loudon, Blount, and Sevier Counties.

One distinction the KNS doesn't make is the Sheriff's Office has about, what, 2,000 employees. The Sheriff's Office is a huge operation covering not only patrols which most people see, but the downtown jail, Maloneyville jail, training, aviation, legal (writing warrants, etc.), investigating crimes, forensics and a host of other duties. The comparison thus far is to Mayor Ragsdale's office, which has, what, a couple dozen folks?

You'll also note that the clothing allowance beyond certified uniforms is less than the food budget in Mayor Ragsdale's office. Paying tens of thousands for private supper clubs, dinner and drinks at Mortons and Beverly Hills hotels seems to be quite different than buying a suit for a detective or court officer (who certainly uses same in investigating crimes, going to court, etc.).

I question whether the uniform allowance should extend to some employees. But, I guess it's a small perk for some.

It should also be noted that (as the KNS points out in yesterday's and today's story) in every single clothing and travel charge the Sheriff's Office followed county policy to a 't'. In fact, the KNS says the Sheriff's Office should do well in any audit. I don't think we can say the same for other departments.

Strange, when I worked for a private employer, there were expectations as to what I had to wear to customer's sites to "project an image", and I didn't get a clothing allowance. None of my employees who go in the field get a clothing allowance (although they do have 1-2 logo shirts).

And if I tore a pair of pants or 'messed up a shirt' while doing field work (which I did many times), I couldn't imagine my company replacing it.

If Sheriff's officers are required to purchase uniforms out of their own pocket (that's the implication), then it seems like we need a change in policy to divert some of the money from Ms. Pinkston's shoe allowance for uniforms for our deputies. Plainclothes undercover officers should also be able to buy civilian outfits for their assignments- that's their "uniform."

Perks are often a way to hide pay increases. If our officers are underpaid, let's pay them competitively and put those raises out in the open. More sunshine, please!

A few thoughts on today's article (travel):
- The Flamingo hotel isn't exactly putting on the Ritz. Flying into Vegas (or anyplace west coast) the night before a conference is pretty routine, given the time change.
- I'm all in favor of educational conferences that allows members of government and KCSO to share ideas with other similar organizations. To some extent, I don't think we do enough of this.
- KUDOS to Mike Dalton for driving to Nashville to catch a cheaper flight. I've done that before, and it is an extra burden to drive (especially if you drive back late at night).

I didn't see much to be concerned about in today's article...

That's my $0.02. Flame on.

-----------------------------------------
Fighting for Reform and Representation, Fourth District
Steve Drevik, Commission Seat 4-B
(link...)

Dillard's would at least be a locally owned store

Pretty darn sure Dillard's is not locally owned.