Lowndes County supervisors approved a tighter travel policy Thursday that makes county officials follow state code more closely in order to be reimbursed for expenses.
Little discussion followed board president Harry Sanders’ motion to adopt the new policy. Supervisor Leroy Brooks did make a motion to table the action until the next board meeting so the matter could be reviewed. Brooks’ motion failed 3-2, with supervisor Jeff Smith being the only other official in support.
Sanders’ motion passed by that same vote with Brooks and Smith opposed.
The lack of discussion on the topic of travel policy was in contrast to a lengthy exchange between Sanders and Brooks last month. That back and forth centered around Brooks being asked to pay $199 back to the county after he traveled to the coast for a conference a day early and was reimbursed by Lowndes County for the trip.
County administrator Ralph Billingsley admitted his authorization of Brooks’ travel for that day was an oversight. Supervisors voted 3-0 that Brooks should pay the money back. Brooks and Smith abstained from that vote.
Brooks said he followed state law and would not pay the money back.
The county’s new policy expands on Mississippi Code Section 19-3-67, which orders that supervisors receive expenses for food, lodging and travel.
The travel portion of the policy states an authorization form must be approved by the department head or an elected official over the department, as well as the county administrator prior, to a trip. It also mandates that any out-of-state travel be approved by the board. Extra overnight stays before or after the purpose of a trip won’t be reimbursed and supervisors have to submit a reimbursement form after a trip.
The monthly mileage reimbursement portion makes supervisors specify the purpose of their trip and mandates the county administrator to approve any travel outside the four counties beside Lowndes (Clay, Oktibbeha, Monroe and Noxubee counties). The completed form would then have to be submitted to the board president for approval and then to the county administrator by the 20th day of each month.
“The travel component is when we’re traveling out of town for a conference. The mileage policy is for the supervisors or any of us,” Billingsley said. “Both of those are addressed in state law.”
After the meeting, Brooks said he would not seek administrative approval for travel to neighboring counties.
“I don’t work for Ralph. Ralph works for me, so I’m not going to be running up there saying, ‘Ralph can I go here?’ when I’m trying to carry out my job responsibilities. That is not his job. If I’ve got to go somewhere to take care of county business, I’m not asking the county administrator. They can handle that however they want to,” Brooks said. “Ralph does not dictate to me, and if that’s the direction they’re going, there’s not going to be any peace and harmony anywhere on that board because they (aren’t) going to tell me what to do.”
Brooks said he needed more time to review the policy because a revised version of the draft he’d seen was sent to supervisors Wednesday afternoon.
“Everything that was on the travel policy was what Harry said he wanted in. It wasn’t Ralph’s. It was a Harry Sanders travel policy,” Brooks said. “If Ralph is going to do what Harry wants him to do, we don’t need an administrator. Just let Harry run the county.”
Sanders said Brooks had a copy of the draft for two weeks.
“If he hadn’t had a chance to read it, why did he go up to Ralph’s office and tell Ralph that he was totally opposed to it?” Sanders said. “It’s not anything a reasonable person would be upset about…I’m in total agreement with Ralph’s suggestion of a travel policy. It gives some accountability and some way of checks and balances against any potential fraud in the mileage reimbursement.”
$199 sending the county to court?
Brooks said in a July 31 meeting that he would only pay the $199 back to the county if he was ordered to by a judge. Whether legal action is imminent may hinge on responses from the state attorney general and auditor. Sanders has asked them both how to get the money back if Brooks refuses to pay.
“I don’t want to go to court, but if they say that’s the only way we can get our money back, we’re going to court,” Sanders said. “The only reason why we’re having to implement a travel policy and a mile reimbursement policy is because (Brooks) doesn’t want to follow the rules.”
The county’s travel authorization form has blanks for beginning date of a trip, returning date, destination and purpose along with mileage. Sanders said Brooks frequently leaves the space for destination blank and designates the purpose of each trip as “Constituent service.”
“I don’t think that’s enough. We just put in there that you have to fill out the form all the way. You have to give the exact purpose of your trip and where you went,” Sanders said. “If you’re on legitimate county business, why wouldn’t you want to do that?”
Brooks said has no plans to repay. He said he followed state statute.
“It’s a moot issue to me. I don’t owe the county nothing and I’m not paying anything. I followed the process. Ralph signed off on it and the board approved it,” he said. “If they want to go to court, we can have our day in court, but other than that I’m not thinking about it.”
Nathan Gregory covers city and county government for The Dispatch.
You can help your community
Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 43 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.