by Neil Richard
In doing the research for this topic, there were many hands trying to steer the proverbial tiller towards finding wrong-doing. I am proud to say that although those voicing concern had very loud voices, everything presented in the final product is based on verifiable facts. There is a paper trail for nearly everything we found and those items that didn't have a paper trail were not necessarily worrisome.
The biggest, and most obvious, conclusion from the research is that Ruby Brabo's travel far exceeds that of her peers. For better or worse, her travel Expenses for the total 18 month period we focused on were $10,314.88. The combined total for the other six Supervisors in office during that same time period totaled $9,633.25. Brabo's Reimbursement amounts, money the County repaid her for expenses she incurred, are even more skewed with $511.77 for the other six Supervisors compared to her total of $4,642.76. While numbers are important, the volume of paperwork was what really drove the conclusion home. Some Supervisors had expenses that only required a few sheets of paper to print their documentation while Brabo paperwork took an entire ream of paper to print.
The second, almost as big, conclusion from the research is one that firmly rooted in my opinion. For those unfamiliar with the history of Brabo and the potential merger of L. E. Smoot Library into the Central Rappahannock Regional Library (CRRL) system, I encourage you to read my Opinion article here. I only mention this article because it shows, in my opinion, that Brabo has a tendency to overstate or exaggerate certain things. In her numerous comments during Board meetings, Brabo has stated that the National Association of Counties (NACo) and Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) have reimbursed the County for some of her travel but not all. While this may be true to the letter, I feel it adds further proof to her inclination to overstate the facts. NACo only reimbursed the County for $595.32 in travel expenses. The remaining $950.27 NACo paid went directly to Brabo as she was the one that incurred the expenses. I was able to verify that Brabo did pay for those items with her personal credit card. While I can't fault her for asking for reimbursement for travel expenses, I feel like the bottom line is being whitewashed a little too much.
Editor's Note: In an effort to hear directly from the National Association of Counties on the topic of travel reimbursement, we asked them a few questions. They did not respond to our email with answers.
Outside of these two overarching conclusions, there are other tidbits and anomalies that were discovered. Mileage Reimbursement cost more than Airline Reimbursement by about $100. There were nearly $1,100 in Parking fees paid alone. John Jenkins traveled the least and only incurred a paltry $515.00 in expenses. Both Jenkins and Richard Granger incurred no travel costs in the first half of 2018. Over $9,000 was spent on VACo and nearly $6,000 was spent on NACo (that's net, after factoring in the Repayments NACo made). A few receipts were lost but nothing that raised alarm. A few math errors were made but, again, nothing that raised concerns. There were rumors of Supervisors flying First Class but there was no evidence to support this. Jeff Bueche did repay the County for his wife's portion of the hotel bill. Although other Supervisors showed more than one adult in a room with only one bed, there are no records of them paying the County for the spouse's share of the bill.
In looking to the future of travel for the Supervisors, they have agreed upon a much larger travel budget than in the past. In further crunching the research results, the Supervisors should come in under budget in the next fiscal year. This is assuming they stick to their yearly average travel of nearly $17,000 that they've had over the past 18 to 24 months and don't add anything major to their travel itinerary. You can view their updated Travel Policy here.
I feel like the constant questions from citizens have forced the Supervisors to look closer at their travel and realize that their constituents will hold them accountable. John Jenkins' idea to post travel expenses publicly is a great step in the direction of having an open and easily accessible government. Regardless of where you stand on more or less travel for Supervisors, I feel that they do bring good things to the County by traveling to various conferences and seminars. Where the line should be drawn between too much travel and not enough travel is up to the voters to determine.
One final note about all of this research. In order to obtain the FOIA information from the County, we had to pay $459.21 in fees. Thankfully, a citizen was willing to cover most of those costs with a $300 donation. If you feel the research we've done was valuable enough to warrant a donation, regardless of how large or small it is, we would certainly appreciate it. Because we are a 501(c)(3) nonprofit as recognized by the Internal Revenue Service, we are not in it to make money and we are legally barred from being political. You can donate by using the PayPal button on top of our page or clicking here.
Continue reading:
In doing the research for this topic, there were many hands trying to steer the proverbial tiller towards finding wrong-doing. I am proud to say that although those voicing concern had very loud voices, everything presented in the final product is based on verifiable facts. There is a paper trail for nearly everything we found and those items that didn't have a paper trail were not necessarily worrisome.
The biggest, and most obvious, conclusion from the research is that Ruby Brabo's travel far exceeds that of her peers. For better or worse, her travel Expenses for the total 18 month period we focused on were $10,314.88. The combined total for the other six Supervisors in office during that same time period totaled $9,633.25. Brabo's Reimbursement amounts, money the County repaid her for expenses she incurred, are even more skewed with $511.77 for the other six Supervisors compared to her total of $4,642.76. While numbers are important, the volume of paperwork was what really drove the conclusion home. Some Supervisors had expenses that only required a few sheets of paper to print their documentation while Brabo paperwork took an entire ream of paper to print.
 |
| 18 months of travel documents for Brabo (left) and the other six Supervisors (right). Banana for scale. |
The second, almost as big, conclusion from the research is one that firmly rooted in my opinion. For those unfamiliar with the history of Brabo and the potential merger of L. E. Smoot Library into the Central Rappahannock Regional Library (CRRL) system, I encourage you to read my Opinion article here. I only mention this article because it shows, in my opinion, that Brabo has a tendency to overstate or exaggerate certain things. In her numerous comments during Board meetings, Brabo has stated that the National Association of Counties (NACo) and Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) have reimbursed the County for some of her travel but not all. While this may be true to the letter, I feel it adds further proof to her inclination to overstate the facts. NACo only reimbursed the County for $595.32 in travel expenses. The remaining $950.27 NACo paid went directly to Brabo as she was the one that incurred the expenses. I was able to verify that Brabo did pay for those items with her personal credit card. While I can't fault her for asking for reimbursement for travel expenses, I feel like the bottom line is being whitewashed a little too much.
Editor's Note: In an effort to hear directly from the National Association of Counties on the topic of travel reimbursement, we asked them a few questions. They did not respond to our email with answers.
Outside of these two overarching conclusions, there are other tidbits and anomalies that were discovered. Mileage Reimbursement cost more than Airline Reimbursement by about $100. There were nearly $1,100 in Parking fees paid alone. John Jenkins traveled the least and only incurred a paltry $515.00 in expenses. Both Jenkins and Richard Granger incurred no travel costs in the first half of 2018. Over $9,000 was spent on VACo and nearly $6,000 was spent on NACo (that's net, after factoring in the Repayments NACo made). A few receipts were lost but nothing that raised alarm. A few math errors were made but, again, nothing that raised concerns. There were rumors of Supervisors flying First Class but there was no evidence to support this. Jeff Bueche did repay the County for his wife's portion of the hotel bill. Although other Supervisors showed more than one adult in a room with only one bed, there are no records of them paying the County for the spouse's share of the bill.
In looking to the future of travel for the Supervisors, they have agreed upon a much larger travel budget than in the past. In further crunching the research results, the Supervisors should come in under budget in the next fiscal year. This is assuming they stick to their yearly average travel of nearly $17,000 that they've had over the past 18 to 24 months and don't add anything major to their travel itinerary. You can view their updated Travel Policy here.
I feel like the constant questions from citizens have forced the Supervisors to look closer at their travel and realize that their constituents will hold them accountable. John Jenkins' idea to post travel expenses publicly is a great step in the direction of having an open and easily accessible government. Regardless of where you stand on more or less travel for Supervisors, I feel that they do bring good things to the County by traveling to various conferences and seminars. Where the line should be drawn between too much travel and not enough travel is up to the voters to determine.
One final note about all of this research. In order to obtain the FOIA information from the County, we had to pay $459.21 in fees. Thankfully, a citizen was willing to cover most of those costs with a $300 donation. If you feel the research we've done was valuable enough to warrant a donation, regardless of how large or small it is, we would certainly appreciate it. Because we are a 501(c)(3) nonprofit as recognized by the Internal Revenue Service, we are not in it to make money and we are legally barred from being political. You can donate by using the PayPal button on top of our page or clicking here.
Continue reading:
This article seems to be very well written with mostly factual information. My concern is two-fold: First, I have traveled alone and also with friends and family. The hotel room charge is the same for one or two people, so I'm lost on what significance/conclusion you are trying to come up with. Second, there is not any evidence in your write up on whether the travel incurred by various supervisors were for the benefit of the county. Leaving that part out of the equation doesn't properly address your concerns on travel expenditures. One more observation: Ms. Brabo went on more trips than everyone else on the board. Did you question why? Could it be that the other members are married and / or with full time jobs and children, thus allowing the single member that does not have the additional personal and job obligations to travel the most. I do not know the personal life of all the members of the BOS, but just felt that this research doesn't address the entire picture. Looking forward to any comments. Thanks for your diligent work. Penny Smith
ReplyDeleteWhen you say "mostly factual" I would love to hear more about what you feel is incorrect. I'm more than happy to share any and all of the documents I have that prove every single dollar amount. But it is certainly possible I have a typo somewhere so if you see one, please let me know so I can correct it.
DeleteRegarding your first concern, in my experience a hotel will charge you more for more people. They use more water, more towels, more amenities, etc. Additionally, if you review Part 5 of the series, Supervisor Bueche repaid the County for the additional cost the hotel charged so that his wife could accompany him.
Regarding your second concern, we have never shied away from the fact that there is more to the story than just the numbers. In Part 9 I say "...I feel that they do bring good things to the County by traveling to various conferences and seminars. Where the line should be drawn between too much travel and not enough travel is up to the voters to determine." However, to research how much information was brought back by each Supervisor over an 18 month period is incredibly labor intensive. Even worse, how do you quantify what an idea is worth? Supervisors don't come back from trips with cash in their pockets, they come back with ideas, best practices, news of potential legislation, etc. It's hard to affix a dollar amount to how much money the County saved by not allowing fracking.
Since your Facebook comment was on Part 1 and your Blog comment was on Part 9, I'll post this response in both places since I'm not sure which article you read. Either way, we always appreciate you reading!
Mr. Richard,
DeleteFirst, I did not intend to imply that there were false facts in this report. For that I apologize.
For my first concern, I do travel almost on a monthly basis and have never paid for a second person. The room rate (Marriott) is the same whether I go alone or add a second person when I reserve a room. I do have a concern about the the "type" of hotels that the supervisors are staying at. Looks like a lot of the stays are at resorts, which normally costs more than a hotel. I can understand if there is a conference in the resort that the supervisor is attending, but if that isn't the case he/she should be better stewards of the county's (our) money. I did read the thru the entire article. After I realized that I was the only one with a comment on your project94 blog, I found the Facebook post and re-posted my response. Will do the same.