Audit finds loose accounting by sheriff

Tue, 10/03/2006 - 4:03pm
By: John Thompson

The long-awaited release of the forensic audit of the Sheriff’s Department use of federal drug funds provides a glimpse into a program that has been shrouded from public view for several years.

Click here to download a copy of the full accounting report.

The Fayette County Commission voted Thursday night after executive session to release the results of the audit provided by The Investigative Accounting Group.

In her 16-page assessment CPA Laurie Dyke said that there were “no direct instances of misappropriation; however, we were unable to establish that all transactions were properly approved and recorded or that all assets acquired with Federal Seizure Funds are being used for valid purposes, based on documents provided.”

Contacted Monday, Sheriff Randall Johnson said he didn’t have a chance to examine the whole document and a statement would be released at a later date by Johnson, or his attorney Rick Lindsey.

“I know there are some things that need to be tightened up,” he said.

On Tuesday, County Commission Chairman Greg Dunn explained why it took so long for the $16,000 audit to be released.

“We were going through legal channels and this was part of our discovery during one of the cases against the sheriff,” he explained.

The audit has been completed since last November, but Dunn said the county was trying to “solve the problem without imploding the county.”

The audit seems to vindicate county officials who claimed there were no financial controls on the Sheriff’s Department.

“I just can’t believe that nobody questioned him for years. The information has been there,” Dunn added.

The commission chairman said the audit shows the arrogance of the department in not documenting travel expenses and leaving large gratuities.

“They were leaving $10 tips on a $20 bill with taxpayers’ money,” he said.

Travel costs

The audit covered 2001, 2002, 2003 and 2004. As part of the audit, investigators also examined trips totaling more than $70,000 taken by the department in fiscal years 2004 and 2005.

In the audit several deviations were observed from the county’s written travel policy, including:

• No documentation of the necessity, approximate cost or advance approval of trips by the department.

“Implicit approval is generally documented through Captain (Michele) Walker’s authorization to issue per diem payments to travelers,” the audit stated.

• A flagrant disregard for the county’s travel policy that limits attendance at events that are more than 300 miles away to one employee.

“We noted numerous trips to locations more than 300 miles from the county, including Boston, Houston and Las Vegas with multiple attendees and no written justification,” the report stated.

• Exceeding the county’s 20 percent maximum gratuity policy.

“We noted a few where the gratuity amount appears unreasonable and certainly above the 20 percent limit, including one where the meal receipt was $22 and a $10 tip was included,” the audit said.

While most of the travel expenses appear in line, the auditors had a problem with the lack of documentation surrounding the travel. Another problem was advancing money from the drug buy fund account, instead of federal seizure funds.

During a visit to the department in Aug. 2005, the auditors questioned Walker about expense advance and reimbursement forms without check numbers. Walker told the investigators that she “sometimes pays travel expenses and occasional other small items from a cash fund that she keeps in her safe.”

The investigators said the cash in the safe comes from funds budgeted for drug buys.

“Each year for at least several years, the Sheriff has requested and the county has budgeted a line item for drug buys. No documentation of the actual use of these funds is received by the county finance department. We understand that the amount is approximately $28,000 per year.”

“We also discovered that some of the cash is maintained in the safe, but some of it is kept in a bank account maintained by the Sheriff’s Department that was not provided to us,” the investigators indicated.

Some of the trips made by Sheriff’s Department employees include:

• A two-day trip to Pensacola, Fla., in July 2003 for four employees, including then-Lt. Col. Bruce Jordan. The trip was paid for with drug funds.

• A three-day trip to Boston for three employees, including Jordan in August 2003.

• A two-day trip to South Carolina in August 2003 for three employees for repairing the helicopter. The trip was paid for with drug funds.

• A trip to Washington, D.C., in September 2003 for four employees to attend a firearms instruction class.

• An eight-day trip to Florida in October 2003 for Jordan and three employees for “unknown training.”

• A five-day trip to South Carolina for five employees to attend bloodhound training.

• A two-day trip to Las Vegas in February 2004 for Jordan and two employees. The audit says there was no stated purpose for training and no conference registration.

• A four-day trip to Ft. Lauderdale in March 2004 for Jordan and two employees. The audit states no purpose was given and no per diem or expenses, except hotel.

• A four-day trip to Jacksonville for Jordan and three employees for crisis hostage negotiation.

• A trip to Hilton Head in September 2004 for two employees for asset forfeiture training.

In the annual certification report signed by Sheriff Randall Johnson, the document lists $96,497 for travel and training in fiscal year 2004.

Commission Chairman Greg Dunn refused to sign the document because of lack of documentation.

In the most recent certification report submitted in July, $66,996 was spent on travel and training.

The auditors listed several problems with the department’s accounting practices involving training and travel. The department was taken to task for no accountability to the county, the undisclosed bank account and the indication that all of the drug fund buy money was not used to purchase drugs and a lack of documentation of funds paid or reimbursed from the drug buy fund.

Computers and televisions

The audit also discovered that during 2003 and 2004, the department bought more than $190,000 in computers, TVs and electronic equipment. But when the auditors tried to inventory the items, they ran into problems.

“Several of the items we attempted to verify were not tagged, improperly identified, not available for inspection because we were told that they were out in the field, or on loan to another agency and not recorded on either of the inventory listings,” the audit reports.

In 2004, the department bought more than $21,000 worth of TVs for the watch office.

Vehicles

During the same time frame, the department spent more than $157,000 on 10 vehicles and two golf carts. All of the vehicles were purchased at Don Jackson Lincoln Mercury through a very informal process.

“The Sheriff’s Department does not issue purchase requisitions, purchase orders or competitive bids for large purchases, as specified in Fayette County’s Municipal Code Article 5. Several purchases in excess of $20,000 were made and according to county regulations, these should have been approved by the Board of Commissioners on a competitive sealed bid basis,” the audit states.

The audit also said it’s questionable whether one of the vehicles should have been assigned to District Attorney Scott Ballard because the assignment may not be a “valid law enforcement purpose” required by the Equitable Sharing Guidelines.

The two golf carts were assigned to school resource officers at Whitewater Middle School and an unnamed school. As of Nov. 2005, the audit determined the department had a ratio of 1.09 vehicles for every non-jail employee in the department.

In January, three Fayette County employees were detained by deputies after they drove away from an auto dealership with three vehicles that had been traded in by the sheriff’s department three weeks earlier.

Although county officials contended the cars were titled to the county and thus owned by the county, sheriff’s officials say they were bought with federal drug seizure funds which by law means they can only be used for law enforcement purposes.

The vehicles had been used as undercover cars, and the department routinely trades undercover vehicles out ... “for obvious reasons,” said then- Lt. Col. Bruce Jordan, director of investigations for the Fayette County Sheriff’s Office. Because the cars were bought with federal drug seizure funds, the county does not have control over them.

“The matter has been turned over to the U.S. Attorney’s Office,” Jordan said, noting that no arrests were made nor citations issued in connection with the incident.

Jordan said the initial report from the dealership was unclear about who actually took the vehicles, so deputies began looking for them. Ironically, it was Jordan himself who found the vehicles on Ga. Highway 54 near McDonough Road and he followed them into the county’s fleet maintenance area along with an undercover drug agent in an unmarked vehicle and one road deputy.

“I said, ‘Get out of our cars,’” Jordan said, adding that County Commission Chairman Greg Dunn had sent a letter to the dealership asserting that the cars were county property.

“I told them Greg Dunn has no governing authority over them because they were purchased with federal drug funds,” Jordan said.

The three county employees, including Finance Director Mark Pullium, were taken to the sheriff’s department to write statements about “why they did what they did,” Jordan said. Pullium did not comply with that request, although the two other employees did, Jordan added.

All three employees were later released after Sheriff Randall Johnson determined not to arrest them. Jordan said the cars were the dealership’s property and thus the dealership could have taken out criminal warrants for the employees’ arrest.

Also, one of the cars had an incorrect tag placed on it, and none of them were insured, meaning that the three employees could have at least been cited for driving without insurance, Jordan said. No citations were written, Jordan confirmed.

The three cars had a trade-in value of $21,000, Jordan said. Because they had already had their insurance coverage revoked, the cars had to be towed away, he added.

Weapons

Another big purchase during fiscal year 2005 was weapons. The department spent more than $75,000 on 142 Sig-Sauer pistols. When the auditors visited in Oct. 2005, they received an inventory listing showing all 142 of the new weapons, but only seven were in the armory. One weapon that was supposed to be in the armory was with a uniformed officer, and another that was shown as being assigned was in the armory.

The Sig-Sauers replaced Glocks and the auditors were told the Glocks were being used as backup weapons. The auditors received an old inventory listing of the Glocks, but were told it had not been updated in years.

“There is no policy to physically inspect weapons assigned to any officers,” the report concluded.

Repercussions

The audit concludes that certain spending decisions by the Sheriff’s Department may adversely impact the county’s budget. When vehicles are bought with seized funds, they have to be maintained and insured with county funds.

The county could end up paying operating costs for the helicopter in several years, the audit says, if it’s determined the helicopter costs are not an approved use of seizure funds.

In 2004, the department started with a balance of $167,000 in the seized funds account and received $853,000 in seizure funds and interest income and spent $654,000. But in 2005, the department only received $191,000 and spent $490,000 and was left with a year-ending balance of $47,000.

“If the trend continues, it is possible that there will be insufficient Federal Seizure Funds to pay for the significant helicopter expenses and this may create budget and cost issues for the county,” the audit concluded.

In 2006, the numbers bounced back. The department received $1.5 million in funds and spent $599,000, leaving a fund balance of $962,000.

The audit does indicate that funds are being spent for valid law enforcement purposes and supplementing the Sheriff’s budget, but offers several concerns.

• Certain line items, such as uniforms, are budgeted in drug funds and the general county budget.

• The use of a vehicle by the District Attorney.

• The large amount of money spent on TVs and computers.

• The ongoing expenses for the helicopter.

In summary, the audit states that seizure funds have not been accurately reported in the county’s annual financial report. While the inaccuracies are not material to the county’s financial statement, they “indicate internal control weaknesses which can and should be corrected.”

“The Sheriff’s Department is not complying with established county policies and procedures, especially related to purchasing, competitive bids and documentation of travel expenses,” the audit concludes.

The audit also warns the county should be cautious about the Sheriff’s Department reporting before signing the annual Certification Report.

In April of this year, County Commission Chairman Greg Dunn insisted that all federally forfeited property be “funneled through the Fayette County Department of Finance,” according to a letter he wrote to Fayette County Sheriff Randall Johnson.

Dunn also wrote a letter to the U.S. Department of Justice, which administers the federal drug forfeiture program, saying that all property “requested on behalf of the sheriff’s department” should be submitted to county finance director Mark Pulliam.

“This letter is to notify you that, effective immediately, the contact person authorized to receive forfeited property from the Department of Justice has been changed to the Fayette County Director of Finance, Mark Pulliam,” Dunn wrote.

Currently the Justice Department works directly with the Fayette County Sheriff’s Department in providing the seized items and funds.

The sheriff’s department operates a drug task force that works local cases in addition to regional cases by cooperating with the federal Drug Enforcement Administration. By participating in DEA busts, the sheriff’s department qualifies for the seized money, which must be spent on items such as equipment, supplies and training. The funds cannot be used to pay salaries.

Dunn’s letter to the Justice Department also referred to the sheriff’s department entering a “Federal Equitable Sharing Agreement.”

Sheriff Randall Johnson said there is no such agreement in place.

“No agreement ever happened about that drug money because it’s not his,” Johnson said

Dunn has insisted that he doesn’t want to control the forfeited drug funds, but he wants the funds and property purchased with that money to be fully accounted for.

The sheriff’s department made its drug seizure fund purchases available for inspection by Pulliam earlier this year who went through stacks of receipts from purchases, officials said.

— Staff Writer John Munford contributed to this article.

login to post comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
THE BOSS's picture
Submitted by THE BOSS on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 2:16pm.

Sheriff Randall Johnson Responds To Forensic Audit
(See “Fayette Daily News”) Cal, I don’t think Johnson likes “The Citizen”?
'Show me anything illegal we've done'


Submitted by lawaboveall on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 4:28pm.

Randall is sounding like Clinton. " It deepens own whut the definkneeshun of Eeleegal is ". There is a difference between illegal and wrong. Look it up. He does not get it and he never will. He cannot understand why people are questioning him after all these years. It is almost like saying...he has done it for years and now, right as he gets ready to RETAR, people are questioning his judgement.

Well, I for one will pitch in on the RETARRMINT party.

THE BOSS's picture
Submitted by THE BOSS on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 11:34am.

Well! Well!

As far as the “Internal Criminal Investigation” (SEE “FAYETTE DAILY NEWS”) to be conducted by Gary Conger, District Attorney for the Chattahoochee Judicial Circuit which includes Columbus? Gee is there anyone from Columbus we all know? (That Good Old Boy System Kicks In, ya know what I mean Vern.) Maybe I know too much to trust anyone anymore. But I’d think the FED’S would be all over this stuff. Maybe they are, let’s hide and watch.

If you haven’t read the “Accounting Report”, do it now, just click on the link provided by The Citizen.

Someone needs to get control of that “VISA” card, or cards.

Can’t do favors for the Good Ol Boys with “Purchase Orders” and “Competitive Bids” now can you? Can’t do returns and get cash back?

Just read the report and you’ll see who gets to take most of the trips, “Click”, “Click”.

Have A Nice Day!


Submitted by lawaboveall on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 4:29pm.

Would the primary beneficiary of all those trips and training have the initials BJ?

Submitted by chill on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 10:43am.

Not running to the Sheriff's defense but I would really like to know where you read/heard that the SO procured the Sigs b/c the Glocks are not safe. Glock handguns are among the safest firearms in the world. They have been used by many LE agencies because of this fact. Glock is a "point and shoot" weapon. No hammer to Cock, no "safety" to release. In a high stress situation, this is the type of weapon you want b/c there is very little that can go wrong. Sig Sauer also makes very safe and quality firearms and there is no "safety" to release. The weapons the SO purchased (p229's, p226's) are configured in Single-action/Double-action (SA/DA). The mechanics are just different. For the first shot, the hammer must be manually cocked then fired or the trigger pulled completely to the rear (10 lb trigger pull); every shot after that you must simply pull the trigger (4.5 lb trigger pull) and the pull is shorter. Because of this, I have seen some in the department (certain plain clothed offecers) carry the Sig holstered with the hammer already cocked. Also, regarding the GSA co-op purchasing, the SO got the Sigs through Autrey's Armory. At $75,000 for 142 weapons that is a little over $528/, this is a great deal by any standards for a weapon that retails new for $800+ and $900+ with night sights. I doubt the feds could have done any better. Thank you Ben! Furthermore, there are over 200 deputies in the SO. Every deputy was given the option to go with the new Sigs or stick with their trusted Glocks. Some decided to stick with what they are used to and still carry the Glock as their primary duty weapon. Note: Sigs are relied upon by US Navy Seals and the federal govt recently signed a multi-million dollar deal to supply all agencies under the DHS with Sig-Sauer p229’s, p226's, and p239's. I have used both Glocks and Sigs and I prefer the Sig p229. The "safety" in modern firearms is the operator of that firearm. Smiling

Submitted by lawaboveall on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 4:22pm.

I did not say that the Glocks were unsafe. I was referring to the excuse given by the Sheriff's department for a budget line expenditure for firearms a couple of budget cycles ago. (check the record, I did)

I totally agree that the safety in any firearm is the he/she who handles the weapon. However, that did not prevent more than one instances of accidental discharge of the Glocks by Sheriff's personnel and the subsequent request to replace them with the Sigs because they were unsafe. I did not say that, Bruce did.

The Glocks were supposed to be turned in to the County for disposal, (as per requirement) but Bruce and Co. then decided that they were keeping them for backup weapons. I think they should have back up weapons. Safe back up weapons. My point is simple, if the Glocks are unsafe, get rid of them. If they are not, keep them and safe the $75k on new toys. When justifying an expenditure (regardless of the amount) try telling the truth (as difficult as it maybe for some over there. This is another example where the FCSO operates under a different set of rules (or maybe just an alternate reality).

The Sheriff can spend his budget as he wishes. The courts are already clear on that point. But as a taxpayer in this county, I would not mind the Sheriff demonstrating a little proper stewardship of the monies. As they audit shows...that ain't happenin!

Submitted by chill on Fri, 10/06/2006 - 5:01pm.

lawaboveall,
I did eventually see the justification you are referring to. I apologize for my misunderstanding of the facts. Lindsay referred to it in his letter just the other day as well. The comission should also be asking that if they are "unsafe" which they are absolutely not; why do some deputies still carry a Glock for their primary duty weapon? Why were they given a choice? Lindsay also referred to both the Glock and Sig as revolvers. Do you think he owns has a gun? Sounds like that would really be unsafe if he doesn't even know the proper work for them. Side note: the "audit" was not conducted according to GAAP, it is a politically motivated document designed for use in litigation. It is a waste of taxpayer money spent on creating it. It should be taken with a grain of salt. We need a real audit and it should go back to the creation of the DTF.

Submitted by lawaboveall on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 8:05am.

Spextor,

The commission did ask about switching out of the guns during the budget cycle and got the "they are unsafe" justification. Unfortunately the court has now ruled that, once the money has been allocated, the sheriff can do whatever he wants to with the money. That includes buying new guns whether they need them or not.
The only way that the Commission could have prevented the purchase would have been to deny the funding during the budget hearings.
If that had happened there would have been two outcomes. First the sheriff would cry to the papers that the County commissioners were anti-public safety because they insisted that the sheriff's people use "unsafe" guns (which we now know is not true. Secondly, the sheriff would have taken the money from somewhere else in the budget, bought the guns anyway, and then claimed that the commission underfunded him in some other area,(jail, cars, toys) and the commission was anti-public safety. That, young friend is how the FCSO works.

If the sheriff were required to justify purchases like everybody else, this kind of thing would get more scrutiny and the public would be made aware of how the tax dollars are spent.

This type of activity is what caused the $200k overrun in the sheriff's budget in fiscal'06. Did you know that?

Submitted by chill on Mon, 10/09/2006 - 1:35pm.

What you are referring to, the "unsafe glock" justification was used in budget meetings. The SO was, in a very sly manner, attempting to get credit for the Glocks by turning them in to the commission. This credit would have been used towards the purchase of the new weapons(effectively increasing the SO's appropriated budget). Since this credit was denied by the commission the Sheriff decided to purchase the new weapons with money in the Drug Seizure accounts in accordance w/ federal guidlines. Once approriated the Sheriff can use his budget the way he wants. In this case he knew that the $75,000 could most effectively be used to pay his men and women. Drug seizure money cannot be used to pay salaries. Unsafe Glocks?Nice try Jordan. The Sheriff does not need to justify any puchases out of Seizure accounts. The Sheriff only needs to justify his budget requests. Once the money is appropriated he can use it how he sees fit. Because of this the commission has no guarantee that his requests will be used the way he says they will. However, if the Sheriff wants to play this game, then next time around the commission will be much more reluctant to give him what he wants. This affords a nice little balance of power.

Yes, I am aware that the Sheriffs budget was in the red. I don't know the specifics but I bet it is quite interesting.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 11:34am.

"Also, regarding the GSA co-op purchasing, the SO got the Sigs through Autrey's Armory. At $75,000 for 142 weapons that is a little over $528/, this is a great deal by any standards for a weapon that retails new for $800+ and $900+ with night sights. I doubt the feds could have done any better.

I think the agency I mentioned can only sell IT and cars/trucks to state and local agencies. I have no idea about weapons.


Submitted by aztec1 on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 10:02pm.

After reading the report, it is no wonder the Sheriff and BJ were weary of prying eyes. I had been of the opinion that maybe the Sheriff was just too trusting of his staff to do the right and smart thing when it came to spending money...NOT ANYMORE..!

There are a couple of things that jump out at me that are really troubling. The first is the misuse of the TAXPAYER funded Drug Buy Fund. The fact that it was used as a petty cash fund for travel expenses and who knows what else, and not as a fund for drug purchases shows a complete disregard on the part of the custodian of that fund (Capt. Walker) to use it in a way consisent with its budgeted purpose. Handling petty cash is a hornets nest when it is not done according to very strict accounting practices. Based on what this report says, someone really dropped the ball on seeing and anticipating the can of worms that would open up once it was discovered that paying cash from this fund for something other than what it was designated for and then reimbursing the fund from the Fed seizure account and saying, "Well, we paid it back so it's OK". It fits with the attitude of BJ when he tried to say it was "OK" because he reimbursed the Fed fund with a personal check once he discovered that people were asking questions. The fact that Capt. Walker did not reveal the existence of the fund until questioned about it by the auditors is troubling. Even more troubling is the fact that someone in the department chose not to reveal the bank account from which those funds were drawn. If this petty cash supply is still being used in this way, then the Sheriff and Capt. Walker have not learned a damn thing from all the scrutiny. Someone needs to ask if this continues to be a taxpayer funded account. Because if it is, it don't need to be anymore, judging from the fact that the fund was being backfilled with drug seizure money anyway. Why not just use the Fed drug seizure fund/money for drug buys...now there's a revelation.

The second thing that is really troubling is the fact that the auditors were not able to reconcile the DAG-71 claims by the Sheriff with the actual amount of seized assets received from the Feds. They did verify that what was received was deposited into the department's Fed account, but they can't tell just how much was actually requested vs. received in asset sharing from the Feds, nor can they tell which requests were turned down, reduced or outright denied because the Sheriff's books (or lack thereof) don't address this somewhat important issue. Only one solution I see. Someone needs to request records from the Feds to see just how much they have paid the Sheriff in asset sharing and reconcile that amount, payment for payment, with what the Sheriff's Department records show was requested and what was actually received. I am to the point now that if this issue is not resolved, maybe the FCSO drug unit does need to be pulled back from working with the Feds until it is. Maybe someone at the Feds needs to take notice that there may be some auditors showing up at their door asking some questions. Even worse, some aggressive Fox 5 News reporter.

I could go on and on, but not today...but for one last thing. This audit is dated. It was completed in November of 2005. I would be curious to know if anything has changed as far as the accounting practices within the Sheriff's Department. If the Sheriff has not insisted on correcting some of the obvious things mentioned in the report even after BJ decided to raid the drug fund to pay for ball team security and then lie about it and slip in a personal check hoping no one would notice...if the Sheriff continues to fall back on the old "it's political" excuse as he seemed to have done tonight on the news, then maybe it is time for him to ride off into the sunset and retire...

Submitted by snark on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 10:22pm.

Why bother to watch "some aggressive Fox 5 News reporter" if you just plan to rewrite the story to suit yourself?

BJ decided to raid the drug fund to pay for ball team security and then lie about it

BJ didn't raid the drug fund and when he learned someone had inappropriately reimbursed travel from that fund, he paid it back with a personal check. It's right there in Dale Russell's report.

I wouldn't blame you for just blowing off Russell's report because he surely showed the story he wanted to show and ignored what didn't fit it, but you aren't just blowing it off - you're completely re-writing it.

Submitted by skyspy on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 7:40am.

He didn't pay anything back until he had been caught.

Submitted by lawaboveall on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 7:39am.

Snark,

Your comment reflects the attitude of the command structure of the FCSO and that is the problem. Bruce did not raid the drug account. He had Michelle Walker do it for him. She works for him, or did you miss that part?

He wrote the check because he was caught. There is no amount of "spin" you can put on this to make Bruce look innocent of wrongdoing. You know he is not, and now we are all learning just how bad things are.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 7:44pm.

Why wasn’t the computer equipment and the vehicles purchased off of Government contract?

The Governments procurement office, GSA, opened their schedule contracts to state and local governments a few years ago.

As a rule, a purchaser can save up to 50% by using them.

Does the county use these contracts? If not, than why not?


Submitted by lawaboveall on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 7:53am.

The answer here, from what I gather is NO. The contracts exist, but if Randall used them he would have to comply with the record keeping requirements and that he was unwilling to do. That is why he bought all the guns without going through this process. It would have been too hard to justify and prove that all the guns they bought, they actually received.
BTW, does anybody else wonder why the Glock's which were replaced because they were "unsafe" are still in use as back ups? I think they should have as many weapons as they need, but if the gun is unsafe it is unsafe as a backup. The guns belong to the county and there is no accounting for them. How do we know they are there?
Because Michelle Walker says so? Sure, whatever.

Submitted by bronson on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 9:58pm.

The county might be using the GSA contracts you're talking about but that wouldn't mean the Sheriff was using them. I think part of the beef the commissioners had if memmory serves is they don't go through the county to buy and they do their own thing.

Submitted by lawaboveall on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 7:47am.

The county does have such agreements. The Sheriff will not use them.
He will not use the county fleet department for repairs because he claims it takes too long, but then he never tries.

The budget for the Sheriff is about $14 million. Just for the sake of argument, let's say that they saved 2% of the budget by combining purchase. That works out to $280K. If you throw in another $100k from the lawsuit costs that would have been avoided by following the rules, our tax burden would have been reduced by almost $400k.

So the sheriff chooses to waste money to protect his turf rather than work for the benefit of his constituents.

Submitted by skyspy on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 7:59am.

When is the current term up for our sheriff?? When are the feds going to swoop in and clean this up?

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 7:55am.

State and Local Governments Get Best Value Through GSA

State and Local Governments Get Best Value Through GSA
Using the federal government’s buying power, state and local governments can now save money when they buy information technology (IT) software, firmware, supplies, support equipment, and services! GSA is making this possible through “cooperative purchasing.”

The specific contracts available to state and local governments are GSA’s Federal Supply Service Schedule 70 and Corporate Schedule contracts that contain IT special item numbers (SINs). GSA is developing a training course to help state and local governments learn how to effectively use GSA Schedules.

Participation in cooperative purchasing is voluntary for state and local governments, and contractors. GSA contractors must modify their existing contracts to participate. After the contracts have been modified, contractors still have the option of accepting orders on a case-by-case basis.

As a result of the e-Government Act of 2002, state and local governments are encouraged to place orders for IT using these contracts. Questions about cooperative purchasing may be directed to the National Customer Service Center at 1-800-488-3111.


Submitted by bronson on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 5:13pm.

It hit the news tonight. If you missed it at 6 probably on at 10 again. Dale Russell is pulling travel records and thinks more problems. Tonight Michelle Walker is saying the report is not a real forensic report and that if they dug hard enough they would have found all the stuff they were looking at. If I work somewhere and someone is doing an audit I would make sure they got all the records and wouldn't make them dig.

Submitted by joliebjolly on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 7:04pm.

I just caught the tail end of the story where Randall Johnson was saying this was all political. How now? I'm missing something somehow. Isn't the elction over and didn't the people Johnson blamed for attacking him lose? If it was political it seems like the report would have been released before the election or am I just out in space somewhere? Is he going to try and resurrect that rumor that Dunn wants to run for Sheriff? Yawn.

abeautifulday4us's picture
Submitted by abeautifulday4us on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 8:07pm.

Why wasn't the audit released BEFORE the election?


Robert W. Morgan's picture
Submitted by Robert W. Morgan on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 7:19pm.

So when Bruce (allegedly, Cal) pulled out a handful of the drug money in the (allegedly) unlocked safe he was making a political statement? Or was the fact that Dunn blew the whistle - a little early, but nevertheless, a whistle properly blown a political statement?

Randall, please don't insult us by doing a Bill Clinton-like defense of what is obviously an (allegedly) real crime. Diverting attention away from the (allegedly) real crime does not enhance your (allegedly) fine image. Please let the GBI investigate and live with the consequences.


Submitted by lawaboveall on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 7:57am.

RWM,

You sure have changed your tune. Weren't you saying that all Dunn wanted was power? That the sheriff was within his rights? I find in ironic that two good people got forced out of an office where they were doing real benefit to the county, by old fashioned corrupt politics. Too bad there is no such thing as an election "do over".

abeautifulday4us's picture
Submitted by abeautifulday4us on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 4:18pm.

Why wasn't the audit released BEFORE the election ?


THE BOSS's picture
Submitted by THE BOSS on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 2:31pm.

GOOOOOOOOD MORNING FAYETTE COUNTY!
WAKEUP AND LOOK WHAT IS GOING ON IN YOUR BACKYARD.

Fayette County has the best Sheriff’s Department and employees in Georgia. Before this Sheriff and his people (The Click, those 12 to 15) can take it down any lower, we need a change and we need a change today, not next election, today. It’s time the people ask for and get a change.

We have procedural problems here in all departments, From the “Very Top” down to the janitor.

Now before anyone gets their little feelings hurt, there are at least 200 good employees at the SO and we all know right from wrong, and if you don’t then there is the “Click” (you know those 12 to 15), those that do not know right from wrong - shame on you, “Guilty By Association” we all get what we deserve, sooner, or later.

Wait till accountability comes into play... Everyone knows, but everyone just wants to start pointing fingers at the others. To bad you don’t understand the oath you took, OH! That’s right you just wanted a “Big Badge” to wear, to make you feel like someone big, I know your kind. “SCARY”

SO has had a busy last four weeks. From shooting dogs, misuse of employees for baby sitters, misuse of drug funds, JOrdans demotion to Lt., lavish cars, electronic equipment and department vacations. Any one know if they all still meet for lunch everyday (the same eight to twelve every day one big table)

It’s really sad that we have an agency “The Fayette County Sheriff’s Department” can’t even do a simple accounting procedure. But is anyone really surprised? Play dumb - it’s easier to cover up.

Think about it! These people are responsible for the chain of evidence, from a Crime Scene to evidence lockup to court and back and forth? Wonder how many innocent people are in jail because of their mishandling of evidence or the missing of evidence?

I would guess that only 66% to 75% of the actual drug bust “drugs and money” get accounted for.

All the little trips are usually the same people, some time someone new gets to go along for a job well done, or recruitment.

They have no idea who has what equipment, except the “Click” always gets the new toys and the boys on the road that do the real work are the last to get the things they need.

Commissioner Greg Dunn and Company, I thank you for a job well Done. I am sure there will be a lot more people saying the same thing by the end of the year, and you will have won one last one for the people of Fayette County.


farrahfawcettfawn's picture
Submitted by farrahfawcettfawn on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 2:50pm.

I can't stand to see you continue to misuse the word anymore, you should be referring to "clique" rather than "click". Sorry, I couldn't help myself.


Submitted by Hardtack on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 2:00pm.

Many of us knew long ago that "loose" money lying around even in the sheriff's office was very, very dangerous. All of those people who wrote in an defended the sheriff from the county, wanting to audit the expenses, should learn a good lesson here. Whether an individual in the commissioner's office was unliked, or not, had nothing to do with the books being done correctly. Providing no one put some cash into their own pocket (as does happen in the big cities) too much should not be made of this farce. Let them all resign and go home failures, that is good enough just for having a good time on the money. Please stop defending the party you like when they are wrong. Ill deeds must be punished or they won't stop.

Submitted by SoCalMama on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 12:34pm.

As the citizens and taxpayers of Fayette County....can we not call for Sheriff Johnson's regisnation? I believe the only way to solve this is to get rid of the elected officials and start over with a new group....this just makes me so sad, Fayette is such a great community.

farrahfawcettfawn's picture
Submitted by farrahfawcettfawn on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 1:21pm.

Someone in our business was considered the "golden boy" for 10 years and given carte blanche. Turned out the last 2 years of his employment he was traveling on our dollar, courting our customers, stealing our client files and starting his own business on the side and lying about what was going on. In retrospect we made a poor choice by allowing him to be in charge without direct supervision. My point is that some people are very skilled at deception and good, honest people can be too trusting. Fayette is a great community, and I believe Sheriff Johnson has helped make it that way. Give him a chance to get this behind him and move forward.


Submitted by SoCalMama on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 2:18pm.

I respectfully disagree......of all people in this county, the Sheriff should uphold the integrity and enforce the laws of Fayette County. It's obvious that he can't even control his own department and his own urges for "freebies". I feel he should resign and walk away with what little dignity he has left. He may have had good intentions in the beginning...but instead of the higher ups taking "business trips" and riding in free cars, Sheriff Johnson should have been hiring more officers to accommodate a growing Fayette County. Dang, I hate this.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 2:31pm.

” It's obvious that he can't even control his own department and his own urges for "freebies".

So according to your logic, Speaker Dennis Hastert should resign, or maybe Bush, because of what Foley has done.

”but instead of the higher ups taking "business trips"

I can’t speak for anyone else, but I would rather have the best trained Sheriffs Officers than ones that are not trained.

” Sheriff Johnson should have been hiring more officers to accommodate a growing Fayette County.”

But he can’t use the drug money for that. That would be illegal.


Submitted by SoCalMama on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 2:35pm.

or do you need to just put the crack pipe down?

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 4:11pm.

What part didn't you understand?


masked08's picture
Submitted by masked08 on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 10:54am.

but not for the reasons you would think. Anyone put under the spotlight would raise flags. You, me, all the other "leaders".
However, 6 out of 10 items listed above note that Mr. Jordan went on those trips. A light bulb should be gleaming brightly now. BTW, if he hasn't reported for work, can't he be fired for the no shows??


Submitted by lawaboveall on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 4:39pm.

I have not seen the records if they exist, but who wants to bet that in addition to Bruce that all of the trips were taken by the same group of no more than 15 people experienced the bulk of the training out of the 200 or so folks that work for the sheriff.

Want proof? After the jailers accidentally killed an inmate at the jail some time back, in the subsequent suit the jailers claimed they did not have enough training. How much training did they get? It worked out to about $10 bucks a person. Wow.

Submitted by aztec1 on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 9:58am.

The results of this audit are dissapointing and very disturbing. It's obvious that the Sheriff does not insist that his employees be accountable for property inventory. Pieces of equipment can be misplaced, but if employees are mandated to be on the "dotted line" as a custodian of a piece of issued equipment or property, then there is a place to start when inventory verification is necessary...that is if you have a system of yearly or bi-yearly inventory verification. It's obvious that the department has no centralized, methodical, or detailed inventory system to track its equipment or use of its supplies. Consequently, it is not surprising that things are missing, and probably have walked out the door to parts unknown. It is one thing when a TV or piece of electronic equipment gets misplaced, BUT GUNS? The fact that the auditors were not able to verify the weapon inventory is most disturbing to me. Where are they?, Who has them?, What kind of paper trail is in place to hold someone accountable if they are lost or missing? How often does the department verify its weapon inventory? No one seems to know, or want to say. We as taxpayers need to start asking questions and insist on answers. There is no excuse for not keeping track of every firearm owned and used by the department, much less a plasma TV or other electronic toy.

The department's drug unit has done good work with the Feds. They are well regarded and highly skilled and competent. Their hard work has paid off in bringing in millions in seized monies and assets to the department. It is so unfortunate that for all their good work, their reward from their departmental administration is to be betrayed with bad or non-existent accountability, questionable purchases and expenditures, and the appearance of impropriety. All of this has now called their integrity into question as well as the wisdom of their continued cooperation with the Feds. If their cooperation and participation with the Feds is jeapordized or terminated because of the stupidity and arrogance of the Departmental bosses, it would be Fayette County's loss.

It is obvious that the Sheriff and Bruce Jordan lost sight of what it's like to live from paycheck to paycheck as most rank and file members of their department are forced to do from month to month because of low pay and practically non-exisent benefits and retirement. The most obvious evidence of this are the "toys" and trips that were purchased and paid for with the seized drug funds. Bruce always got is trip paid for. I would be curious to know how much money was spent sending the rank and file deputies to good training classes in places like Panama City, Pensecola, Las Vegas, Ft. Lauderdale, Hilton Head, Wash DC, Boston, etc etc. I bet you will find little or none...most probably because they don't have to spend much money when you send them to the dingy dorms at the garden spot of scenery, the state training facility (GPSTC) in Forsyth, Ga.

I would be curious to know how much was spent from the drug seizure fund on buying the rank and file updated and new body armor and other safety equipment, or were the deputies forced to buy their own out of pocket, and then buy new body armor after three or four years to replace the worn vest that they wore 5 or 6 days a week and was beginning to degrade, smell and turn colors from wear. I would bet that the rank and file deputies probably had to work a few additional off duty jobs to pay for their new vest because they could not afford it on just their departmental salary, and because they had a desire to come home to their loved ones at the end of the shift.

...I am not even going to get started on the ulitmate "toys"...those damn helicopters...

Bottom line is this...if the Sheriff had insisted on his own house being kept clean, he would not be in the awkward and unfortunate position he is in now. If the Sheriff could account for and show that purchases and the expenditures from the drug seizure fund were sound, solid, and made good sense, then I would be willing support him when he tells (and told) the commisioners to pound sand when they were shaking their fingers at him. Now it's obvious that they had a point. The courts decided in the Sheriff's favor as far as his little private war with Greg Dunn, but that does not mean that the courts were right. We as voters and taxpayers will have a final say at some point, and right now the Sheriff has some damage control and explaining to do...or not if he has decided to retire... then all the more reason that we as voters and taxpayers in this county insist AND DEMAND accountability from the Sheriff's Department in how it spends our money from here on out...and IT IS OUR MONEY!...not Bruce Jordan's or Randall Johnson's...OUR MONEY...because it is OUR SHERIFF'S OFFICE, not Bruce Jordan's or Randall Johnson's or Greg Dunn's...IT IS OUR SHERIFF'S OFFICE.

On a positive note, we as taxpayers and voters need to be thankful for the continued dedication of the rank and file of the Sheriff's Department despite all the distractions. Sheriffs and their "Lt. Colonels", Chief Deputies, etc. will come and go, but the rank and file will always be there. From the dispatchers, to the jailors, to the clerks, to the "road warriors"...THEY DESERVE OUR SUPPORT despite the failings of their bosses. IT IS THEY who answer the 911 call in the middle of the night, dispatch the patrol car to the right address, or keep guard on the human garbage occupying our jail, or keep track of the files and reports generated in the course of business. It is the underpaid and underappeciated deputy in a squad car who will answer your need and call at all hours of the night and day when someone is standing outside your window trying to break in, or stealing your car, or robbing the store down the street where your son or daughter may work. It is the overworked Investigator who always has reports waiting in the In-Box every morning when they come in for their day, and gets one call after another from citizens wanting to know if their case has been solved yet when in reality, it is probably somewhere in the stack on the desk because the investigator is ONLY a couple of weeks behind in even looking at the reports. It is he or she, the rank and file deputy, police officer, investigator and many others like them that make the decision every day to stand between US and the human garbage of the world. Indeed, it is the rank and file that deserve our thanks most of all, for just being there and taking a stand between us and the badguys, and knowing full well that by taking that stand, by answering our calls for help, by standing between us and THEM, they put themselves in harms way...because public safety and service is their calling...THEY, THE RANK AND FILE OF THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, DESERVE OUR SUPPORT, despite the failings of their Sheriff and management staff. Let them know that next time you see them by just saying -- "THANKS FOR BEING THERE!"

Submitted by McDonoughDawg on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 9:08am.

Didn't they have pretty good reason to doubt the use of the drug money's? I remember folks calling Dunn & Company Power Hungry over these accusations. It seems all they wanted was an accounting, and here it is, hard to say that the Commission was wrong.

I'll hang up and listen.

Submitted by lawaboveall on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 9:21am.

Those who were using your taxes to fund a "live style" of a feudal lord and his select few. So sad is it not? Dawg, do you not find it ironic that the those who were fighting to keep the power were the ones who were playing the role of victim?

Hey Eric, what do you say about "frivolous lawsuits" now? Do you have the guts to respond?

If I come across angry, it is only because I am.

Git Real's picture
Submitted by Git Real on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 9:35am.

We understand you're angry but your husbands and Linda's loses were a result of many issues and not limited to the sheriff's department fiasco. I'm glad Greg is not my commissioner anymore.

But, is he available for a congressional election in 30 days?


Submitted by lawaboveall on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 10:00am.

That is the second time you have called me Janet. I am male, over forty, with a master's degree in business and a small business owner that lives and works in this county. So stop trying to continually deflect from the issue by claiming that I am some hysterical female.

What other issues are you referring to exactly? "Frivolous" lawsuits?
They do not seem so frivolous anymore do they? Wasting money on the Marshals? If you are so close to this gang of arrogant free spenders, then you already know that Randall's two errand boys (Eric and Jack) tried to put the Marshall's function under the sheriff when they take office and he told them to stuff it. So I guess that issue was wrong too eh?
The actions revealed here actually make a pretty good case for a county police force after all. Let the sheriff handle something he is better qualified for, like the jail.

How about the other issues in the campaign? Protecting the land use plan? Holding down taxes? Not allowing cronyism to rule the actions of the county government? Dunn's arrogance? He cannot hold a candle to the disdain that Bruce and Randall obviously hold for the people of this county. Yeah, those are all good reasons for not re-electing these people.

Your credibility on this issue is zero now. Every issue that you supported regarding the county government and the election have been proven wrong. Go discuss something you know about, like food, or movies, or Westmoreland ...oh never mind. Don't get me started on him.

If you are glad Dunn is gone, then the reason can only be personal, it cannot have anything to do with his role on the commission.

Submitted by Hardtack on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 2:10pm.

As has been said many times before, let the sheriff run the jail, not create a Los Angeles county police force! We need a county police force that is hired by the commission and who have stringent hiring practices and the ablity to fire them at will. Old timey sheriffs are nearly gone, thank goodness.

Git Real's picture
Submitted by Git Real on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 12:45pm.

You sound like a girl.


Submitted by run4fit50 on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 8:43am.

doesn't spoil the whole bunch.

Several at the top were not in agreement with Bruce or the way he handled himself and those who worked in his division, but who wanted to put their job on the line by speaking out against him? If you crossed him, you paid dearly. Rumors have it that the Sheriff was not aware of the way he "ruled". The Sheriff trusted him. Too much trust was placed in one person and he believed everything he was told by BJ. Unfortunately, it's coming back to bite him.

Changes should be made now....not later. Put a "second in command" in place that has a proven record that can move the department forward! (Hannah?) Planning and reorganization should take place now!

Submitted by lawaboveall on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 9:44am.

Mawbell,

This is not about one bad apple. This is about an attitude that starts at the TOP of the FCSO and pervades down at least to the level below where Jordan use to be. The people that worked directly for Jordan were the primary beneficiaries of the largess that was the Drug Funds and the budget from the county. None of those people need to be considered for replacing Randall. And replacing him is precisely what needs to be done. He needs to be gone, Jordan needs to be gone, and anyone that reported to them should be placed under a level of scrutiny that would be normal for any other governmental organization.

If you believe for a second that Randall did not know what was going on your are incredibly naive. Where do you think Jordan learned to play this game? If Randall did not know what was going on then he needs to be replaced immediately for failing to do what he was elected to do, run the sheriff's office! Either way, he is wrong, we lose, and he needs to go.

cogitoergofay's picture
Submitted by cogitoergofay on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 9:31am.

One Bad Apple can spoil the whole bunch when there a whole bunch of witnesses that see it, participate in it and turn their backs on it, "because I don't want to lose my job." How many other people knew about these indiscretions? How about the people that got free, brand new cars? Who else? Aren't police and sheriff's deputies supposed to spot crimes and report them? Exactly what type of misconduct would motivate these people to report the misconduct?

"WHEN BAD MEN COMBINE, THE GOOD MUST ASSOCIATE; ELSE THEY WILL FALL, ONE BY ONE, AN UNPITIED SACRIFICE IN A CONTEMPTIBLE STRUGGLE."
Edmund Burke, Irish Philosopher; 1792, after the French Revolution.. This observation has been paraphrased "The only thing needed for tyranny to prevail is for a few good men to do nothing."


bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 9:46am.

"How about the people that got free, brand new cars? "

I don't remember reading that in the audit report.


Git Real's picture
Submitted by Git Real on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 12:43pm.

The use of a vehicle by the District Attorney

I McBroom and Caldwell had free cars also. Not sure if they were shiny new ones or not. I guess that's a perk that DA's get. What goodies do the Superior Court Judges get?


Submitted by SoCalMama on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 8:27am.

I'm ashamed that these are the officals who are here to protect and uphold Fayette County!

I would certainly love to have a crack at the position of upholding the intergrity of this fine county....sign me up...where can I apply?

Submitted by jerimabry on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 7:35am.

All I am going to say about this is that his [[[EDITED]]] needs to be put in jail for stealing from the tax payers. Myself as well as any other citizen would of done been thrown in the jail cell.

All Smiles's picture
Submitted by All Smiles on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 5:18am.

Hey! What about the other 4 high schools in the county? Why only Whitewater HS? Oh Yeah, Jordan's son goes there. I think Jordan should now have to pay out of his pocket 2 golf carts each for the remaining 4 high schools


Git Real's picture
Submitted by Git Real on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 8:06pm.

Well, if it's any consolation one might find it reassuring that our sheriffs department is utilizing the latest and most up to date accounting procedures available in government today. I'd say accountability practices are right in line for what we the taxpayers expect and are getting from our government agencies.

In spite of the "loose accounting" procedures sited and the dollar amounts suggested I'd have to say that compared to other government agencies we're getting off cheap. Not that any of this is right mind you.

Ok....who's the mo ron that turned on these ugly italics and is giving me this goofy accent? Don't do that anymore......please! I'm not supposed to talk Italian.


Submitted by lawaboveall on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 9:16am.

Git Real,

Of all of your attempts to justify what goes on in the FCSO, this is by far, the lamest. To even try to justify this waste of taxpayer money and betrayal of the public trust in the cloak of "it is better than most", is ludicrous to say the least.
The level of accountability that the county consistently applies to all of its practices and procedures was the benchmark against which the Sheriff's office practices were compared. So if the Sheriff wanted to use the best practices, he would simply mirror the county. He has not only not done that, he and his people of blatantly ignored long standing, existing policy and treated our tax dollars like their own personal slush fund. These practices might be OK in Fulton County, but we do not live in Fulton County do we?

You state that what is being done is right in line with what taxpayers expect of government, so it is OK. What color is the sky in SheriffWorld? How wrong you are. Most people I know do not have the low expectations of their government that you seem to have. It is this type of attitude that puts the likes of Lyn Westmoreland in office. Your attitude is at the same time, sad and dangerous.

The situation that has now come to light is precisely what was being said during the recent election cycle. Randall managed to get two stiffs elected with the hope that they would take office before all of this had time to come out. Too bad for him, and for his two new county commission errand boys, that it came out before they could take office and sweep the whole thing under the rug as they had promised during the campaign.

It is clear now that two of the three people who were willing to stand up to Randall and his misdeeds got eliminated by a disinterested electorate. Too bad for Fayette County huh?

Submitted by tonto707 on Thu, 10/05/2006 - 8:16pm.

to continue referring to the "drug seizure money" as taxpayer money?

If you don't know what you're talking about you ought to stay out of the blogging business!

Git Real's picture
Submitted by Git Real on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 10:27am.

Of all of your attempts to justify what goes on in the FCSO, this is by far, the lamest. To even try to justify this waste of taxpayer money and betrayal of the public trust in the cloak of "it is better than most", is ludicrous to say the least.

Janet,

I'm glad I'm not married to you. You sure are an uptight and bitter sort don’t you think? Have you ever heard of SATIRE before? Get a life.

I'm also glad your husband is no longer our commissioner. Aside from his lawsuits with the sheriff there were many other reasons to desire him gone. I will be glad to get into those if you so choose.

As for the sheriff's department I am still an ardent supporter of that department and so should you. The good in that department far out weighs the bad. It appears that shenanigans have taken place for some time under Randall’s leadership and that is shameful. My point was that it takes place routinely in all levels of government and why should it surprise any of us. Piss us off…yes. Surprise us…no. Bolsters the argument for term limits wouldn't you say.

Most people I know do not have the low expectations of their government that you seem to have. It is this type of attitude that puts the likes of Lyn Westmoreland in office. Your attitude is at the same time, sad and dangerous.

Silly bitter lady. You know me better than that. I haven't voted for Westmoreland since the first two elections when he went to the state house and I discovered the "emptiness" of his convictions and lack of cognitive abilities. I did vote for your hubby a couple of times except for this last election. Eight years was plenty and I thank him for his service but it was time to move on. There are plenty of folks who worked around your hubby that though he took advantage of his office too. Hmmmmmm... Too bad for Fayette County huh?


Voice of Fayette Future's picture
Submitted by Voice of Fayett... on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 4:47am.

Good detail in this story. Git Real---- how do you know we are getting a good deal? How can you logically say that?

This audit only goes back to 2004. Should it now be expanded to go back, say, 10 years ?

It is regrettable that Randall has jumped up and put spin on it. For him to attempt to minimize this by saying "We need to tighten things up" is an attempt to make it go away. "We'll take care of it". What Randall said is what you expect for an energy conservation program during a gas shortage--- not for a multimillion dollar department with apparently no checks and balances.


fancypants's picture
Submitted by fancypants on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 9:39pm.

For a long time I felt Dunn & Co were just exagerating and this was a bunch if humbug, trying to fish for votes.

Now I have to say I seriously question the Sheriff's integrity, as well as that of his department as a whole. If they are willing to sell their integrity for a bunch of TV's, computers and cars, what else are/were they willing to sell?

It's a shame for Sheriff Johnson to ruin his good name like that. I don't think he did any of this maliciously, but he certainly had more than one eye closed on these ongoings. May be he felt he couldn't throw his protege Jordan in jail for misusing funds?

A shame, a real shame.


Submitted by thebiggun on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 10:00pm.

We need to get over all this good name of Johnson stuff and how the wool has been pulled over his eyes for years. Was he sleeping the whole time and had no idea where the money went ? He always drove the best and newest cars, had all the goodies, and spread around the buying to people that would help him get elected. He spent as if he was the king of a small kingdom with no regard to helping save money by getting the best deal. If this was a government contract, they would be in front of the Congress explaining how they wasted tax payer money, followed by long terms in the a federal pen. I would like to see a detailed, item by item list of money spent on travel, goodies and credit card payments. Also names of the people that went, money they spent, places they were and classes they attended. Were they on the clock for the whole time they were on this trip that also had a little vacation built into the junket? And it looks like all of this spending was on top of all the money they got from the county commission each budget year. Where are all the items that were purchased with the money ? 1,000 of questions with the only answer being "we need to tighten up a little".

I support the police for all the dangerous work they do, but I will not support a hand full of people spend our money as if they found that pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Looks to me that we need a new Sheriff, from the outside of this organization, to come in and fix the rotten apple.

fancypants's picture
Submitted by fancypants on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 7:24am.

If Sheriff Randall Johnson still stays in office after all this then Fayette County as a whole truly has the blinders on! All this nepotism has got to go!

There is way to much of this "rub my back and I'll rub yours" going on and now it seems that law enforcement is just as infested by this practice as is the rest of our elected government.

All of this happened under his watch and he is FULLY responsible for EVERY dollar that was spent not in accordance with federal, state and local law. If all of this is true, Sheriff Randall Johnson should resign and show that he still has some decency and integrity left in him. He needs to do this now and not wait until all his dirty laundry is out in public.


Submitted by Soldier Boy on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 7:37pm.

Sounds like hmmm Kathleen you jeolous or just hate that we have one of the best Sherrifs Dept. in the state and that it is because we do not let the commission handle everything.

Submitted by Kathleen on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 7:50pm.

I don't deny that we have one of the best sheriff's dept or that a lot of great men and women work there. I was just talking about the sheriff and Bruce Jordan using drug money for incorrect purposes according to the drug money seizure laws, etc. I love law enforcement officers for the work they do and the risks they take. I just think law enforcement officers should be held to the same standards as non-law enforcement people. Forget about higher standards. There are a few bad apples that are not even held to the same standards as regular citizens.
But I do respect law enforcement officers, almost as much as I respect US soilders who go far away to serve our country and get shot at. So if you are a law enforcement officer, don't take my comments about this news story as a personal attack on you and other law enforcement officers! I am just commenting on the drug seizure money situation as it was reported. Nothing else.

abeautifulday4us's picture
Submitted by abeautifulday4us on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 7:41pm.

I want plasma tv's, MP3's, trips to Vegas, Jet Skis and lake houses, too !


Submitted by Kathleen on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 7:52pm.

Funny!

Submitted by Kathleen on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 6:31pm.

It seems to me that the higher ups at the sheriff's department must have been enjoying the freedom of being able to do whatever they wanted with drug money withoout any kind of checks and balances for a long time. How come they were able to do this for so long? I bet certain people at the sheriff's department never paid for their own meal during all this time. I bet there is electronic equipment bought with the drug money in people's private homes. I bet there is a lot of stuff bought with drug money that is not being used by the sheriff's dept or for other valid law enforcement purposes. I think Fayette county needs a whole new group of leaders in the sheriff's dept.

bad_ptc's picture
Submitted by bad_ptc on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 7:29pm.


Submitted by head_ragg on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 7:03pm.

money counted at a bust? one for the county...one for me...one for the county...one for me?

Submitted by Kathleen on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 7:10pm.

That sounds like how it must have been! I mean I bet Bruce Jordan and some others never had to worry about paying their own bills. If they needed money for a credit card payment or mortgage payment they probably just went to the safe! I don't know why Bruce Jordan is allowed to stay there at all. Apparently he was taking trips to Florida and Las Vegas for no real reason other than for fun. Who knows what all else he spent drug money on? I bet he has a big screen TV, at least one, and computers, and all at his house that came from the sheriff's dept. Apparently they all got new TV's and passed them out to everybody at the dept. Smiling

abeautifulday4us's picture
Submitted by abeautifulday4us on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 7:19pm.

What a network. They pass out a bunch of goodies using other people's money. Everyone seems to have known about it and cashed in including our prosecutor. Wow....How far does this go?


Submitted by swmbo on Tue, 10/03/2006 - 10:59pm.

Think about the businesses that support all of those equipment purchases.

--If you are a company that services those 1.09 vehicles per employee, you may be inclined to fund a campaign.

--If you run a company that provides tech support for those computers, you might be inclined to fund a campaign.

--If you have an aviation maintenance business, you might be inclined to fund a campaign.

OR if you have a company that provides support services, you might be inclined to run for office to protect the beneficiary of those services. The possibilities are limitless.

-------------------------------
If you and I are always in agreement, one of us is likely armed and dangerous.

mudcat's picture
Submitted by mudcat on Wed, 10/04/2006 - 5:46am.

After all, the one expenditure that really leaps out of this audit is - what else ---

" A trip to Hilton Head in September 2004 for two employees for asset forfeiture training"

Although I didn't know Hilton Head had a training center for this sort of thing, I am proud of our 2 employees for paying attention in the asset forefiture training class and doing so well in bringing their new found knowledge home to Fayette County.

meow


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.