Lazaro Aleman
ECB Publishing, Inc.
One thing about the ongoing purchasing card (p-card) controversy is that citizens are getting an education on the issue.
Last week, the Jefferson County Commission considered a series of online documents that included a final draft of the p-card policy, alleged p-card abuses by the Clerk of Court Office and a letter to the Regions Bank authorizing County Coordinator Parrish Barwick to have online access to the monthly transactions of p-card users.
In the end, the board approved Barwick’s authorization to monitor p-card transactions. It did not, however, ask Clerk of Court Kirk Reams to surrender his p-card; nor did it make any revisions to the p-card policy, although it indicated that it might do so in the future.
At the same time, Reams publicly released numerous documents pertaining to the issue via Attorney David Collins, including selected email communications and 196 pages of p-card purchases by the 13 individuals authorized to use the p-cards.
Also, prior to the commission’s discussion of the p-card issue on Thursday evening, Jan. 20, Reams read a prepared statement.
First, he said, his attorney had released to the press all p-card records in his office’s possession and he encouraged any and all persons interested to review such records.
Secondly, he said, no unauthorized use of a p-card had occurred in his office by a third party, contrary to what had been alleged at an earlier meeting.
“Any such statement was simply not true,” Reams said. “I have consulted with my counsel as to what actions should result from such reckless statements. My attorney has reached out to the FDLE to ensure full cooperation in their investigation. I will refrain from any more comments until their investigation is concluded.”
P-cards, not unlike credit cards, are for authorized county personnel to make official, county-related purchases. The card, per the current policy, may be suspended pending retraining or permanently revoked with good reason, including for unauthorized purchases or card misuse. Other disciplinary action also may result.
The policy authorizes two levels of spending under “normal conditions.” On the default profile, a daily limit of $1,000 is set per transaction per vendor, with a total daily limit of $2,000.
On the extended profile, a daily limit of $3,000 per transaction per vendor is set, with a daily total limit of $4,000.
Adjustments to the set limits, per the policy, require review by the p-card administrator in the clerk’s office and the county coordinator, and may also require prior board approval in some instances.
The p-card, per the policy, may not be loaned to another person “under any circumstances,” and violations will result in disciplinary action. Receipts must also be submitted for all purchases.
Disallowed p-card purchases, per the policy, include food, alcohol, entertainment, ringtones, phone apps and other personal items, with violation punishable by disciplinary action.
Included also in the commissioners’ package on Thursday evening was a memo to the board titled “Access to p-card,” seemingly authored by Commissioner Betsy Barfield. The memo asked that Barwick be given authorization to monitor all p-card transactions.
It had come to the commission’s recent attention, the memo stated, that Reams possessed a Board of County Commission (BOCC) p-card that he had been using “while neglecting to follow the p-card policy.”
The memo noted that the only two people who presently had access to the online p-card account were in Reams’ office. The memo named the two as Charles Culp and Kristyn Newberry.
“We realize the need for tight security of the board’s p-cards; however, upon asking Reams – multiple times – for access for Parrish Barwick, it is consistently denied by Reams,” the memo stated. “It is poor policy for Reams’ agency to have the only access to the board’s p-cards.”
It’s noteworthy that both Reams and Barwick said that the latter had had access to the p-card online transactions in the past. For reasons that were never stated, however, Barwick ceased monitoring the accounts. This was a point that Reams made several times and that Barwick concurred with.
The memo to the board continued with a statement that it was disconcerting to see the “forbidden charges” made by Reams, several of which were listed in a separate attachment titled “examples of p-card abuse.”
Included the cited examples, which the commissioners never discussed per se, were six pages of expenditures. The alleged abuses included the $5,000 check to the Jefferson County Republican Party (JCRP) for a political fundraiser, an amount that the party has since reimbursed.
The six pages also included a series of 10 consultant fees paid by the Clerk of Court’s Office to WCCJR Consulting LLC and Culpchar (Charles Culp) in 2021. The payments ranged from $17,900 in one month to $28,800 in another.
A handwritten notation on the page stated, “Is Parrish reviewing these charges? Receipts submitted?”
Asked specifically via email why the consultants’ fees were included, Barfield responded via email: “To demonstrate to the commissioners the need for Parrish and the BOCC to have access so we have our own oversight; considering the charges shown for this issue.”
Other listings included $4,982.71 for travel (all seemingly reimbursed) and $5,014.30 for Verizon phone and wireless communication charges. The board never discussed any of the items, so it was difficult to decipher the point of theses expenditures being listed.
“There are 13 commissioners/employees that have a BOCC p-card,” read the memo to the commission. “Reams is the only constitutional officer that has a BOCC p-card. Considering Reams’ forbidden charges on the BOCC p-card, we ask that he surrender his BOCC p-card immediately.”
The package also included a draft letter for legal counsel to sign, asking Regions Bank to give Barwick online access to the p-card transactions immediately.
The board’s only action, which occurred with a minimum of discussion, was to grant Barwick authorization to access the p-card transactions, which authority he apparently had previously had.
Relative to the information that Reams released, it included email communications between himself and one member of the county commission and the treasurer of the Jefferson County Republican Party (JCRP). The information also contained a combined 196 pages in pdf format of p-card expenditures for fiscal years 2019/20 through the start of 2021/22.
The emails provided dated from Oct. 1, 2021 through Jan. 19, 2022, and pertained in one way or another to the p-card issue and the Lincoln Dinner that the JCRP held on Oct. 14 with Gov. Ron DeSantis as speaker.
It was difficult to follow the thread of the emails, however, as some were cryptic, others referenced prior communications, and a couple appeared irrelevant or contradictory.
In terms of the 196 pages of p-card transactions, they list all the expenditures made by the 13 authorized county personnel during a three-year period. The monthly expenditures are broken down by cardholder, date of purchase, item purchased and amount. Nowhere, however, does it indicate if the purchase is authorized or not; nor do the entries show if it’s a reimbursement.
Asked the reason for the release, Collins said it was so the public could see for itself the p-card records and how the policy was working, or not working.
“There has been, I believe, an inference that people have misusing the p-card,” Collins said. “And I think that is correct to some extent, by some using the card for non-authorized usages and then quickly reimbursing them.”
Reams, Collins said, had been accused of a lot of things, but he hadn’t done anything that others weren’t doing.
“The custom in use, the way that the cards have been used, has been used that way by a number of employees,” Collins said. “So there is not anything he has done that is any different than the custom in usage and that other employees have not done on occasion.”
The fact, Collins said, was that if the policy were being strictly followed, there should be no reimbursements.
“The problem is that the policy allows for it,” Collins said. “In my opinion, the policy has allowed unauthorized purchases by county employees so long as the expenditures are quickly reimbursed. The whole p-card policy, and the usage of it, in my opinion, has been very lax.”