Auditor and commissioners debate per diem vs. receipts for county travel expenses

County officials reopened a contentious discussion on March 24 about whether county travel should be reimbursed by per diem or by submission of detailed receipts, with the county auditor and several commissioners taking opposing views on administrative burden and accountability.

“As auditor, and having statutory responsibility for financial oversight of our county, I like being able to track things to the penny,” the county Auditor said during the briefing, arguing in favor of detailed receipts and recounting private- and public-sector experience that, the auditor said, favored receipts over per-diem as a cost-control measure.

The Auditor told the board that many county contracts and grants operate on cost-reimbursement terms and said the county has limited reserves, so any significant funding reduction would force service reductions. The Auditor also said they are willing to help staff adapt to any paperwork requirements tied to receipts.

Other commissioners argued that a per-diem model simplifies accounting and can be quicker for staff, noting existing state and federal per-diem rate schedules that set locality-based amounts for lodging and meals. One commissioner described the per-diem system used in other government settings and said it reduces back-and-forth between departments and financial services over missing or inadequate receipts.

Discussion touched on operational issues that affect both sides: the time staff spend assembling reimbursement packets, the administrative workload for financial services to audit detailed submissions, and the frequency with which employees lose small receipts and use attestation forms. Auditors and commissioners acknowledged some departments find the existing county policy difficult to follow and that the policy might be applied inconsistently across departments.

After extended discussion the board directed staff and the finance committee to revisit an attestation form and the county expense-reporting policy. Commissioners asked the finance committee to return a recommendation on whether the committee would accept attestation statements in lieu of receipts and, if so, under what conditions. Several commissioners asked for the committee to consider implementation details — for example, whether approvals should require department- or division-level sign-off and how to handle lost receipts using vendor reprints or electronic receipts.

(ending) Commissioners did not change policy at the meeting; they asked the finance committee to review attestation usage and report back to the full commission.