Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vehicle Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bonner County commissioners press review of vehicle allowances, motor pool and travel reimbursements
Summary
During a budget workshop, commissioners and the county risk manager debated whether to keep flat vehicle allowances, require county vehicles for on‑scene work, and reallocate travel reimbursements after reviewing usage and risks.
Bonner County commissioners pressed the county risk manager on Monday to justify continued flat vehicle allowances and to propose a plan that reduces the risk of employees responding to incidents in personal vehicles.
The discussion grew out of the risk manager’s budget presentation about travel and vehicle allowances. Commissioners asked for a cost‑benefit analysis comparing continued flat allowances (the risk manager described a $300 monthly stipend) with mileage reimbursement or use of county‑assigned vehicles.
The matter matters because arriving at an incident in a county vehicle gives the public a clear identification of county staff and avoids liability questions that can arise when employees use personal cars for official county work. Commissioner Williams said the board “has an argument for saying if there is an available vehicle still that has the Bonner County emblem, that…there isn't a reason not to be checking out a county vehicle to arrive on scene in a county vehicle.”
Risk manager Christian said the vehicle allowance exists because, in the past, department heads received a flat monthly amount instead of mileage reimbursement; he estimated the stipend is taxable and approximated at “300 a month.” Christian told commissioners he cannot precisely track current mileage because the stipend replaced routine trip logging, and that a rough annual mileage estimate in his draft budget was $4,000 if the stipend were removed and the county paid mileage instead.
Commissioners raised several practical issues: the time cost and logistics of checking out items from the motor pool; maintenance and repair costs of older, department‑assigned vehicles that may exceed the stipend; and risks when employees arrive on scene in personal cars. Christian acknowledged the motor pool has changed over time and that older, surplus vehicles sometimes cost more in maintenance than anticipated.
The board asked Christian to return to the next budget meeting with a short, comparative analysis that includes: (1) estimated annual cost to the county under three options — continued monthly allowance, mileage reimbursement, and assignment/check‑out of county vehicles; (2) an assessment of implementation risk and impact on response at incidents; and (3) a proposed policy for when staff must use a county vehicle rather than a personal vehicle.
No formal decision was taken. Commissioners agreed to keep current allowances in place for now while directing staff to produce the comparative data for the upcoming budget cycle.
