Beaver County staff raise concerns about credit-card charges tied to district attorney’s office

A county staff member told the Beaver County Board of Commissioners at its Oct. 1 work session that recent credit-card charges tied to the district attorney’s office included purchases the staff member described as inappropriate and possibly in violation of county purchasing rules.

The staff member said the charges occurred “over the last 2 months” and listed examples including two Starbucks purchases, meal charges lacking receipts and a $3,200 promotional-items purchase that the staff member said bore the district attorney’s personal name. “The promotional items have his personal name on them,” the staff member said, adding that such items “are promoted with him as the DA more than the office itself.”

The staff member contended those items amount to campaign materials and said county general-fund money should not be used for campaign materials. They also said the $3,200 purchase violated the county’s purchasing policy by exceeding thresholds that require competitive bids or purchase orders. “Using a credit card purchase does not mean that departments can avoid our policy limits for when to use a PO,” the staff member said. The staff member said other departments have used the county card for purchases over $2,500 without following proper purchasing procedures.

The staff member made two requests to the board: that the district attorney repay the county for the specific charges deemed inappropriate, and that commissioners update the county purchasing policy to include explicit rules on credit-card usage and restrictions on certain purchases — for example, promotional items printed with an individual’s name and tickets to networking events. “I think the case should repay the taxpayers for the inappropriate charges, but I’m also asking you to help prevent this moving forward by making changes to our purchasing policy ASAP,” the staff member said.

No formal motion, vote or repayment was recorded in the meeting minutes. Commissioners did not record a decision during the work session; the staff member said they had contacted the district attorney’s office to request repayment and that, as of the meeting, repayment had not occurred.

The staff member also requested policy language clarifying approvals required before using the county credit card, and examples of restricted purchases. The board did not adopt any changes during the Oct. 1 session; the staff member asked commissioners for a response and said they had not yet received one.

Clarifying details provided during the discussion include the approximate $3,200 promotional-items charge, the staff member’s statement that purchases over $1,300 require additional purchasing procedures, and that other departments had used the county card for purchases over $2,500 without following proper procedure. The staff member characterized the purchases as “questionable charges” and asked commissioners to consider both repayment and a revision to the purchasing policy to explicitly govern credit-card use.

The matter was raised during the department-head and administrative reports portion of the Oct. 1 work session; commissioners did not take a formal vote or issue a directive recorded in the transcript during that meeting.

The county’s purchasing policy was referenced by the staff member as the governing internal authority; the staff member said the current policy does not sufficiently address credit-card usage and promotional items.

The board may take further action on the requests at a later meeting, but no direction, assignment to staff, or formal vote was recorded in the Oct. 1 work session transcript.