Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Travel Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Heather presents consolidated travel policy, members press for cost-effectiveness and tighter vehicle rules
Summary
Peoria County staff presented a consolidated travel policy to replace inconsistent versions dating to 2016; members supported using GSA rates, suggested explicit prohibitions (including on alcohol and possibly cannabis-infused nonalcoholic beverages), and pressed for rules to prioritize county vehicles and require an employee acknowledgement form.
Get email alerts on the Travel Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Heather, a county staff member, presented a proposed consolidation of the county travel policy and said the goal was to combine inconsistent versions (one in the former auditor’s office and another in personnel policies) into a single clear document. “We have had the same travel policy in place since 2016,” Heather said, and the draft draws on more than a dozen external policies and best practices.
Heather highlighted several planned changes: add ride‑sharing services to the approved transportation list, set a reasonable tip threshold (stated as a maximum of 20%), reiterate that alcohol is not an allowable county reimbursement and defer the numeric mileage/reimbursement rate to the federal General Services Administration (GSA) schedule rather than hard‑coding a number in the policy. “The reimbursement rate for travel is set by the GSA,” Heather said, and the county will refer to that published rate so the policy does not require annual numeric edits. She said the county hopes to put the policy into effect July 1 and to review it regularly.
Board members asked clarifying questions and made several suggestions. Member Daley asked how airport parking reimbursements would apply, noting that Peoria and Bloomington airports often do not charge for parking and that the policy should require the most cost‑effective option for travel so the county does not reimburse unnecessarily long drives and parking. “I think it’s important, the line in there, about this has to be the most cost effective way to do this,” Daley said. Daley also asked that agreements with outside organizations include language preventing use of taxpayer funds to reimburse alcohol purchases.
Steve praised the item as an informational presentation and asked how staff would communicate the policy changes to employees. Heather said staff will develop a frequently asked questions page, record trainings, encourage departmental review, and is considering a form employees sign acknowledging they have read and will adhere to the policy.
Danny asked whether the policy covers in‑county travel between facilities; Heather confirmed it does and said the policy covers both out‑of‑county and in‑county travel, including mileage between the courthouse and other county facilities. Danny pressed for firmer language prioritizing county fleet vehicles so staff do not routinely use personal cars when a county vehicle is available and suggested reimbursements be coded so supervisors can spot frequent personal‑vehicle use. Heather said staff will work with fleet and county administration and that department heads will be the authority on vehicle priority.
Eden raised a minor point about modern beverages, noting some states now allow cannabis‑infused nonalcoholic beverages at restaurants and suggesting the policy explicitly address whether those items should be reimbursed; Heather said she would consider the language.
The chair asked members to provide further feedback to the chair, Linda, or Heather and said staff hopes to return to the committee next month for a formal vote after incorporating suggested edits.

