Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Travel And Meals topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Finance director asks committee to clarify travel per diem rules as staff report inconsistent claims

Alpine County Audit and Finance Committee · May 14, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Alpine County finance director Klaus Leidenbauer told the Audit and Finance Committee that employees interpret the 75% travel‑day per diem provision differently depending on travel patterns, and the committee directed staff to consult county counsel about allowing limited exceptions while preserving IRS accountable‑plan rules.

Klaus Leidenbauer, Alpine County finance director, told the Audit and Finance Committee on May 14 that the county’s travel and meal reimbursement form is producing inconsistent employee claims and needs clearer rules. "When traveling outside Alpine County on official county business, meals are reimbursable to county employees," he said, reading the current policy language, and highlighted confusion about a 75% per diem for travel days.

Liedenbauer described a range of travel scenarios — staff who travel from home to the office then to a conference, day trips that begin midday, and early‑morning flights — that lead to varied reimbursements. "Some people that travel and work on the same day…they’ll give themselves a lunch and then a dinner per diem," he said, while others take the full per diem after long travel days. Committee members agreed the variety of patterns makes a single rule hard to apply without more precise guidance.

Sam Booth, the county CEO participating virtually, said applying a standard like the IRS guidance is simpler to administer but recommended a documented exception process. "Maybe have an option…so that you can submit a request for the full reimbursement," he said, noting supporting evidence such as flight departure times could justify a full day’s reimbursement.

Members debated whether brief activities such as checking or answering email on a travel day constitute sufficient "work" to justify full per diems. Staff noted that short work might be recorded as an hour or two but said basing the rule on what is reasonable for travel — rather than on incidental work — could be clearer.

The committee did not vote on policy language. Liedenbauer said he will consult county counsel about preserving an accountable plan (to avoid taxability of reimbursements) and return with recommended edits and possible supervisor or finance‑director approval language for exceptions at a future meeting.