I usually find your observations accurate, but I take exception to the April 23 editorial, "Comptroller Appeal Looks Unreasonable." Trust is not "the core issue" in the firing of comptroller Sarah Wilson. Abuse of authority and abuse of the employer-employee relationship by County Judge Bob Clinard is the core issue. Her appeal is not unreasonable.

In support of his decision to fire Wilson, Clinard states "The citizens want to know that I have a comptroller who is managing our county money properly and is helping us prevent theft and misuse of county funds. I need to know that I have a person with good judgment. I now doubt your judgment since you were not forthcoming with me." Your opinion article explains that Bob Clinard learned that Sarah Wilson recently married Scott Stober and Clinard fired Wilson because she did not advise Clinard of the marriage. Scott Stober was a county employee when he was arrested in 2013 for theft of property. He has pleaded not guilty to those charges. Your opinion article states "Stober has not been found guilty of anything."

In July 2013 when Stober was arrested, Wilson advised the sheriff that she had a relationship with Stober. In April 2014 when Clinard asked Wilson if she was married to Stober, she confirmed it. There is no indication she has lied or misrepresented her relationship with Stober at any time. Clinard states Wilson was not "forthcoming." Wilson has no duty as comptroller to keep Clinard, her employer, advised of the status of her personal relationships. She is entitled to her privacy.

Following Stober's arrest in July 2013, the sheriff conducted an investigation of Wilson. No mishandling of funds was found. Clinard has used the words "theft" and "misuse of county funds" in association with firing Sarah Wilson. If he was concerned about Wilson's handling of taxpayer money, the prudent act would be to order an independent, confidential audit. I have not read about an audit taking place or any specific allegations against Wilson. Without affording Wilson due process, as a conscientious judge would be compelled to do, Clinard has found Wilson guilty of wrongdoing because of who she married.

Your opinion article states "At this stage, based on what's been revealed, it's unreasonable for a public employee to expect to be rehired into a place of public trust." What is unreasonable, irrational, arrogant and weak is for Clinard to fire Wilson for failure to disclose her marriage then implicate Wilson with words like "theft" as a veil for his actions.

I do not expect Wilson to be rehired. I expect that when her termination by Clinard is found to be wrong and damaging, she will be afforded a year or two of salary at taxpayer expense. Shortly after Clinard was elected, he proposed that he be given a raise because he had made decisions that supposedly saved the taxpayers money. With that same logic, when Sarah Wilson gets her settlement because of Clinard's actions, should the settlement be paid out of his salary?

Deven Dagen

Bella Vista