NWA editorial: Was that wrong?

Public employees should guard against entitlement mentality

Any employer knows, or should know, that one of the challenges of managing people is the fact they all come with a unique set of decision-making and ethical boundaries.

Some employees value clear personnel policies as the set of rules they want to abide by. They not only follow the letter of the rules, but also the spirit behind them. These folks are perhaps the easiest to manage because they seek to understand the reason for the policy and to act well within their employers' wishes.

What’s the point?

Public employees have a duty to ensure their behavior does not abuse taxpayers.

Others look at the rules like attorneys look at laws -- whatever the rules don't explicitly forbid must be within the bounds of acceptable behavior. These are the George Costanzas of the world. The "Seinfield" character, in the process of being fired for engaging in dalliance one evening in the office setting, responds "Was that wrong? Should I not have done that? I tell you, I've got to plead ignorance on this thing, because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing was frowned upon ..."

George Costanza isn't the chief deputy of the Benton County Sheriff's Office. Richie Conner is. But at least on the issue of his county-issued vehicle, it's hard to tell the difference.

Last June, Conner took his family on a Florida vacation. They traveled there in a county-owned SUV assigned to him so he can do his job of protecting and serving the people of Benton County. That's in Arkansas. Florida had a Benton County between 1844 and 1850, but it's been known as Hernando County ever since. And we're fairly certain there's no mutual aid agreement that extends Conner's jurisdiction from Northwest Arkansas to Florida's western coast.

"Deputy Conner acknowledged taking the county vehicle on vacation and believed it was permissible as long as he paid for the gas," Benton County (Ark.) Prosecutor Nathan Smith said. "Because Deputy Conner had the general authority to drive a Sheriff's Office vehicle and because some confusion apparently existed within the Sheriff's Office over the vehicle-use policy, this incident did not constitute a criminal offense."

It might be an ethical issue, Smith said.

Might be. Like Donald Trump might be a pompous loudmouth.

Conner's excuse was Costanza-esque. He's been with the agency for 20 years. Others have used county vehicles to travel on vacation. Previous sheriffs were lenient about such things, he said.

But now Conner is Sheriff Kelley Cradduck's chief deputy, a position whose occupant, one might expect, has a duty to set a good example of behavior. Instead, at least in this instance, he's demonstrated how common sense simply isn't that common.

In what ethical universe does it make sense for county taxpayers to subsidize a public employee's family vacation? Ethical boundaries vary from individual to individual, but how can one suggest it's good judgment to take a sheriff's office vehicle, issued to give the chief deputy a better capacity to serve the taxpayers of Benton County who purchased it, four states away on a personal trip?

Was that wrong? Should he not have done that?

We will agree with Conner on one aspect of his defense: He's not the first to have done something like this. Every year, discoveries are made in which public employees develop a sense of entitlement to a benefit that justifies behavior that goes beyond the pale.

Remember Mark Wilcox, who once served as the commissioner of state lands? A few years ago, Wilcox had two state vehicles assigned to him. One was a truck he used on his Greenbrier farm. It was also involved in a hit-and-run accident back in 2008. The driver? Wilcox's wife, who had nothing to do with state business. Two years later, as details emerged, taxpayers learned the state had covered repairs to the vehicle hit by Wilcox's wife while she was driving the state vehicle.

Was that wrong? Should Wilcox not have done that?

Once the public learned of the abuse of taxpayer-provided vehicles, Wilcox reimbursed the state for the repairs to the other vehicle.

Examples abound in local and state government. It's not that long ago a county employee in Benton County (Ark.) used county-purchased lumber to build a deck on his home. That went well beyond poor ethics to criminal behavior, but the attitudes are close cousins.

Within the sheriff's office, a detective was involved in an accident last year as he traveled to the Wakarusa Music Festival on Mulberry Mountain to work a private security job. The detective was on his way home on June 5, 2014, when his Jeep Rubicon went off Arkansas 16 in Madison County. At the time, word went out warning deputies about such abuses, but formal polices weren't changed.

Clearly, they should be.

Give credit to Benton County Justice of the Peace Kevin Harrison, who blew the whistle after discovering Conner's taxpayer-subsidized vacation. "I have an obligation to taxpayers to make sure county property is being used for the purpose it was purchased for," Harrison said. "No taxpayer ever meant for a county vehicle to be used to take a 1,500- to 2,000-mile trip for a vacation."

Some employees need clear boundaries and elected officials should adopt policy changes when such incidents make them aware of inappropriate behaviors by public employees. And public employees should jealously guard against developing any sense of entitlement.

It's the taxpayers who are entitled to fair treatment by those they employ.

Commentary on 10/10/2015

Upcoming Events