Maybe clerk should pay county for rent, utilities
Flabbergasted! I think that word best describes how I have felt as I have read in the Citizen about the passport fees being collected for the personal gain of one of our elected officials. I guess I really shouldn't be surprised, as we are talking about government. You see, only in government can an elected official skim off the top and not get in trouble. Had this been going on in the private sector, one would lose their job, and probably be facing criminal charges for embezzlement.
Or, maybe we can now assume the elected position of clerk of the court is a salary plus commission job. I guess $90k a year isn't enough money to do the duties of the job. The problem with that is a commission is paid as a percentage off what an employee produces for the employer, which I see in this situation isn't happening. I'm not seeing any benefit to the county, for income being brought in, by someone being paid by the citizens of this county to do a job. Yes, processing passports is in the scope of the job, which we, the citizens are paying for.
So, we have a problem. And a solution has been offered. The clerk of the court now wants to share with the county one-half of the money. How noble.
Maybe we, the citizens should start charging the clerk of the court rent and utilities for the use of the office she is in. We, the taxpayers are paying for it. Why should we not be reimbursed for the use of county assets to process these passports? If one is going to run a side business out of a county-owned office, using county utilities and supplies, the county deserves to be paid back. My opinion, all the money should go to the county, not half. Heck, $44k would go a long way towards paying some of our bills.
Maybe the voters will fix this unethical behavior come election day.
— Scott Ricks, Conyers