Letter: Questioning Martin reimbursement
I think it is outrageous that the members of the Garfield County Board of County Commissioners voted to award Commissioner John Martin $25,000 to cover his legal costs regarding accusations of corruption on his part.
If this claim was denied by the board’s insurance company they must have had good reason, so why should the taxpayers be liable for this? I think that if this had been a private-sector employee they would have been individually responsible and would have been required to seek reimbursement through the civil courts if they felt they were wrongly accused.
What is the difference in this case and the slush fund of taxpayer funds that the U.S. Congress maintained to pay for accusations of corrupt and illegal practices of its members. This is just another example of the cronyism that exists at all levels of a government that is controlled by the corrupt and dysfunctional two-party political system.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.