Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: FRIDAY, December 16, 1994 TAG: 9412160060
SECTION: VIRGINIA PAGE: A-1 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: RICHARD FOSTER STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
And Wells wound up settling the dispute for less than $2,800.
Wells was at odds with the county over who should get the interest he accrued by depositing the Sheriff's Office payroll in his personal checking account.
Accountants and lawyers were the big winners in the fight.
The county paid $13,385 to the Richmond-based accounting firm of Keiter, Stephens, Hurst, Gary & Shreaves to audit Wells' account.
David Shreve, the Altavista-based attorney hired by the county for the lawsuit, was paid more than $6,600. And the county still owes him for services rendered this month.
And Wells paid more than $8,000 out of his own pocket in legal fees.
The whole thing makes some county residents pretty steamed.
"It's outrageous to do something like this. The average taxpayer wouldn't pull a trick like that," said John Sublett, a former county supervisor.
Sublett, who's been eyeing another run for the Board next year, said he doesn't agree with how the county handled its negotiations with Wells.
For starters, he thinks the Board shouldn't have settled for such a small amount - especially since it ended up spending more money than it was trying to get back. "That's totally wrong. If [the $15,000] was the taxpayers' money, then we deserved every dime of it. You don't compromise taxpayers' money."
He also questions how the Board could decide to settle a lawsuit involving public money without taking a public vote.
"When you go into executive session and make a decision that's going to affect the public, you need to tell the people what that decision is," Sublett said.
The Board of Supervisors handled all negotiations about Wells behind closed doors and through its attorney, Shreve. As a condition of the settlement with Wells, both sides agreed not to divulge the amount of the settlement or any details about how it was reached.
Several people close to the suit, however, said Wells paid the county less than $2,800 - not even half the interest he said he accrued from the payroll money he deposited. The supervisors estimated he had accrued $15,000 in interest.
Another former Board member, Verle Johnston, has a similar opinion to Sublett's. "I can't understand legally how the Board of Supervisors can conceal the receipt of funds. As county citizens, we are entitled to know what money comes in or goes out."
But the Board may not have needed to hold a public vote on the matter because it gave Shreve a broad power of attorney.
When the Board voted to hire him last April, it passed a motion stating that Shreve was to be given the power "to take the necessary steps to protect the county's interests" in seeking the $15,000 from Wells.
In May, Shreve filed a lawsuit against Wells on the Board's behalf.
County Attorney John Overstreet said, "There was never a public vote held to file the suit [against Wells] and I never heard anybody complain about that.
"If [Shreve] has the authority to file the suit, then why doesn't he have the authority to settle the suit for his client?"
Board members and officials in the county administrator's office referred questions about the suit to Shreve, but the attorney declined to comment.
Board Chairman Dale Wheeler would say only that he believed the Board was within its legal rights to negotiate with its lawyer about the suit in executive session. The Virginia Freedom of Information Act allows local governing bodies to go into executive sessions to discuss litigation, legal matters or personnel decisions.
Johnston disagrees with Wheeler's defense of the Board's actions. He said, "You can make decisions in executive session, but in order for those decisions to be valid, a public vote must be made."
Wells was investigated for commingling funds earlier this year by special prosecutor Eric Sisler. Sisler found no evidence of wrongdoing because Wells had stopped depositing payroll funds in his checking account before a state law made the practice illegal.
A report prepared by Sisler said that Wells bought a pickup truck for himself with $15,000 in interest from the funds.
by CNB