Panel investigating Salt Lake County policy racks up a $45,000 tab

A volunteer panel charged with investigating county policy and practice in the wake of the "guzzlegate" scandal has worked for months longer than originally anticipated and cost the county $45,000.

"It is a lot of money," Salt Lake County Councilman Joe Hatch said. "It's far more than what was stolen from us in guzzlegate and hiringgate combined, so I'm expecting one heck of a report that will dazzle us and make us go, 'Wow!' "

The panel was originally expected to come up with its recommendations by the end of July. Then it was September. Then October. Now, "I don't even want to guess," county chief administrative officer David Marshall said.

The financial cost has come not from the five high-profile citizens constituting the panel (lawyer, accountant, businesswoman, consultant, fleet manager), who are volunteering their admittedly very expensive time, but for legal and accounting support staff who are not.

Marshall expects to pay another $20,000 before the process is complete.

While the panel's investigation has been much broader and deeper than anyone initially thought, "we said from the beginning that they were free to look into what they thought was important," Marshall said. "We're not telling them how to go about their business."

The legal charges have come from the panel's advisor, attorney Randy Dryer, who has charged the county about $12,000 for his time. Most of the rest has come from accounting firm PriceWaterhouseCooper's staff (one of the panel members, Gil Miller, is a member of the firm), who have analyzed the mountain of fleet, policy, financial and transportation data the panel has amassed.

The panel also has interviewed many county employees and officials, some more than once, and is now working on recommendations.

While Hatch and other council members have been disturbed by the cost, Marshall said the process, while more prolonged than expected, hasn't been out of the norm.

"We would have paid that much if we had contracted with somebody to come in and do the same thing. . . . That's the good thing — and the problem — with giving a panel complete freedom. You don't control what they do," he said.

While the panel has opened many of its periodic meetings to the public, lately the meetings have been closed while members discuss the substance of the recommendations.

---

E-mail: aedwards@desnews.com