Friday, June 17, 2005
Over month later, commissioner has yet to explain cell phone bill
It has now been over one month since WFTV-Channel 9 ran a story detailing the abuse by Seminole County commissioners of personal privileges financed by public tax money.
Included in the story were details of calls and charges related to the cell phone of longtime commissioner Dick VanDerWeide, who asserted that the calls had not been placed by him and that certain roaming charges placing him in Tampa were not legitimate since he had not been in Tampa.
To date, despite repeated inquiries, Commissioner VanDerWeide has still not yet explained who placed the calls or incurred the roaming charges on his cell phone, which is paid for by taxpayer dollars.
We will continue to ask the Commissioner for an explanation until he provides one, and will continue to report to you his continued failure to do so.
As we have written previously:
Among the details noted were three phone calls placed from Commissioner Dick VanDerWeide's taxpayer-financed cell phone to a 1-800 number referring callers to a phone sex line at another number. Although there were no subsequent calls to the second number noted on VanDerWeide's bill, the commissioner was asked about the initial three calls to the 1-800 line.
VanDerWeide's response was that he did not make the calls, even though they appeared on his itemized bill. As proof, the 12-year member of the commission said he was also assessed roaming charges from Tampa on his bill, even though he said he had not been in Tampa.
Inasmuch as he is expected to be a watchdog of how public funds are spent, we thought for sure that VanDerWeide would look into the matter to determine why the public was being charged for expenses the commissioner said were not his.
Unfortunately, several inquiries to Commissioner VanDerWeide as to what he has learned have received no response. It seems the commissioner would be anxious to tell us and the public what he learned about this matter, since we may otherwise form the impression that he has failed to followup on the issue for one of two reasons.
The only conclusions to be drawn in the absence of any further explanation from Commissioner VanDerWeide are:
To see the video of Commissioner VanDerWeide's denial that the calls and charges were his, click here.
Included in the story were details of calls and charges related to the cell phone of longtime commissioner Dick VanDerWeide, who asserted that the calls had not been placed by him and that certain roaming charges placing him in Tampa were not legitimate since he had not been in Tampa.
To date, despite repeated inquiries, Commissioner VanDerWeide has still not yet explained who placed the calls or incurred the roaming charges on his cell phone, which is paid for by taxpayer dollars.
We will continue to ask the Commissioner for an explanation until he provides one, and will continue to report to you his continued failure to do so.
As we have written previously:
Among the details noted were three phone calls placed from Commissioner Dick VanDerWeide's taxpayer-financed cell phone to a 1-800 number referring callers to a phone sex line at another number. Although there were no subsequent calls to the second number noted on VanDerWeide's bill, the commissioner was asked about the initial three calls to the 1-800 line.
VanDerWeide's response was that he did not make the calls, even though they appeared on his itemized bill. As proof, the 12-year member of the commission said he was also assessed roaming charges from Tampa on his bill, even though he said he had not been in Tampa.
Inasmuch as he is expected to be a watchdog of how public funds are spent, we thought for sure that VanDerWeide would look into the matter to determine why the public was being charged for expenses the commissioner said were not his.
Unfortunately, several inquiries to Commissioner VanDerWeide as to what he has learned have received no response. It seems the commissioner would be anxious to tell us and the public what he learned about this matter, since we may otherwise form the impression that he has failed to followup on the issue for one of two reasons.
The only conclusions to be drawn in the absence of any further explanation from Commissioner VanDerWeide are:
Either way, Slats is obviously very disappointed in the commissioner's silence on the issue, as should you and all his constituents.1) The calls and charges really were his and he hopes the issue will simply go away; or
2) Even though the calls and charges were not his, since they are being charged to the public rather than his personal expense, the commissioner really does not care why or how they were charged to his bill.
To see the video of Commissioner VanDerWeide's denial that the calls and charges were his, click here.
hy