A request for two new patrol vehicles for the Grand Traverse Sheriff’s Office has rekindled long-simmering tensions between Sheriff’s Office officials and the county administrator.

Sheriff Tom Bensley is seeking approval to purchase two new patrol vehicles at a cost of $25,000 each. Bensley says the department initially identified 11 vehicles that needed to be replaced in 2017 as part of last fall’s budget preparations, but asked for seven in his proposed budget. That request was denied by administrators “as part of the need to put forward a balanced recommended budget for 2017,” according to County Finance Director Jody Lundquist, with all seven vehicles cut from the budget.

An unexpected Sheriff’s Office budget surplus of $330,000 for 2016 allowed Bensley and administrators to reach an agreement this month to purchase five patrol cars for $125,000. But while Bensley is pressing for his last two needed vehicles, noting funds are available to purchase them, Lundquist says the Sheriff’s Office has offered no justification for the cars and that administrators can’t “make it a practice to keep spending money just because we have it.”

“The county has never historically had a method of budgeting and planning for vehicle replacement,” says Lundquist. “There is no vehicle replacement policy or plan in place to guide how the fleet is reviewed or how budget decisions are made. We have requested the Sheriff’s Office to develop a policy…to assure taxpayers that the vehicles being purchased are necessary.”

Bensley says his department keeps a detailed spreadsheet on every vehicle in the department, tracking age, mileage, repair costs and history. Vehicles marked for replacement in 2017 typically ranged between six and 11 years old and averaged between 130,000 and 147,000 miles. Noting that patrol vehicles see more intense usage and wear-and-tear than typical daily-use vehicles, Bensley says patrol vehicles are first transitioned to gentler fleet usage if possible, then eventually phased out. “When they get old and have high mileage, those are the ones we earmark for replacement,” he says. “We are very conservative and spend a lot of time (on the review process).”

Bensley also says there is ”urgency” to his request because of the time it takes to get the cars delivered. “You don’t just go to Walmart and get two of these off the shelf,” he says. “You have to go through the board (for budget approval), which could take a month. Then when you place the order, it could be a couple months before the vehicles arrive. The manufacturers also stop production at a certain point to retool the car for next year’s model. So we’re getting into the fall, and we’re still driving cars that should have been replaced in March.”

Though Bensley’s department submitted a proposed draft policy to administrators outlining their vehicle review process, Lundquist says the policy is vague and lacks crucial details. There are no specific data measurements identified – such as thresholds for mileage, vehicle age and repair costs – that incorporate best industry practices and would allow the county to predictably budget for vehicle replacement year after year, according to Lundquist. “Without a fleet management plan or citing any specific data, how are we making well-informed budget decisions?” she says.

The vehicle debate is the latest in a series of ongoing tensions between Bensley and County Administrator Tom Menzel over budgeting and leadership styles. “This is an example of the old culture and why it is such a challenge to change,” says Menzel. “The ability to track expenditures and plan for future ones is critical for every department if we are ever going to become more effective and efficient.”

Bensley, meanwhile, says the Sheriff’s Office “has the documentation to back up why vehicles need to be replaced” and funding available to purchase vehicles, and has attempted to meet administrators’ request for more details on the replacement process. “If they need something else, I wish they’d just sit down and talk with us,” he says. “There’s really been no communication, and that’s a huge problem. (Menzel’s) trying to make it seem like a money grab by our office, and that’s wrong.”