26 Comments for this article

Tags: , , , , ,


WILMINGTON, NC (WWAY) — Wilmington City Councilwoman Laura Padgett will be reimbursed for going over her travel budget.

In a 5-2 vote Tuesday night, the council approved giving Padgett $450.10 back. She said she went over her $2,750 budget. It was for three trips, which she said are very important to maintaining relationships and gaining information for the city.

“I have been for the last several years, starting in 2008, a speaker on many national agendas. When I do that, I recognize the City of Wilmington,” Padgett said. “We’ve always had to justify the expense. It’s not caterwauling off into some wonderful vacation spot. It’s work. It’s time away from home, family, children and business. It’s impossible to participate in state and national organizations and not spend some money.”

Mayor Bill Saffo said the travel budget for him, and the council is $20,000 a year, and they have not exceeded that.

This is not the first time Padgett’s travel expenses have been an issue. Three years ago council voted to increase each member’s travel budget and tweak the reimbursement policy if a member went over their allotment after Padgett was denied a request to be reimbursed after exceeding her travel budget.

Comment on this Story

  • kirk

    Did she fly business class?
    Did she stay in a five-star hotel?
    Were all her meals eaten in an expensive restaurant?
    What are her allowances?

  • guest45

    that’s the whole problem in a nutshell, “BUDGET”, that’s a word no one in politics seem to know, as long as it is coming out of the taxpayers pocket, why should they worry, until we say enough is enough!!!!!!!!!!1

  • Guest7969

    Smudget….she doesn’t need to follow a budget when she has the fine Wilmington taxpayers paying the tab! Keep electing them Wilmington…sit on your rear ends at home when elections are going on…this is what happens.

  • lonetraveler

    Has she never heard of “net meeting”? Traveling for every meeting is no longer needed or justified. Why not have a video conference where all involved parties can meet online; this would not only save her travel expense but everyone else in on the conference. It appears that money is no object when you are spending taxpayers’ money. I say if you have consumed your travel budget, then don’t travel.

  • jj

    Would they do the same for other City employees? I would bet they would not. Budget, do these people understand what it means.

  • SurfCityTom

    she has the same issue every year. She goes over budget and the City taxpayers cover her overdraft.

    Rather than generalities, perhaps she can specifically note the travel which caused her going over budget; where she went; and how the city specifically benefits.

    That’s called accountability.

  • patsy cline

    I think she should save her receipts and file them as a business expense at the end of the year instead of us paying her back. Or just simple dont go over budget. Thats not hard to do.

  • Wilm guest

    this is a Wilmington issue, not a Surf City one. Butt out old man

  • guesty

    Did she go to some other cities to look at their scary police cars? This flake needs to go.

  • suspicious 1

    With no consequences for overspending, where is there an incentive to stay within budget?

  • Guest CommonTater

    If we could pay her travel expenses to leave for good…….

  • Taxpayer$$$

    Did Ms Padgett ever submit a report on the benefits to the taxpayer of these trips? What useful information was learned and applied? Could the same information be had without having to travel?

  • SurfCityTom

    for any person who owns and pays property taxes on real estate located in the city of Wilmington.

    Who elected you the decider of who may comment on issues for which they have a direct interest?

    So, go bugger off guest who likely pays no taxes.

  • guesty

    I know Tom owns property within the City of Wilmington and pays taxes to the City of Wilmington.

  • SurfCityTom

    and because I reside outside of the city, I can not vote in city elections.

    There was a time when only property owners could vote in elections. They were the ones with true vested interests.

    So all I can do is comment and ask pointed questions in an attempt to sway voters when elections do come around.

  • Guestman.

    You know absolutely nothing of the kind. Just because that old coot says he does is more reason to believe he doesn’t.
    He tells more lies than a 5 cent watch.

  • SurfCityTom

    it nust really bug you that the film incentive charade has played out just as I described some 8 weeks ago.

    Were you also 1 of the proponents for the taxpayer funded ballpark whch voters had enough sense to vote down?

    You must have a rather shallow life, living entitlement to entitlement, if the best you can do is troll after me.

    The increasing anger you communicate may be an indicator more people are reading and considering the truth in what I say.

    Keep up the good work. Your comments confirm I must be on the right track.

  • guesty

    If you say so then it must be true.

  • Guestman.

    I have no horse in the film fiasco perpetrated by teabaggers like you and the legislature.
    I voted against the ballpark and think the convention center was a waste of time and money. Neither of those are any of your business since you live somewhere else.
    The reason I comment on your posts is that you are a know-it-all pompous ass and more people are getting sick of you as witnessed by the posts on here.
    I don’t have anger, just disgust for someone that thinks he knows it all and has a compulsion to spew forth crap about everything on this post.
    That, and as I told you before, you are an easy target of opportunity. You are the only person on here,besides Heimie, that is consistently wrong on almost everything and is too stupid to know it.
    Is your curiosity satisfied now?
    BTW, thanks for the checks.

  • SurfCityTom

    you’ve stated I lied and you just stated I’m consistently wrong; and you’ve called me stupid.

    Pray Tell, where have I been wrong? Be specific.

    So far, when it comes to the legislature and the budget process, I’ve been spot on target.

    By the way, disagreeing with you is not proof positive I was wrong.

    So far, you seem to be the only one who is “sick of you”. You seem to be the only weasel spewing forth dirt; but then that is the liberal approach when unable to dispute facts.

    My domicile is not an issue. As a property owning taxpayer, it is my right and duty to comment when appropriate.

    We could settle this one on one. Perhaps raise some funds for the wounded warriors. But that would require you to step from behind the cloak of no identity.

  • Guestman.

    I already contribute to the Wounded Warriors as well as Fisher House since I have some relatives and old army buddies in need.
    I stand behind everything I say and will add that you try to denigrate people that disagree with you calling people, in more words, stupid. I just state it outright. You also like to refer to entitlements and getting welfare to people that don’t agree, Questioning their comprehension skills is another favorite of yours.
    You are not lily white in this, old man.
    You beg for specifics but when you are asked you won’t provide any.
    You are just a bitter old man that likes to think of himself as important or smarter than everyone else and you are neither.
    Anyone else that is sick of SC Thom please respond.

  • SurfCityTom

    everything you say. Apparently quite true as you fail to stand in front of your statements with fact. On at least 2 other topics, others asked you to provide facts with your incredible charges. And of course you resorted to insult laced comments rather than facts.

    And clearly, you don’t have the stones to stand up and try to put me in my place.

    Keep up your anal postings; they continue to show I’m on the right track.

    Must be tough knowing you’re wrong on so many topics.

  • John Boy

    This type of behavior is “very intimidating.”

  • ChefnSurf

    Not the first time she’s done this, and it most certainly won’t be the last. Why? Because she knows she’ll get away with it. How does she know that? Because that’s what happens.

    Voter insanity: Re-electing the same people over and over again and expecting different results.

  • Guest-o-matic

    The grand peeps of Wilmington are too lazy to get up out of their smelly armchairs to go cast a vote. Having a mere 12-15% turnout of potential voters means a shoe-in for incumbents. Add to it having candidates like Justin Lenasa running for these positions doesn’t help. We can call Wilmington voters the “Sheep Peeps”. They “say” they want something different, but aren’t willing to do the work to get it, so exactly as in this case, “You do what you’ve always done, you get what you’ve always gotten!”.

  • ChefnSurf

    If I’d used “apathy’ it would’ve destroyed the metaphor. Besides, not voting is truly insane.


Related News