In the May 3, 2018, online edition of the Eugene Weekly, Eugene resident Ethen Perkins writes in a letter:
Opponents of the citizen initiative for an elected auditor, 20-283, have criticized its budget, salary and broad scope. A competitive salary, budget and scope are more likely to achieve savings and efficiencies in city operations, and raise city standards for relationships and obligations.
A salary and budget attracting the most competent candidates is more effective than one that depends on Eugene city council approval. Voter’s measure 20-283 allows sufficient staff, scope and resources to independently investigate graft or misuse of public funds.
The council’s measure, 20-287, has its scope set by stakeholders in the annual budgetary process, namely city council and manager. The weaker auditor option would be hired and controlled by insiders and bureaucrats, and would not answer to Eugene’s taxpayers.
I urge voters to choose our elected officer rather than trusting city manager and council to do so. Don’t be confused into thinking you should vote no on both options.
Failing to make your choice is likely what those who don’t want an auditor are slyly hoping for, and have offered up a weaker alternative to achieve. Their shenanigans will continue if both measures fail. Please vote NO on 20-287 and YES on 20-283.