Improving the accountability & transparency of city government
In the May 10, 2018, issue of the Eugene Weekly, Eugene resident Ralph McDonald writes:
Some opponents of Measure 20-283 claim an elected auditor would insult the accountability of current city employees. Rank and file city employees see the problems with waste and mismanagement. They recognize them earliest, often the only witnesses. …
In the May 10, 2018, issue of the Eugene Weekly, Eugene resident Lisa-Marie DiVincent writes in a letter:
I’d like to bring a little kindness into the elected auditor discussion. Folks on both sides are upset. Political empaths such as myself feel concerned for everyone involved. …
In the May 10, 2018, issue of the Eugene Weekly, Bonny Bettman McCornack writes in a guest viewpoint:
If you want to save money and have open and accountable government, do your pocketbook and our democracy a favor and vote “Yes” on Ballot Measure 20-283. …
In the May 10, 2018, issue of the Eugene Weekly, John Barofsky and Joshua Skov write in a guest viewpoint:
As long-time volunteers who watch Eugene’s city government closely, we want a strong and effective performance auditor. That’s why we’re supporting measure 20-287, and not 20-283.
The best way to understand how 20-287 will be more effective is to start with the way Eugene’s government currently works. We have a voice in one simple way: We elect eight councilors and a mayor, and they direct the city manager.
Everyone else in city government works for the city manager. All small spending decisions, the preparation of the budget, the maintenance of our streets and parks, hiring and firing of staff — all of that falls to the city manager and his executive staff. You may not like it, but that is our form of government — so-called council-manager form — and it’s written into the city charter. …
On May 9, 2018, Rachael McDonald of KLCC reported:
Eugene voters are considering two competing performance auditor proposals on the May 15th ballot. Measure 20-283 would establish an elected auditor. Measure 20-287 is for an auditor who’s appointed by the City Council. …
In the May 8, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, EWEB Commissioner Steve Mital writes in a letter:
The campaign for a Eugene city auditor stems from a perceived need for more robust checks and balances in our city government. Perhaps the most powerful tool for forcing accountability is independent, thorough, and thoughtful local investigative reporting.
Communities across the nation, including ours, have experienced dramatic declines in local print reporting. We will be better off as a community by re-committing to buying and reading the paper than with either city auditor measure. Nothing exposes laziness, incompetence, or corruption and mobilizes a response from elected officials as effectively as a front-page story.
In the May 8, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, Eugene resident Finn Po writes in a letter:
For three months, hardworking volunteers gathered nearly 11,000 signatures to qualify Measure 20-283, the proposal for an elected Eugene city auditor. Fearing a fair yes-or-no vote, the mayor, city manager and five city councilors joined with moneyed interests to try to defeat it by proposing a distracting measure for a rubber-stamp appointed auditor measure — a lapdog masquerading as a watchdog. …
On May 7, 2018, OPB’s “Think Out Loud” program hosted a debate:
There are two measures on Eugene ballots that propose different ways of selecting a city auditor. They are nuanced, but essentially measure 20-283 calls for the auditor to be elected, while measure 20-287 calls for the auditor to be selected by the Eugene City Council. Bonny McCornack of Elected Auditor for City Accountability and Chris Wig of Citizens for Sensible Oversight debate the merits of the two measures.
In the May 6, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, Eugene resident Joy Marshall writes in a letter:
I have thoroughly read the proposal, Measure 20-283, for an elected auditor for Eugene, and I find it alarming.
I’ve been active in writing and vetting legislation for years. I’ve seen many an idea that seems appealing on the surface, but how it’s actually written is critical. This measure would encourage people to be adversarial and litigious. The whole message of the campaign is that we can’t trust government; it is anti-public-spirited as a time when we should be coming together with respect and reason.
I believe that’s why the League of Women Voters, both city unions (AFSCME and the firefighters), The Register-Guard and many other thoughtful voices oppose it. It is also ironic that the campaign doesn’t trust our current elected city councilors to do a good job, but somehow electing one more politician will fix all of our problems.
I urge voters to be thoughtful about what we put in our city charter, and vote no on 20-283.
In the May 5, 2018, online edition the Register-Guard, Eugene resident Jon Belcher writes in a letter:
As a member of the Citizen Charter Review Committee, which in 2002 unanimously recommended establishing a city performance auditor appointed by the Eugene City Council and overseen by a citizen audit committee, I thank the proponents of Measure 20-283 for reviving the discussion.
If only they had developed their proposal via an open inclusive process rather than behind closed doors. They could have avoided several flaws in Measure 20-283. It pays an excessive salary, provides for no ongoing citizen oversight and allows the first auditor to be elected by a minority of voters. Moreover, it creates an auditor so independent as to be ineffective — someone on the outside looking in. …