Improving the accountability & transparency of city government
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. …
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. …
In the May 5, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, Eugene resident Glenna Dunaway writes in a letter:
I keep reading comments regarding Eugene Measure 20-283 indicating there are people who think that the process of electing an official means necessarily that that public servant will act for the common good. You know that’s not true. I know that’s not true. We all know that’ not true. Please give some thought to other aspects of measures 283 and 287, and make your decision based, as much as possible, on reality as you understand it.
In the May 5, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, Eugene resident Ralph McDonald writes in a letter:
Some opponents of Measure 20-283 claim an elected auditor would insult the accountability of city of Eugene employees.
Rank and file city employees see the problems with waste and mismanagement. They recognize them earliest, and are often the only witnesses. …
In the May 4, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, Eugene resident David R. Newman writes in a letter:
Despite many lawn signs urging a “yes” vote for an elected auditor, questions remain. For starters, the measure implies: “OK, Eugene City Council candidate, I’ll vote for you, but I don’t trust you to do an honest job, so we’ll also elect an auditor to look over your decision-making/implementation shoulder and report back to us.” …
In the May 3, 2018, online edition of the Eugene Weekly, Eugene resident Brian McMurray writes in a letter:
This in response to Ed Moye (Letters, 4/19), who appears unaware there are Eugeneans who do not support 20-283, the elected auditor measure.
I for one believe this measure is flawed and is not worthy of our support. The claim is that it will provide an independent auditor and bring transparency to city government. Who wouldn’t support that? …
In the May 3, 2018, online edition of the Eugene Weekly, Eugene resident Ken Rosemarin writes in a letter:
In the voter’s pamphlet, City Councilors Pryor and Syrett state that the supporters of the independent auditor believe “the city manager, city staff, elected mayor and elected city council are all so bad that only a separately elected” auditor can fix things. BINGO! …
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. …
In the May 3, 2018, online edition of the Eugene Weekly, Eugene resident Ron Bevirt writes in a letter:
City officials and their allies who oppose BM 20-283 for an independent elected auditor claim it is “overpriced and overreaching.” They’re just trying to scare you into voting against your own best interests. In reality, it is the city that is “overpriced and overreaching.” …