In the June 8, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, the editorial board writes:

Voters rejected a proposal for an elected Eugene city auditor on May 15, but the initiative’s sponsors can take heart from detailed election returns released by Lane County this week. Measure 20-283 passed in three of eight Eugene City Council wards, and in 12 of 31 voting precincts. Most encouraging to the sponsors was that the elected auditor found support in diverse parts of the city, and lost by a landslide in only a few neighborhoods. …

In the May 17, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, the editorial board writes:

Eugene voters defeated both proposals to create a city auditor’s office — an initiative measure for an elected auditor failed by 7 percentage points, and the Eugene City Council’s measure calling for an appointed auditor was rejected by a 3-to-1 ratio. The initiative’s version was too expensive and unaccountable; the council’s proposal was seen as a maneuver to derail the competing measure.

A city auditor, however, is not a bad idea. With some refinements, and in a political atmosphere less polluted by suspicion and acrimony, a proposal for an auditor’s office might fly. In the wake of Tuesday’s doubly negative verdict by the voters, such a proposal can’t come from the City Council any time soon. Only an independent citizens’ group would be able to pick up the pieces, apply what has been learned and give Eugene the cost-saving benefits of performance auditing.

In the May 13, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, the editorial board writes:

Supporters of Eugene’s competing ballot measures to create a city auditor’s office justify the expense of their proposals by claiming that organizations save $3 to $5 for every dollar spent on auditing.

That may be true, but there must be a point of diminishing returns. Otherwise, Eugene could spend $1 billion on auditing, gain $3 billion to $5 billion, and send everyone a fat check.

In the April 30, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, the editorial board writes:

Measure 20-283: No. The measure would create an elected city auditor’s office — a potentially fruitful idea, but the proposal goes too far in terms of expense and not far enough in terms of accountability,

Measure 20-287: No. The Eugene City Council’s alternative to Measure 20-283 would create an appointed auditor’s position. The council muddied the waters by placing this proposal on the ballot.

In the April 8, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, the editorial board writes:

Voters can cast their ballots in nine different ways, counting the undervote options, on a pair of dueling measures to create an auditor’s office for the city of Eugene. The best choice is to vote no on both, giving the city a chance to return with an improved plan for audits after the political smoke has cleared. …