Laserfiche WebLink
respond to citizen questions about the way things work, and could find ways to improve City <br />operations. If the auditor position was responsible to the City Manager, "there was no point to it at all." <br />The person would feel constrained to give the manager positive reports about issues and personnel. <br /> <br />Ms. Taylor asked Bob Cassidy and Ken Tollenaar of the CCRC why the committee recommended the <br />auditor position. Mr. Cassidy said the key reason was the independence of the position. The CCRC felt <br />the position would have an impact only if independent. He was sure the committee would oppose a <br />motion that modified its recommendation. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ asked if the committee's support for the proposal was unanimous. Mr. Cassidy said yes. <br /> <br />Mr. Pap~ thought the council should ask the voters if they supported an audit position. He hoped the <br />council put something on the ballot. He was concerned, however, about hiring a full-time auditor to <br />assist the council, which was not a full-time body. Mr. Pap~ was also concerned about the impact on <br />the council/manager form of government of having someone with independent authority, and <br />suggested having the auditor report to the audit committee. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly believed that there was great value to having an independent auditor because it promoted <br />transparency, openness, and integrity in municipal government. He thought the philosophical and <br />psychological benefits worth the cost of the position. It could help demonstrate that the council could <br />be efficient and accountable prior to requesting tax increases from the citizens. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly did not think the manager's proposal worth referring to the voters as it could happen now <br />without charter authority. He emphasized the importance of the position's independence. <br /> <br />Speaking to Mr. Meisner, Mr. Kelly confirmed that the auditor was in the committee's original charge <br />from the council. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly quoted from correspondence from the General Accounting Office in Appendix M of the <br />final report of the CCRC regarding the need for local government to take steps that ensure an auditor <br />was independent and free from organizational impairment. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly believed there were jurisdictions where the concept worked well and others where it did not, <br />and suggested that the council not attempt to generalize from the experience of individual <br />communities. <br /> <br />Mr. Kelly said the CCRC recommended the audit committee as a way to more closely involve the City <br />Manager with the operations of the city auditor. He said that the budget proposal for a temporary audit <br />was a very different thing from a charter-established, ongoing employee appointed by the council. <br /> <br />Mr. Farr was specifically concerned about an auditor appointed by the council as he feared that it <br />would become a political position. He did not want to see a council majority dictating the day-to-day <br />operations of the City. He did not believe the council needed another employee. He opposed the <br />motion. <br /> <br />Ms. Nathanson quoted from the materials provided to the council by the CCRC on the topic, which <br />stated "Nonetheless, internal auditors should not report directly to the governing board except in highly <br /> <br /> <br />