In the April 30, 2018, issue of the Register-Guard, Eugene resident Christine L. Sundt writes in a letter:
If Measure 20-283 passes, Eugene’s voters would elect their auditor rather than having one appointed by the City Council. That means we, the people, decide who is best qualified (experience, residency, and success) from among candidates.
Opponents to the elected auditor initiative claim that the ballot measure was crafted behind closed doors, without public inclusion or debate. That’s false. The grassroots initiative met and exceeded the requirement with 13,000-plus qualifying signatures. Weren’t those signers who spoke directly with canvassers regarding the proposed measure representative of the public’s inclusion, and their signatures an affirmation of the debatable issue? How many signatures did it take to qualify the council’s measure?
The other opposition statement, that an elected auditor costs too much, is shortsighted. Challengers should note that salaries are often incongruous within the same institution. Football coaches are paid far more than regular faculty members, and even more than university presidents. Sports fans argue that it’s because you get what you pay for. Winning is everything.
The same applies to an elected auditor whose success would be judged by voters. Too much money has already been squandered on unfettered, failed projects (City Hall, South Willamette, urban renewal, etc.). Choose elected, not appointed.