Quantcast
 
Loading
WatchSonoma
WatchSonoma Watch

Sonoma County Board of Supervisors reject change to auditor’s post

By BRETT WILKISON
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday unanimously rejected a proposal to switch the county’s top elected financial post to an appointed one.

Supervisors said such a move risked a public backlash at a time when calls for transparency and close fiscal oversight of government are widespread.

David Sundstrom

“I’m not sure this sends the right message to voters,” Supervisor Efren Carrillo said.

The proposal, advanced by county administrators, sought board approval for a ballot measure that would have asked voters whether they wanted to end their selection of the county’s auditor-controller-treasurer-tax collector in favor of a Board of Supervisors’ appointment.

Switching to an appointed post could attract a stronger pool of candidates for the office and allow the county to apply higher minimum qualifications than those required by the state, administrators said.

Nine other California counties, including Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Santa Clara and Marin, have gone to an appointed post for their top financial officer.

But the move is opposed by many current and former elected financial officers statewide, who say it eliminates the independence of a key oversight and fiscal management post.

Tom Ford, who retired as Sonoma County’s elected treasurer-tax collector in early 2006, said he shared those concerns.

“I always felt that voters are smart enough to make their decision,” he said Tuesday, urging the board to kill the proposal.

Carrillo, Mike McGuire and David Rabbitt led opposition to the proposal, voicing strong reservations about changing the post to an appointed one.

The office has been a focus of heightened public scrutiny in the past two years amid an unprecedented round of county borrowing to shore up its pension system and the retirement of the former incumbent Rod Dole, now the county’s top-paid pensioner.

Dole’s appointed replacement, David Sundstrom, oversees the county’s $1.65 billion treasury, including school, community college and special district funds, serves on the county pension system board and manages county auditing, financial reporting, local tax collection and bond issuance.

“The autonomy of that office is crucial,” McGuire said.

Board veteran Valerie Brown endorsed the proposal and differed sharply with the other supervisors before joining them in the final vote.

She said voter selection of the auditor-controller-treasurer-tax collector office, like that of county judges, often amounted to “just checking the boxes.”

She suggested that supervisors were better equipped to make the selection and she questioned a key argument against such a move: the need to preserve the supposed autonomy of other elected county officers.

As several of those officers sat in the audience, Brown called that claim “specious,” saying the board had ultimate authority over and accountability for county government.

“The ideology that says the accountability is there because it runs with the people” misses the point, she said. “The accountability is with us,” the board, she said.

Carrillo countered that switching the selection to a board appointment could be seen as undermining faith in democracy.

“I think it would be a mistake to move in this direction,” he said.

Sundstrom, who was appointed in December to fill the remainder of Dole’s term, stayed out of the debate. When he was hired, the former Orange County official pledged to run for the elected office in 2014 or apply for an appointed one. He did not speak before the board Tuesday.

Shirlee Zane, the board chairwoman, cast her no vote after voicing concerns about the estimated $125,000 to $250,000 cost of the ballot measure and its timing, on the heels of recent county budget struggles and amid a bid to reign in salary and pension costs.

“It’s simply not the right time,” she said.

You can reach Staff Writer Brett Wilkison at 521-5295 or brett.wilkison@pressdemocrat.com.





5 Responses to “Sonoma County Board of Supervisors reject change to auditor’s post”

  1. sonoma citizen says:

    The County Auditor/Controller position is the fulcrum for change. That person has not only the authority but the responsibility to monitor finances county wide. The Water Agency is exempt from Grand Jury investigation; hence the lack of followup on its payoff of Michael Allen in 2010. The Board of Supervisors uses the Water Agency as its paymaster for political favors. The Board of Supervisors, who govern the Water Agency, are complicit in the Water Agency’s systemic diversion of cash. An independently elected new Auditor/Control in 2014 could tilt the playing level, in favor of the taxpayers and citizens, by the simple expedient of serving the public interest; by asking the obvious questions like: where did that money go? Since the Press Democrat, bafflingly, has turned a blind eye to the Water Agency’s role as political paymaster–baffling in the face of the PD’s good work pensions–and since the Grand Jury has no power to investigate the Water Agency, the job falls to the Auditor/Controller. The Supervisors race in 2012 will pale next to the heat of the 2014 election.

    Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

  2. Fiscal Conservative says:

    The time for an elected position was before the $1.87 Billion in pension debt.

    Own it.

    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5

  3. Sonoma Sam says:

    Why isn’t Rob Dole in jail?

    Has anyone ever considered looking at all pensions and chopping them down to NO MORE than the last year’s salary? Dole never made 200K a year yet he and others get more than they ever earned.

    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6

  4. Shepard says:

    County Administrators advanced the proposal? Well, slap me silly, why am I not surprised?

    Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2

  5. John Abrahams says:

    Good for the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors–the Auditor’s position needed to stay an elected position and not one appointed by the Board.

    Auditor’s should be independent of those that they audit.

    Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply