Auditor Referendum | Position by LWVGP

4/23/2018
​From:    LWVGP Committee looking at Auditor Referendum on March 20,2018 ballot
Re:         Report to the LWVGP Board of Directors
Approved by Board of Directors LWVGP
 
The Committee met three times.
 
The first meeting reviewed available information:
                background information from Peoria County Board Nov 28 meeting         
                wording of the ballot referendum
                2018 Peoria County budget
                LWVIL "Consolidation of Governmental Units & Sharing of Major Gov. Services”
                LWVGP position
                PASS FORWARD report dated June 28,2012
                other LWVGP committee reports

The second meeting collected information from: Shelly Hranka (Tazewell Co auditor); Kent Rotherham (Peoria Co auditor); Steve Sonnemaker and Carol Van Winkle (past Peoria Co auditors); candidates Alan Paredes, Emily Rotherham, Jessica Thomas; Andrew Rand (Peoria Co Board chair); Steve Morris (Peoria Co Board vice chair); six leaguers and four citizens. The auditors/candidates had been given background information available and were told our committee would recommend whether the League "Support, oppose, stay neutral, or other." 

Pertinent LWVGP position: "C. The LWVGP urges continuing study exploring cooperation and sharing of responsibilities between local governmental units for the purpose of reducing local government costs and providing better services to all the citizens of the area."

Pertinent LWVIL position: "The LWVIL supports the efficient and effective operation of government. Consolidation of governmental units and the sharing of major governmental services may be a way of promoting the efficient and effective operation of government. In achieving this goal, the League supports a cooperative and transparent process, in which citizens have sufficient and timely information with which to make informed decisions about proposed actions , and well-defined channels for citizen input and review. Administrative and fiscal efficiency should be included in the criteria by which local governments consider whether to consolidate or share major services. ... As used in this position, consolidation refers to both the process of consolidation and the process of dissolution." Also, "In determining whether to support a consolidation/shared services proposal as a way of making government more efficient and effective, local Leagues should apply the following criteria. While it is not necessary that each standard be met, the League recognizes that these standards represent potential benefits of consolidation, leading to more efficient and effective government:

• Will the proposal either result in projected cost savings and a positive effect on taxes over the long term? Not necessarily. Unknown.
• Will the proposal either result in an increased quality and/or efficiency of services or, at a minimum, maintain services at existing levels? Likely to improve existing levels.
• Will the proposal fairly address disparities in employee contracts? Highly paid position with no skills required? Not applicable.
• Will the proposal result in a reduction in the number of governmental entities?" Yes.

Further, LWVIL's Where We Stand positions regarding "County Government Structure,” the following position: "County legislative bodies should have the right to require independently elected county officials to adhere to the same personnel and procurement systems as appointed county department heads."

The third meeting addressed these considerations:

• PASS Forward (a group of citizens who looked extensively at both the Auditor and Recorder of Deeds positions in 2012) recommended referenda ask the voters about whether these positions be elected or appointed AND recommended those positions NOT be elected positions; and "eliminating the Peoria County Auditor's elected position and having those duties preformed by an internal staff auditor in the Finance Department who reports directly to the Peoria County Board Audit Committee."
• Theoretical arguments for electing County Auditor:
• No check-and-balance of Peoria County Board
  1. Citizens better protected by a daily watch dog overseeing expenditures
  2. An independently elected auditor has no conflict of interest
• Theoretical arguments against electing County Auditor:
  1. Redundant. There is a Chief Financial Officer and a purchasing department.
  2. Peoria County Board and County Auditor have similar statutory duties for devising system of accounts and financial records.
  3. It’s possible to hire someone based on professional background, education, with CPA status preferred rather than electing people who may not have the needed skills or expertise.
  4. Historically in Peoria County, many elected officials have not worked full time.
  5. Professional CPA with experience could be hired for current salary or less.
  6. It’s possible to hire staff with professional background rather than patronage hires.
  7. Peoria County undergoes an extensive external audit annually.
  8. The Peoria County Board is answerable to the Peoria County voters for mismanagement of Peoria County funds.
  9. The County Auditor does not make policy.

In conclusion, the Committee reminds the LWVGP Board and membership that our local positions for over 20 years has included that the County Auditor is not a policy-making position and should not be elected. Further, with advances in technology and changes in county government structure, we support a "YES" vote on the referendum:

"Shall the elected Office of the Peoria County Auditor be eliminated, effective December 1, 2018, and replaced with a professional County Auditor qualified and appointed by the County Board with a 5-year term during which such appointed County Auditor can only be removed from office for malfeasance or official misconduct?  YES             NO"

The preference of the committee is to eliminate the County Auditor position; passing this referendum is a path to that possible outcome.