Town Square

Post a New Topic

Future of auditor's office uncertain

Original post made on Feb 22, 2019

With City Auditor Harriet Richardson concluding her Palo Alto tenure this month, city officials are preparing to hire a consultant to manage the office while the City Council consider its long-term future.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, February 22, 2019, 6:52 AM

Comments (11)

Posted by Anon
a resident of Evergreen Park
on Feb 22, 2019 at 8:55 am

Seems vital to have an independent city council appointed auditor.

Since it was a vote of the people on 1983 to have a CC appointed auditor shouldn’t it take a vote of the people to eliminate the office?

Between this and other patronizing comments recently from the duas including kniss comments about “no traffic problems” and her recent slide show of “ye olde Palo Alto” it feels as if we are being talked down to.
The citizens are already mistrustful of many aspects of local government; this needs to be repaired not made worse!!!

Posted by Sally
a resident of Downtown North
on Feb 22, 2019 at 9:53 am

We need a strong independent audit function. Palo Alto has indeed had a weak audit office lately, with output lacking in quality and quantity. Council ultimately takes the blame for this. The City Auditor reports to them.

Council needs to step up to their job. That means hiring an A+ auditor to run the audit team. It means taking reasonable action when things fall out of alignment. Any council member that doesn't think they can handle this is essentially saying they're not fit for the job.

Now, rather than working to hire a great auditor, we are hiring an expensive consultant to repeat back (with gravitas) what the City Manger and Council want to hear. [This is how consultancies work, and it exemplifies why we need an independent auditor to begin with.]

My alternative is simple. Grow a backbone, and step up to your job description.

Posted by NeilsonBuchanan
a resident of Downtown North
on Feb 22, 2019 at 11:25 am

NeilsonBuchanan is a registered user.

An independent internal city auditor is fundamental to good government. I can support a truly indpendent assessement of the organization, funding level and performance of the current Auditor's Office.

Auditor function balance of power principal.

Our city Manager and City Council surely must recognize the auditor function makes thei jobs easier in the long run. We should expect an city auditor to create a bit of friction. Any effort to push difficult issues out of public sight must rejected by the Council and citizens who elect the Council. Let's see what comes back to Council in a few months.

Posted by Anon
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Feb 22, 2019 at 11:51 am

>> The Finance Committee also recommended by a 3-1 vote, with Lydia Kou dissenting, that the council should revisit the topic of the office's long-term future later in the year.

>> Kou stressed the importance of keeping a fully staffed Office of the City Auditor, which was created in 1983 by a city vote.

Once again, council member Kou stands up for principle.

Posted by Mry
a resident of Midtown
on Feb 22, 2019 at 12:27 pm

The cc needs to do their job and hire and fund a top rated Auditor with sufficient staff. Forget about consultant or revisiting later in the year.

Posted by Fly on the wall
a resident of University South
on Feb 22, 2019 at 1:10 pm

The underlying problem and open secret within city hall is that three successive highly competent and experienced city auditors have given up on the job because of undermining by rigid and miss guided members of the auditors’ staff. Those employees have skillfully used labor protections to prevent their own reform or replacement. The city HR department, legal staff and city council has been struggling with how to contend with the problem. That’s what is behind consideration of eliminating the office.

Posted by Sally
a resident of Downtown North
on Feb 22, 2019 at 3:47 pm

@Fly on the Wall

Yes, most people here know the context of difficult HR scenarios (less public) and poor output (fully public for all who take the time to read reports and think). The response is what folks here are taking issue with, and more will be taking issue as the news of their plot spreads.

The history of the office's problems, at some point, simply doesn't matter. I keep lecturing myself about this, because it's easy to get lost in all sorts of weeds on this.

[Although that history should inform council that we need a poised and experienced personnel manager.... Someone who will set standards and hold folks to them with fairness, transparency, and accountability. PIPs when needed, Management 101 stuff.]

Drama aside: (1) We know need a powerful and independent audit function. That is not only good sense, but also compelled by the early 80s vote. (2) We know the City Manager's Office can't audit itself, or manage its own audits of itself. (3) We know need strong oversight from council.

We need folks to do what is literally their job.

We cannot forfeit the independent audit function because it's tough to manage sometimes. That would be misguided and cowardly.

Posted by Yes, We need an internal auditor.
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Feb 22, 2019 at 4:04 pm

Yes, We need an internal auditor. is a registered user.

Good internal auditor, good government--money well spent. Just do it.

Posted by jh
a resident of Evergreen Park
on Feb 22, 2019 at 4:06 pm

jh is a registered user.

Is it against labor laws to eliminate the department and its staff and then after some period of time hire a new auditor who can hire their own staff? Given what previous auditors have brought to light we definitely need an auditor's office. As has been already demonstrated, outside consultants do not have and cannot in the short-term acquire sufficient knowledge of the city and its workings to drill down and produce the kind of substantive in depth report that makes their report worth much much than the paper it is written on. Worse, it is actually damaging because it is misleading.

Maybe we would be better served in the long run even if it means there is a period without any auditing.

Does the auditor report directly to the council?

Posted by resident
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Feb 22, 2019 at 10:30 pm

I thought our auditors were pretty much PR people publishing lavish praise on the city government. It struck me as odd that when Sharon Ericson left so many managers sang her praises. I didn't know what to make of that.

The recent Citizens Surveys reports are a disgrace, the most recent one not quite as bad as earlier ones. Pages and pages and pages of detailed statistics comparing the current year to the last ten years, or comparing our city to a looong list of other cities. Irrelevant and unreadable.

Maybe the City Manager had something to do with it - put out long, dense documents that hardly anyone will read.

Posted by jh
a resident of Evergreen Park
on Feb 23, 2019 at 2:05 pm

jh is a registered user.

Best accomplished when hiring outside consultants who can produce reams of data but only superficial conclusions.

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from Palo Alto Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

The Economics of Residential Rooftop Solar
By Sherry Listgarten | 59 comments | 6,677 views

Why Give Up Delicious Things?
By Laura Stec | 21 comments | 2,694 views

Business tax in Palo Alto
By Steve Levy | 3 comments | 2,257 views

Is Watching Porn Considered to be Cheating?
By Chandrama Anderson | 4 comments | 1,395 views

Sutter andPAMF --protect your patients from coronavirus -- not just your employees
By Diana Diamond | 3 comments | 1,225 views