Eugene residents who are seeking a ballot initiative to create an independent performance auditor for the city filed a petition with the Circuit Court May 17. They say the city’s proposed ballot language is “biased” and “fails to sufficiently, concisely or fairly describe the initiative.”
The language was prepared by City Attorney Glenn Klein in the city manager’s office.
City Manager Jon Ruiz and conservative members of city government have long opposed such a charter amendment that would provide independent and professional evaluation of city management, department by department, with the purpose of improving management and accountability.
Back in 2002, an ad hoc charter review committee unanimously called for the creation of an independent performance auditor to address long-standing management issues, excessive power by the city manager and eroded trust in city government. But a string of city managers and elected city leaders have kept the topic off the City Council agenda, saying such auditing is not needed and is too costly.
Meanwhile, hundreds of cities and counties around the nation have found that independent auditors have more than paid for themselves financially and have kept small problems from growing into big problems, says petitioner Bonny Bettman McCornack.
The 10-word-maximum ballot caption proposed by the city attorney for next May’s election reads: “Charter Amendment: elected city auditor independent of council/manager.” The question reads: “Shall Charter create elected auditor to audit city operations and activities without supervision or direction by City Council or manager?”
The explanation section is longer and goes into some details of the amendment, but not all voters will take the time to read the summary explanation, which details the cost — less than .1 percent of the city’s budget and duties such as posting audit results publicly.
In response, chief petitioners McCornack, George Brown and David Monk say the “caption and question fail to tell voters that the proposal both creates an office of an independent elected city auditor, and establishes its duties.”
They add, “The summary omits significant detail about required qualifications, the duties of the office, and accountability provisions. In addition, aspects of how the amendment works are inaccurate.”
Citing state and city code requirements for fairness and accuracy, petitioners are calling on the court to improve the short caption to read: “Amends Charter: Establishes office, duties of independent city auditor.” And the revised question should change to: “Shall City Charter be amended to establish office of elected City Auditor to independently audit city operations and activities?”
The petitioners complain that the city attorney’s unnecessary language, “without supervision or direction by City Council or city manager,” implies that the auditor would have no accountability.
In fact, the new auditor would work closely with city leaders to identify problem areas, follow professional protocols for auditing, and collaborate with city leaders on resolving problems and improving efficiencies. An anonymous hotline would be available for citizen whistle-blowers. All audit reports would be published on a website and audits would be subject to peer review.
Once the ballot title language is finalized and the city recorder approves signature sheets, petitioners can begin to collect the necessary 8,091 valid signatures to get the measure on the ballot.
A Note From the Publisher

Dear Readers,
The last two years have been some of the hardest in Eugene Weekly’s 43 years. There were moments when keeping the paper alive felt uncertain. And yet, here we are — still publishing, still investigating, still showing up every week.
That’s because of you!
Not just because of financial support (though that matters enormously), but because of the emails, notes, conversations, encouragement and ideas you shared along the way. You reminded us why this paper exists and who it’s for.
Listening to readers has always been at the heart of Eugene Weekly. This year, that meant launching our popular weekly Activist Alert column, after many of you told us there was no single, reliable place to find information about rallies, meetings and ways to get involved. You asked. We responded.
We’ve also continued to deepen the coverage that sets Eugene Weekly apart, including our in-depth reporting on local real estate development through Bricks & Mortar — digging into what’s being built, who’s behind it and how those decisions shape our community.
And, of course, we’ve continued to bring you the stories and features many of you depend on: investigations and local government reporting, arts and culture coverage, sudoku and crossword puzzles, Savage Love, and our extensive community events calendar. We feature award-winning stories by University of Oregon student reporters getting real world journalism experience. All free. In print and online.
None of this happens by accident. It happens because readers step up and say: this matters.
As we head into a new year, please consider supporting Eugene Weekly if you’re able. Every dollar helps keep us digging, questioning, celebrating — and yes, occasionally annoying exactly the right people. We consider that a public service.
Thank you for standing with us!

Publisher
Eugene Weekly
P.S. If you’d like to talk about supporting EW, I’d love to hear from you!
jody@eugeneweekly.com
(541) 484-0519