What is going on here?
Just one day after a confrontation with City Council members who accused him of exceeding his authority, City Auditor Pete Gonzales Jr. was asked to resign or face termination.
Does anyone else find this situation, I don’t know, bizarre? I suspect I don’t have all of the information here but this is what it looks like to me with lots of question marks:
-
City auditor plans/starts a playground safety audit
-
City council member somehow finds out about audit
- City council member tells him he must ask for permission first? and/or must not do the audit?
-
City auditor argues he has discretion to do whatever audits he likes
-
City council argues he doesn’t
-
City attorney steps in and says council is auditor’s client/boss so he must do what council says?
-
City auditor continues to argue with council
-
Council members accuse auditor of using “children’s safety” as a cover for his actions
-
Council asks for auditor’s resignation
My first question is what was wrong with auditor doing the playground audit? Was it that it was being done instead of some other priority or just that Gonzales decided to do it with out council permission? From the reports, it seems like the latter.
Was Gonzales trying to hide the fact that he was doing the audit? How did council member John Clamp find out?
Council members are accusing Gonzales of wrongly making this an issue of children’s safety. Okay, so what is the issue then? He didn’t ask permission to do the audit first? Was he explicitly told all audits had to be approved by the audit committee before proceeding?
Given the problems the city has had with the auditor’s office (where’s Roddy Stinson when you need him) was this the best way for the council to handle the matter?
The sudden turn of events means the city, for the second time in two years, could be forced to look for an independent auditor. The last auditor, Pat Major, abruptly resigned in April 2007, citing a lack of direction from the council and Mayor Phil Hardberger. Some council observers said Major had a strained relationship with Hardberger and City Manager Sheryl Sculley.
The City Charter gives the auditor wide latitude to conduct audits but says he can be hired and fired by a majority of the council.
I would really like to know how exactly he “exceeded his authority.” What did he do that caused the council to loose confidence in him? I want to know what rule Gonzales broke that has caused the council to ask for his resignation. So far, the comments from the city council have been like the following:
“I am disappointed in you trying to wrap yourself around our children’s safety to do this audit,” Cibrian said. “I suggest that next time you base your arguments on factual data and not on your personal opinion.”
So he didn’t have a good enough reason to do the audit? Until the council and the mayor and city attorney provide some straight answers, I can’t help but think the auditor is being to asked to resign because he started an audit without city council permission. Given why auditors exist in the first place, this seems a very dubious reason for political representatives with significant financial responsibilities to fire an auditor.
Technorati Tags: San Antoino City Auditor, Pete Gonzales, John Clamp, Diane Cibrian
Filed under: City Auditor
Wasn’t Diane protesting Boobie Rock because of “child safety”? So its okay when she uses the child safety card, but no one else can?
Also, should she maybe graduate from college BEFORE questioning an auditor? It seems like she might then understand what one does.