Continued from last week’s post.
Early this year when Mike McMahon was kicking around the idea of running I asked the City for numbers on how much the City spends on third party auditing firms to actually perform the audit and how much money from the City budget is being spent on all the perks of being the elected City Auditor.
After all, given the sort of extraneous nature of the role it would be nice to know how much extra on top of the the cost for the independent auditing firm the City is paying out.
So first, how much the City of Alameda has paid to the independent auditing firms to perform the yearly audit:
So less than $200K every year, it’s not clear why the amount jumped so much from FY 12/13 to FY 13/14 but that might account as to why the City has changed auditing firms for the FY 14/15 year.
The City Auditor, while he doesn’t pull in a substantial sum of money, certainly is getting some benefits from holding what appears to be a largely ceremonial title, this is how much the City has expended since our current Auditor first election until today, well actually, the beginning of this year since I asked for the information in January and have been sitting on it.
Generously rounding down, it’s been in these past few years about $25K a year between stipends, insurance, pers contributions, and health care. Essentially it’s a good 1/6 or 1/7 of the fee being paid to the professional auditing firm yearly depending on how much the City is being charged by the firm that year. I’m guessing it’s dependent on how complicated the finances are in a given year.
Anyway, it is time to take a good hard look at this particular elected position to see if it’s even necessary anymore and who better to call for an examination of the necessity of a position than the person holding that position. Given that our current City Auditor has never suggested this, it appears it will take a new person in that role to ask for a hard examination of the possible redundancy of this charter position.