Sherri votes...
and so should you!
November 2005:
This measure would direct the state auditor to conduct performance audits of state and local governments, and dedicate 0.16% of the state’s portion of sales and use tax collections to fund these audits.
I recommend a NO votes on Initiative 900.
I find performance audits appealing, at least in theory. It makes a lot of sense to me to examine whether you’re actually doing what you intended to do. The state legislature agreed, and passed ESHB 1064 and SSHB 1970 to authorize performance audits for state agencies. However, not everyone felt the legislature went far enough, or perhaps more accurately, two people felt strongly that the legislature didn’t go far enough. Since one of those two people was Tim Eyman, and the other of those two people, Michael Dunmire, was willing to spend over $489,000 to do something about it, Initiative 900 was born.
Initiative 900 does indeed go farther than the process established by the legislature. While the legislature excluded the transportation department (which already does performance audits) and the court systems, I-900 covers all state agencies. But I-900 doesn’t stop there; it also covers local governments and agencies, from city governments to school districts to sewer and fire districts. This seems troubling to me. I’m not convinced that the state ought to be forcing performance audits on local governments, nor am I convinced that this one size fits all approach is appropriate for all levels of government.
Another big difference between the legislative audit and I-900 is a Citizen Oversight Board. The legislative process establishes an oversight board to work with the auditor and the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee. I-900 invests all its power in the state auditor. The state auditor is an elected partisan office; this seems like a lot of power to place in the hands of one person who belongs to a particular party, without any checks and balances.
I-900 would also set aside 0.16% of state sales tax revenue to fund the audits, and the current state auditor projects that his office would have to grow four times its current size over the next 10-12 years to comply with I-900. The legislature may not have gone far enough in setting up performance audits, but I-900 goes too far.