Wow! Glad to see so many responses to my Liberate the Auditor blog. Many did not respond to my question about whether they thought the city auditor should be elected by the people, appointed by the city council or appointed by the mayor with city council confirmation. But some did including SDGal, Robert E. Lee, DD, Basic Civics, LarryandTY.  They all supported an elected city auditor and/or someone not appointed by management. Many commented on the Charter Review Committee and the fact that it lacked independence. 

I enjoyed GrubbyEllis’ satirical bent, but Norman’s response was my favorite:

The only way I could support our mayor, is if Mr. Sanders appointed Diane Shipione to the City Auditor position.

I second that Norman. 

There were some comments about whether or not I planned to run for mayor and the answer is – I do not plan to do so, but if that changes, I will let the public know.

Some comments went off on other issues, like this one from Eric, who wrote: 

“And I remember how you voted against the MEA deal specifically because IT WASN’T ENOUGH! Shame on you on complaining at the margins for a disaster you helped cause!

All I can say is: Eric, your memory may not be what it used to be. Please view the video from the June 27, 2005 City Council meeting in which the contract was voted upon. It’s Item Number 208. My comments begin at approximately 5:31.

For those who cannot access the video, here’s what I said at the meeting when I voted not to increase benefits:

… I am very concerned and will remain concerned that the amount of money that is being contributed into the unfunded liability is not — is not — enough to even move forward as far as the benefits, it does not cover them.  One hundred and sixty million is not enough money.  You really are treading water — and barely — we are getting further behind.  It has to be addressed.  Like I said, every time you’ve come here I’ve pretty much said the same thing, so I’m not going to make a big long speech.  You can certainly e-mail me, I’ll send you the speech; I’ve made it numerous times.  But I do believe there has to be some recognition of benefits that were awarded that could not be funded and this unfortunately seems to continue it.  It’s not to say that I do not appreciate the sacrifices that you are proposing, but I do not believe, in this particular situation, that all the options that could have been looked at were looked at and I don’t even believe we were allowed to look at them.  And that is unfortunate because I think had that discussion been allowed to occur that we might have gotten a little further.  So again, I appreciate you coming out, you know my position on this and I will be voting against it.

In response to my blog, Still Waiting, IgnoranceisBliss wrote:

Here are the FACTS: (1) SDCERS did not create the Preservation of Benefit Plan. The Council created it on 3/19/01 by Ordinance O-18930 — and DONNA FRYE, YOU VOTED FOR IT!!

My response to IgnoranceisBliss:

Please click on this link, go to page 19 (Item Number 202) and read the minutes from March 5, 2001 for yourself. You will see that your statement about my vote is not accurate, since I was not in office until June 2001. However, I do appreciate the apology for your error.

Why is it that some folks like to scream in their comments to blogs, especially the ones who get their “facts” so wrong? That is probably a blog unto itself, but I will leave that for another day.

In any case, thanks for all the comments, thoughtful and otherwise. I appreciate your time and the fact that you bothered to read and participate. 


Leave a comment

We expect all commenters to be constructive and civil. We reserve the right to delete comments without explanation. You are welcome to flag comments to us. You are welcome to submit an opinion piece for our editors to review.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.