Auditor's function should be respected, valued

Regarding the June 19 article “New state law: County auditors can audit”:

Why is the county auditor unable to review county bills and transactions related to his office without having to invoke the state's open records laws? One county supervisor suggested the auditor's title is “misleading,” that his clerical tasks include keeping accurate meeting and financial records, paying bills and monitoring the financial operations of other county offices. The county employs two CPAs and “an external auditing firm.” Excellent, good for us.

I was dismayed at the county supervisors who belittled the auditor's behavior, describing him as “constantly suspicious,” and as thinking “there are these conspiracies of people stealing money and misusing property.” We'd like to believe there are checks and balances and that people we elect to lead don't steal money or misuse property.

However, with daily headlines of rampant abuse, fraud and dereliction of duty by trusted officials, there is clearly need for “watchdog” oversight of any governing body's administration of the law. So, if our auditor is diligent in protection of the public purse, is that not a good thing? His function should be respected and valued, not disparaged.

The public's demands for fiscal transparency and accountability are valid and likely to grow with government belt-tightening. Unshackle this official's access to county records and allow the auditor, who was re-elected by a comfortable margin in 2012, to carry out the duties and responsibilities of the position in a proper manner. I agree with the Iowa House Speaker's assessment: “It's just a good-government provision.”

Heidi Hartke

Robins