I find it interesting that the mayor was quick to assemble a puppet theatre with his charter revision commission, but the council has drug their feet about the audit committee;
I recently applied for a citizen volunteer vacancy that exists on the City Council Audit Committee. I received a response from the chairman that the committee had issues with allowing me to serve, as I may be personally impacted if the Downtown Switching Yard project moves forward. I can speculate that given the public objections and incremental funding required, city administration is working on an exit strategy to abandon this project. This then leads me to believe there must be other reasons for being rejected for the position.
Exit strategy? This ship (or should we say train) has already sailed. Choo-Choo!
I’ve been critical of the pace of the project and had filed a Freedom of Information Act request relating to this project which the city stonewalled for six months before being forced to comply with the law. My credentials and background to serve on this committee are not an issue, as I have worked in corporate finance for more than 20 years, in addition to teaching auditing at the college level for more than five years. I teach my students that a good auditor is independent and possesses a measure of professional skepticism. Apparently, the City Council would prefer that citizen members of this committee not have the independence required to review the city’s business.
A free society demands open and honest government, as well as citizen involvement. I’ve asked that I be removed from consideration, even though no one else has expressed an interest in serving. My hope is that someone will apply and the City Council will allow the independence required for the position.
As you can see by Randy’s job title at Citi, he is well qualified for the VOLUNTEER position. Makes you wonder if this is a matter of personal objections by the committee itself, the city council or the mayor, or just a resistance to making the committee complete.
As you may remember, a little over a year ago we had this audit committee debacle;
Did SDN contact the city and let them know they were investigating him? Or that he resigned? He resigned last year but still sat on the committee until May of this year? This is all suspect. What did Brad tell the city in regards to the resignation? It’s not like the city doesn’t have a direct contact with SDN. Councilor Vernon Brown is marketing manager of SDN. He certainly had to know about the investigation or AT LEAST the resignation. Didn’t he think it would be wise to alert the Audit Committee?
I still have never gotten a straight forward answer as to why councilor Brown kept quiet about this? I totally understand not interfering with a Federal investigation, but he could have quietly alerted the city attorney to keep an eye on Brad, or at least put pressure on him to resign.