Since the founding of our republic there has been tension between
citizens who want to know about the conduct of their
representatives, and those in government who would prefer to do
their business in secret.
Secrecy is not always bad policy. Few would argue that Franklin
Roosevelt should have revealed the invasion plans for Normandy prior
to D-Day.
However, the responsibilities of most politicians are mundane and it
is hard to argue that the public should be denied knowledge of how
efficiently they are managing and spending taxpayers’ dollars.
A major collision between the interests of the public in knowing how
well they are being served by elected officials, and those of
politicians who believe their stature should give them immunity from
scrutiny is now taking place in Los Angeles. The side of full
discloser is being represented by the city controller while the side
of secrecy is being defended by the city attorney.
A 1999 voter approved charter reform gave the city controller the
power to conduct performance audits of city programs and
departments. This new authority was designed to provide the public
with an idea of how well they are being served by city government.
Using this authority, Controller Laura Chick has worked tirelessly
to open up the city’s business to the light of day. Her audits have
uncovered serious issues of inefficiency and waste and sometimes
fraud. It was she who uncovered millions of dollars of fraudulent
billing by a public relations firm hired by the city-owned
Department of Water and Power. It was the controller whose
investigations revealed disarray in the city’s anti-gang programs
and that only a third of the recently increased trash fee was
actually used to hire more police instead of all of it as had been
promised by city officials.
However, when the controller sought to conduct a performance audit
of the Workers Compensation program managed by City Attorney Rocky
Delgadillo, he responded by filing suit in an attempt to block what
he considers an intrusion into his affairs.
If the city attorney is successful in scuttling the controller’s
efforts to review how a multi-million-taxpayer dollar program is
managed, it could have dire ramifications for average citizens who
depend on the efficiency and integrity of city programs. Hundreds of
millions of dollars are housed in programs in elected officials’
offices including that of the mayor. If Delgadillo is successful in
avoiding review of a program he manages, it could embolden other
politicians to block public scrutiny of their work.
Too often we have seen government officials make decisions that are
clearly not in the best interests of taxpayers but are intended to
perpetuate a bloated and unwieldy bureaucracy or to serve outside
special interests. The power to audit and shine a light in the deep
recesses of City Hall is a potent weapon in trying to control the
behemoth that is Los Angeles city government.
It is time to settle the question of the controller’s authority once
and for all by clarifying the charter with a vote of the people.
This will require the Los Angeles City Council to put the clear
definition of the controller’s powers on the ballot for the next
regularly scheduled city election this coming March. This is not
about Chick, who is soon to be termed out. It is about maintaining
the integrity of an oversight process that provides critical
information to the public.
Already some council members are chiming in that the controller
should not have the ability to conduct performance audits of
programs housed in elected officials’ offices. In response,
taxpayers are asking who then will hold officials accountable for
managing the millions of dollars they provide to the city? Do they
really think the public supports having politicians run these
programs beyond their view?
In the next few months the City Council should have a spirited and
very public debate on this issue. In the end, no matter where a
councilmember comes down on the issue of these auditing powers, they
must let the voter, not the courts, make the ultimate decision.