Survey Says
The survey says… 071311
The Prospect’s poll on rolling the Auditor in with the Treasurer Tax Collector was “contaminated” because we allowed more than one vote from each computer. That being the case, we opened the survey up to whatever tampering either side felt compelled to do.
The survey no longer means what it once might have, and the case could be made that it means nothing at all.
However, we’ll suggest it does, even though people decided to “vote early and often”, the poll still represents a measure of people’s favor or opposition to the idea of reducing two public offices to just one.
There remains one sound argument for the roly-poly, the hypothetical money it would save. Some have wondered what the exchange rate is between hypothetical and real-world dollars.
There are many arguments against, the checks and balances argument, the redundancy argument, but perhaps a favorite is one which suggests “why stop there, let’s save a fortune and roll all political offices into the office of Tyrant.” Should the people desire that, I would humbly accept the appointment of Tyrant, and assure you I would be moderate in my taxes, lenient in my judgments and hangings, and would be gentle with your women folk.
Moving on, the eventual results are below.
We can see that that, by a ratio of 59 to 80, or 42% to 58%, more people didn’t want to see the offices combined than do, and assuming everyone cheated equally well, the will of the people seems to discourage the merger.
There were even comments:
| 1 | Any position involving finance requires checks and balances. It is
important to separate who takes in the money and who puts it out. The
Treasurer/Tax Collector is an elected position, as is the Auditor. The
voters get to pick who represents them. We are a small county but we
have been successful financially because of the system we have in place.
Removing another step of accountability is not reasonable. |
| 2 | ...and what's up with another elected official quitting mid-term
over fear of the threat of pension reform that never transpired? Is it
too much to ask that a department manager fulfill the job they committed
to the public electorate they would do? |
| 3 | I think you should give the job to gabby, as she could use the practice with her algebra |
| 4 | only for 10 years or so |
| 5 | Yes, but the position should not pay as other combined offices do like the Planning Director. Sierra County cannot afford another one of those positions. |
What does this mean? Well, we can’t say it means people in the county are dead set against the combination of offices, but we think there is a strong feeling against it.
What will it mean to the Board of Supervisors? Two are immune to voter ire as they are retiring, so we’ll have to see what happens next!
