1. Sonntag has this reputation as some sort of citizen advocate fighting waste, fraud and abuse. The reality, though, is that his office is just another facade creating the false impression of real concern. Some will argue that anything is better than nothing, but when that anything comes at the expense of real waste and fraud prevention, then it's more damaging than good.

Not too long ago I received a commitment from Sonntag to do an extensive audit of corruption in King County's Transportation Department related to their road mitigation system. At stake was several hundred million dollars in road costs that the county was shifting to the taxpayer using manipulation of their road models that even county insiders were objecting to. A year later when the audit results were issued, Sonntag had relied on the same bogus study the county had used to justify its wrongdoing, and had done virtually zero independent investigation. Several county employees at the center of the controversy, who had gone public trying to expose the county's wrongdoing, had not even been talked to by Sonntag's "investigators."

If Washington had a real conscientious state auditor, we'd be measuring that office's success in the hundreds of millions of dollars in savings, if not billions, and not the pitiful million here or million there.

Unfortunately, like government judges ruling on government wrongdoing, a government auditor ruling on government waste and fraud shouldn't be expected to be truly aggressive. The only way to truly audit government is with a truly independent auditor, paid regardless of the outcome, and completely separate from any government oversight or influence.

And something that Washington government would never accept.

Posted by: MJC on August 21, 2007 09:08 AM

2. @1. "...we'd be measuring that office's success in the hundreds of millions of dollars in savings, if not billions, and not the pitiful million here or million there."

One thing most people *fail* to realize is that the auditor's office audits financial statements in the same manner as CPA firms (only for a lot less money!). It is a reporting agency, not an enforcement agency. Until recently, its constitutional authority did not allow it to delve into performance issues that could possibly produce the millions and millions you are talking about.

The auditor is independant! It is a separately elected office, not appointed by, or beholding to, the governor. He is paid regardless of the outcome of audits, and not subject to any government oversight or influence. The office does need to meet professional standards, so it does conform to those standards, and is subject to Generally Accepted Auditing Standards (GAAS), and Generally Accepted Governmental Auditing Standards (GAGAS) promulgated by the AICPA and the GAO.

Of course, I cannot speak to whatever issue you had with KC transportation dept. and Sonntag's handling of that issue.

I submit that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the auditor's office role (aside from the performance audit function). Just look at what they found at the Port of Seattle two years ago. His "investigators" (as you call them) discovered unsupported payments and gifts of public funds of over $300,000. Small amount in contrast to the millions the Port brings in, but it sure straightened them out and caused the defeat of several Port commissioners.

If you want his ofice to hold governments more accountable than he is already doing, urge your legislators to pass stricter laws regarding what goverments can spend their money on, control over assets, etc.

Posted by: MIchael H on August 21, 2007 09:20 PM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?