Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Performance Auditor topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Topeka review committee hears case for independent performance auditor
Summary
The Citizens Government Review Committee heard Johnson County Auditor Doug Jones and discussed creating an independent performance audit office for Topeka, including likely scope, size, costs and safeguards against politicization. Committee members asked staff to add research and draft language for the committee report.
The Citizens Government Review Committee on May 21 heard a presentation advocating for an independent performance audit function and discussed how such an office might work for Topeka.
Doug Jones, Johnson County auditor and member of the Association of Local Government Auditors' Advocacy Committee, told the committee that independent performance auditors “help hold the government accountable” and can identify cost savings, improve compliance and report on how public funds are used. Jones said independence from the management side is essential: “The independent auditors should have no functional or administrative reporting to management whom they are auditing.”
Jones summarized national benchmarking data and local practice, telling the committee that many small municipal audit offices range from one- to five-person shops and that budgets commonly fall in ranges cited in ALGA materials. He said audit offices typically pick topics using a combination of internal assessments, council suggestions and public input and noted that audit work can include reviewing equal-opportunity processes though auditors should not conduct disciplinary decisions.
Committee members raised the risk that an auditor could be “weaponized” by elected officials; Jones said he had not experienced that in Kansas City and described safeguards he used there, including accepting audit topics via council resolution or through a transparent, staff-led selection process rather than audits commissioned by single council members. He recommended following government auditing standards and using an appointment/reporting structure that preserves auditor independence.
The committee did not take a formal vote to create an office. Instead members instructed staff to fold the discussion and Jones’ materials into the committee’s report and to return with research on how similar Kansas jurisdictions have set up audit offices, duties, and budget implications. Staff also confirmed they would supply links and samples Jones referenced, such as ALGA materials and recent audit reports from Johnson County and Kansas City.
Committee members and staff discussed practical questions—staffing levels, expected number of audits per year, and whether an auditor should handle allegations about elected officials or remain focused on program and financial performance. The committee noted the difference between HR- or legal-style investigations and performance audits and agreed to clarify roles and reporting lines in its recommendation.
The committee continued work on its written report and set deadlines for drafts ahead of its next meetings in June.
