Inspector General Proposal Flawed

Limited Independence & Duplication of Resources

Earlier this week, the Research Bureau provided comments at a Working Session on a City Council proposal to create a City Office of Inspector General (IG). This working session followed a November 7th City Council hearing at which the Research Bureau testified against the proposed ordinance.

Duplication of existing resources
The Research Bureau recommends the City would be best served by continuing to use the expertise and resources of the State IG’s Office to address and prevent fraud, waste and abuse rather than duplicating these existing resources. The State IG’s office already conducts investigations and provides corrective action plans, education and training, all at no cost to the City.

Proposal fails to safeguard against conflict
The proposed ordinance expresses a desire for an independent Inspector General. Continued use of the State Inspector General Office would ensure independence far more than the City Council proposal. Under the proposed Council Ordinance the City Inspector General would be at risk of removal by city officials whose own actions could necessitate investigation by that same City Inspector General. The proposed ordinance would have the City Inspector General removed by a 2/3 vote of the Council.