There will be a lot of back and forth during this Democratic Primary season whether we vote to put ourselves on a course to close down the County Treasurer’s office, or not. Kuff has already set up the discussion with varying views, thus far.
As Chad Khan, candidate for County Treasurer noted:
In 2006, Mr. Richard Garcia campaigned about abolishing the County Treasurer’s office and I supported his campaign. I still believe that the County Treasurer’s office has little use and is a waste of taxpayer dollars. Once elected, I will attend every meeting of the County Commissioner’s court with the intent of serving as a watchdog for the taxpayer, which would include working to prove the ineffectiveness of the office. I believe the abolishment of the office must begin from within the office and I vow to work toward that end.
Thus far, Khan is the only candidate to comment on the issue.
I agree that in order for one to abolish the office, one basically must be on the inside pushing the Commissioners and other elected officials to back up the notion in order to put the political and legislative wheels in motion.
In the same post, judicial candidate Wally Kronzer brings up his points regarding the office as basically a “watchdog” which is a pretty good notion; however, without the legislative teeth to truly serve as such, the “watchdog” would just be a whiny, yapping dog, much like the incumbent. If we want something like the City Controller, then by all means, give the position the legislative teeth to perform audits and the ability to more than just suggest cost-cutting measures to the commissioners.
Even so, such a task would require a County Treasurer willing to take on the internal and external powers that be to achieve the legislative changes. Obviously, a very open and honest check into the way the County does business would be required.
