The recent resignation of city auditor Michael Eglinski should spur a needed City Commission conversation about whether the position should be eliminated or strengthened. Hopefully, city commissioners will not take the easy way out and simply discard the position without debate now that it is unfilled.

Eglinski has accepted a position as senior auditor with Johnson County and has submitted his resignation to city commissioners. The resignation allows commissioners to evaluate the auditor position independently of the person currently filling the role and perhaps strengthen the position going forward.

City Manager Tom Markus has pushed for the last two years to eliminate the city auditor job, an independent position that reports to the City Commission and costs the city about $130,000 per year.

The auditor position is that of a performance auditor, as opposed to a financial one. The auditor evaluates city programs and brings performance reports to the commission with recommendations for improvement. Over the years, the auditor has found several issues, including missing payments to the city, that have resulted in significant savings. Notably, it was Eglinski’s 2013 audit that shed light on the fact that the city went for eight years without receiving a $1.26 million payment from Douglas County for its share of the construction of Fire Station No. 5.

In stepping down, Eglinski made clear that he believes the auditor position should remain. He advocated for improving the role by adding an audit committee that could help identify topics and review audit results.

“I think the function helps the City Commission govern and helps them provide oversight and get information that is independent of management,” he said.

Markus thinks there are more effective ways to evaluate the city’s performance than with a city auditor, and he noted that even if the position is eliminated, the city still must conduct an annual audit using an outside auditor.

Markus’ position is reasonable, but given recent events, it may not be prudent for the City Commission to eliminate the auditor position. In May, the city announced it had discovered that hundreds of thousands of dollars in lease payments to the city went unpaid because of recordkeeping and billing errors by the city. The financial director, not the city auditor, identified that issue. But given that more problems are expected to be discovered, perhaps the city commission would be wise to keep in place an auditor who can provide a fresh perspective on city functions.

If changes will make the position more efficient, now is the time to make them. Eglinski’s resignation provides commissioners with an opportunity to improve on the auditor role and ensure that the city is getting a return on its $130,000 investment.