To the editor:
I have read with interest the articles and editorial in your March 17, 2013, edition relating to the city’s (Killeen’s) finances and the pending lawsuit against the city.
I’m in full support of the auditor being hired and supervised by the council.
I would go so far as to recommend that the auditor could be an out-of-town entity that is so large that the loss of our business would not affect its existence. I want truth!
I would make another suggestion. I suggest that the council consider placing the city attorney under their direct supervision.
When I served on the council, we were told several times that the city attorney worked for the city staff (manager), not the council. I had the opinion on occasion that the attorney refrained from providing the council advice that went against the city manager’s desires.
A case in point would be the EMS billing controversy a few years back; check the minutes.
I have worked with the current city attorney for several years, from the time she was appointed as P&Z’s adviser to 2011. Although we have had our friendly disagreements, I have the highest regard and respect for her. I simply believe the city attorney’s loyalty should be to the council and the citizens, not the city manager.
One of the attorney’s duties (principle duty) can be to advise the city manager and staff, but the position’s loyalty is to the citizens who are represented by the council.