Comments so far on this story:

1. Fred Williams wrote on May 13, 2008 6:12 AM:
"Lani Lutar, and the Taxpayers Association, has backed all the giveaways and scams that resulted in San Diego's near bankruptcy. As a well-connected insider with a strong interest in the status quo, neither Lutar nor the Taxpayers Association deserve our trust. Proposition C was cooked up by a small group of insiders, (each of whom Lutar knows on a first name basis), to perpetuate the frauds. Donna Frye wants to stop the fox guarding the hen house. Lutar is on the side of the fox. Vote No on Prop. C."

2. Jack Griffiths wrote on May 13, 2008 8:04 AM:
"Yikes! Fraudulent insiders everywhere. Foxes to the right,foxes to the left and in the center more foxes. Yikes! Enemies of the People abound. There's the haughty SEC,the greedy IRS,the sharks of the ABA,a coven of AFL-CIO pinkos,the clowns of the ALGA and leading the nefarious pack our own IBA. Ship her back to Phoenix,ASAP. Fear-mongers UNITE! Demonizers to the barracades! To hell with the thousands of working families and businesses that need a timely return to the credit markets and the promise of fiscal relief.Let the perversity of our Fears prevail.Cry Havoc and let loose the partisan dogs of personal political destruction.Burn down that Hen house. We'll save it from all those fraudulent insiders. Is this Vietnam revisited? These guys love humanity,no doubt,they just hate people:Working people. Let's get back to the credit markets and re-hab SD with a YES vote on C."

3. Steve K wrote on May 13, 2008 8:58 AM:
"Since both the Mayor and City Counsel were found to be negligent by Kroll and operating in a "climate of corruption," it's prudent that a city Auditor should be elected by the voters to insure independence from city officials."

4. Fed Up wrote on May 13, 2008 9:52 AM:
"Ms. Lutar, executive director of the downtown establishment's Taxpayer Association, has signed on the June ballot in favor of Prop C , which would make permanent in the City Charter an Auditor who is controlled by the "strong" Mayor ( who no longer needs to preside at City Council meetings and needs never appear in public at all except for press opportunities or ceremonial occasions.) Ms. Frye is an iconic populist member of City Council who has signed the June ballot urging a No vote on Prop C for the same reasons stated above: it would make permanent in the City Charter an Auditor who is controlled by the "strong" Mayor whom the public never sees. The voters will compare and decide which is the more accountable system. Personally, I am voting No on Prop C."

5. Fred wrote on May 13, 2008 10:39 AM:
"An appointed auditor that answers to the boss who appointed it is not in the interests of the people, and should be elected. Would you have any faith in the city attorney's office----ever---if that was an appointment by a mayor, working hand in hand with a chief of PD? Auditors are no good if they're compromised from the start and a good one ought to have subpoena powers, be able to convene a grand jury and basically raise all the hell it wants 24/7. At least that way, we the suckers could get our money's worth."

6. Dale Peterson wrote on May 13, 2008 10:47 AM:
"Nothing new here. Disgruntled former City Auditor? Torrell wouldn't play footsie with Sanders PR tricycle so it is time to trash him as a confused malcontent. OK, Ms. Lutar, whatever you say. Have you considered altering the title of your organization to something like---Some Taxpayers for Inconsequentional Reforms and the Status Quo? Respectful citizens can disagree on the merits of Prop. C. However, the continuing trail of personality trashing by high profile Sanders supporters has gone well past the line of reasonable public interaction. Mr. Torrell isn't some sort of California, mid-coast, macadamia nut. I believe I'll place my trust in Mrs. Frye's keen, independent eye. She has never misrepresented anything to this taxpayer. Put me down as another fiscal Republican who has grown tired of all the financial dog and pony productions. No on C."

7. Jack Griffiths wrote on May 13, 2008 11:52 AM:
"Pro C may not be perfect but what are we left with should it not pass? More of what we're enduring now and no return to the credit markets? Are to assume Bank of America as a municpal partner henceforth? At those rates? !OUCH! Idon't think there's time before November to craft an alternative and I fear we'll be stuck in this unsatisfactory and non-compliant position for years to come.That can't inspire fiscal confidence in anyone.I advocate for C because its what's before us now,not tommorrow's pie in the sky,and we need to act in a conscientious and compliant manner as soon as is reasonably possible.We must continue to demonstrate our progress towards recovery.Muni's are a great investment just now. Let's catch that wave. Yes on C. Please!"

8. Steve K wrote on May 13, 2008 11:56 AM:
"I don't think Ms. Frye advocates an "audit function..vested totally under control of the City Council." That would be just as bad as Prop C. In fact Frye says in a campaign email the auditor should be "someone who is either elected by the people or appointed by someone other than the person that is being audited." This would preclude the City Council, as well as the Mayor. Personally, I'm not as concerned about a reliable, independent auditor to comply with the SEC or get the city back into the bond market, as I am with ensuring that the citizens of San Diego are not deceived and caused more expense and less services, because of the dishonest mismanagement of our city government."

9. Fed Up wrote on May 13, 2008 3:11 PM:
"Ms. Lutar's Taxpayers Association -- along with bedfellows SDG&E and the San Diego Chamber of Commerce -- travelled all the way to Borrego Springs yesterday to testify before the state Public Utilities Commission in favor of the Sunrise Power Link which is slated to desecrate 22 miles of Anza-Borrego Desert State Park. Like Prop C, the Sunrise Power Link is another terrible idea brought to us by our friends in business-as-usual. Vote No on Prop C."

10. Jack Griffiths wrote on May 13, 2008 5:01 PM:
"I am no fan of the Power-Stink but I'd trade a few thousand square acres of sand,cactus and lizards for the largest solar collector in the world in a New York minute.The ability to Power 600,000 homes with a re-newable would bring to fruition the dreams of 2 generations of environmentalists and help us sustain the anticipated development of the South Bay and our current military establishment.Jobs,w power and pay-checks for workers to stave off the foreclosures and bankruptcies.The infrastructure and defered maintenance dollars that'll follow the adoption of Prop C also promise relief to the City,its workers and their families.The trickle down equation factors out at $billions$.I am frequentyly at odds with both the SDCTA and the Chamber but on the Solar and Prop C I can't see how we can afford not to get with it ASAP.Yes on C and All power from the Dishes!"

11. Maura Larkins wrote on May 13, 2008 6:26 PM:
"Since we now have a strong mayor system, it seems that in order to keep a balance of power it would make sense to let the City Council appoint the auditor. Dick Murphy proved that a mayor could cause a lot of trouble even under the weak mayor system. Now is not the time to let the mayor appoint his own watchdog."

12. Rick wrote on May 13, 2008 6:31 PM:
"Ms Lutar does not speak for anyone but herself and she does that poorly. She has done more to ruin the reputation of the Taxpayers Association than anyone in history. She sure does not support the taxpayers, just the opposite. It used to be a sound organization,now no one should donate to it. If she really was to do a service, she would address C in its entirity, not just what a hired SEC Bureaucat has to say. His opinion does not count in SD politics."

13. Fred Williams wrote on May 14, 2008 8:13 AM:
"Tax PAYERS is correct. We'll be Paying even more if we follow Lutar's misguided advice and swallow this flawed proposition C. Vote NO. The result, because of the SEC mandate, will be a far better proposal in November. Vote No on C."

14. mel wrote on May 15, 2008 8:23 AM:
"There should not be a "balance of power." The Auditor should have ALL the power. That is why the 5 largest cities have the people elect their auditor. I note that these 5 cities are not in trouble with the SEC, like we are. If the mayor would just stay out of this, there would be no problem. What is his motive ? Considering that theAuditor will audit his people,we can get a good piture of his motive. Is he likely to choose an eager beaver auditor, or a laid back one ? Take a guess. Lani Lutar mentions the SEC monitor. Sanders hired him at a million bucks a year.This is payback. The Taxpayers Association have the same motive as the mayor, namely to keep the dirt under the rug."

15. PBgirl wrote on May 17, 2008 11:06 AM:
"Let's wait to see how the Prop C proponents feel when there is a Democrat in the Mayor's Office!"

16. Maura Larkins wrote on May 19, 2008 11:16 AM:
"Lani, I feel that you're trying to confuse people with your list of "contradictions." You're making a big deal out of minor details. For example, the fact that Torrell agreed that the auditor should have a 10-year term has nothing to do with the all-important question of how an auditor is chosen. The make-up of the oversight committee and the fact that the auditor could be fired also have nothing to do with how the audior is chosen."

17. Billy Bob Henry wrote on May 19, 2008 11:18 AM:
"1. Fred Williams wrote on May 13, 2008 6:12 AM: "Lani Lutar, and the Taxpayers Association, has backed all the giveaways and scams that resulted in San Diego's near bankruptcy. ... YOU NAILED THAT ONE ON THE HEAD."