Riverside voters will see a proposal to create a new city position — an appointed inspector general — on the Nov. 5 ballot.
Measure L would amend Riverside’s charter to create the new role. The City Council would appoint the inspector general.
If approved by voters, the inspector general would be charged with investigating, auditing, inspecting and providing operational performance evaluations for city offices, special districts and joint powers authorities, according to the city attorney’s impartial analysis of the measure.
Originally slated for the March 2024 primary ballot, the council in October 2023 rescinded the resolution referring the measure to voters this past spring and instead put the item on the November ballot. The change was necessary because California’s election laws require charter changes that affect a government employee’s salary be included on the November general election ballot, City Clerk Donesia Gause said in email Monday, Oct. 7.
Councilmember Steve Hemenway and Pete Benavidez, chair of the Charter Review Committee, introduced the inspector general concept in August 2022. At the time, the council voted 4-3 to refer the matter to voters. City officials have said the cost of the measure is unknown, but the inspector general’s operating budget would exceed $500,000.
If Measure L passes by a simple majority vote, the council would be required to set aside funds annually for the inspector general’s office.
An argument supporting Measure L, printed in the Riverside County voter information guide and signed by Benavidez, supports creating an independent watchdog to make sure public funds are used efficiently.
“Today, the city of Riverside has a population of over 330,000 people and a budget that exceeds $1.5 billion,” Benavidez said in his argument. “Therefore, the time has come to create the position of Inspector General to assist local government to enhance accountability and transparency.”
An argument against the measure, also printed in the voter guide, questions the cost of creating the new position and questions why other cities have not sought this role before.
The argument against comes from Brent Lee, president of the Raincross Group, City Councilmember Phillip Falcone; Joan Donahue, president of the League of Women Voters, Andrew Walcker, principal of Overland Development Co.
“Measure L creates an expensive, untested, and unnecessary Office of Inspector General at Riverside’s City Hall,” the argument against reads in part. “Riverside would be the only city in California, with a council/manager form of government, that employs an Inspector General. If the office is the best practice to promote fiscal oversight, why does no other city have an Inspector General?”
Related Articles
Trump sets sights on Pennsylvania and Harris plans to head west as hurricane scrambles campaigning
Riverside rejects ‘overreaching’ regulations for public protests
Steve Garvey and Adam Schiff spar over Trump, housing and abortion in US Senate debate
Jose Medina, Richard Roth face off in Riverside County supervisor race
Donald Trump to speak at Coachella campaign rally Oct. 12
The opponents also said the city should continue to search for more “transparent, productive, and proven methods to assure fiscal responsibility and management.”
In a rebuttal to the argument against the measure, Benavidez and other members of the charter committee, R. Ben Clymer Jr. and Malissa Hathaway McKeith, said Riverside should be a leader in improving local governance.
“Inspector General offices have been established across the country and have been proven to deter wrongdoing, serve as an important check on power, and saves taxpayer money,” the supporters said.
