Champaign County voters ought to be allowed to decide whether they wish to continue electing an auditor.
The Champaign County Board will vote Thursday whether to put a proposal on the ballot to replace an elected county auditor with an appointed professional to keep track of taxpayer dollars.

The vote is expected to be close. Good sense dictates that this proposal be presented to the voters to resolve.

The auditor's office has been the source of considerable embarrassment in recent months following disclosures that the elected auditor, Democrat Tony Fabri, hadn't bothered to show up at the office for weeks at a time.

While the proposal to replace an elected auditor with an appointed auditor is not about Fabri, it's impossible to separate him and his notorious work ethic from the discussion. He represents Exhibit A in the argument for why an elected auditor is not only not necessary, but a waste of taxpayer dollars.

Carol Wadleigh, the professional deputy in the auditor's office, and the other staff members do the real work. The elected auditor, one paid in excess of $60,000 a year, isn't necessary. Fabri himself proved that when he didn't bother to show up at work. Everything still got done. Fabri, who has no credentials for the post, wasn't missed because he wasn't needed.

The elected auditor's position is a relic of bygone days. There may have been a time when elected offices like the auditor, treasurer or sheriff were adequately filled by average citizens with no professional training. But those days are gone. The auditor's office is responsible for keeping track of many millions of dollars raised from multiple sources for multiple purposes.

For some reason, however, people like the idea of electing officials like the auditor, even if they don't know much about what auditors do or make any effort to find out. They feel empowered.

But those who feel that way should ask themselves just what they are empowered to do. They're spending their precious tax dollars to fill a superfluous post usually with someone who has no professional credentials. If they wish to feel empowered, they ought to throw the politicians off the political gravy train.

The gravy train, of course, is what opponents of this measure hope to defend. For some strange reason, Democrats feel compelled to stand by Fabri even though his conduct disgraced them and their party. Their misguided loyalty reflects the poisonous partisanship that has been so disruptive to county government for years.

The good news for Fabri is that he won't be directly affected by this measure. Under the proposal, if put on the ballot and passed by voters, what he considers a vacation and what others call a term in office, will extend until 2012. Then Fabri would be replaced by an appointed professional.

To ensure a professional is appointed auditor, it has to be mandatory for job candidates to have professional qualifications. After all, Fabri was initially appointed when he replaced now state Sen. Mike Frerichs, who also had no qualifications for the post when he was appointed auditor.

Some may decry the loss of a watchdog, a role Urbana Mayor Laurel Prussing played to great effect when she was county auditor. But the watchdog role has declined significantly since then. For instance, Fabri was simultaneously Democratic Party chairman when he was the auditor assigned to watch the Democratic county board.

A nonpartisan professional respected by both Democrats and Republicans could do a far better job spotting problems and bringing them to the board for resolution.

The argument on the merits of this proposal is pretty one-sided. It boils down to choosing merit or politics. But that's an issue for another day.

The only issue to be settled Thursday by the county board is whether voters should decide the issue. It's their money being wasted. It ought to be up to them to decide if they want to continue the status quo or streamline and professionalize county government.