Dayton backs Otto appeal in audit law case
Gov. Mark Dayton expressed support Thursday for State Auditor Rebecca Otto's promised appeal of a legal setback over who reviews county government finances, with the governor saying it's something the Supreme Court should evaluate.
Dayton said the court challenge by a fellow DFLer raises a "very important constitutional question" about the separation of powers and the duties of a statewide elected official. The law in dispute gives all counties the right to hire private firms to do annual financial reviews instead of having to use and pay the state auditor's office.
In a ruling publicly released Tuesday, Ramsey County District Court Judge Lezlie Ott Marek upheld the 2015 law. The judge said the state auditor preserved the right to set auditing standards and demand follow-up even if it doesn't conduct the initial audit. More than half of Minnesota's counties have served notice they might hire or are under contract with a private company starting with the 2018 audits.
"I think it's an unfortunate decision by the district court and I think it warrants consideration by the Supreme Court," said Dayton, a former state auditor himself.
Create a More Connected Minnesota
MPR News is your trusted resource for the news you need. With your support, MPR News brings accessible, courageous journalism and authentic conversation to everyone - free of paywalls and barriers. Your gift makes a difference.
Dayton said he regrets the way the measure it became law, as part of a larger bill crafted in the 2015 session that he signed.
Otto has come under sharp criticism from Republicans for spending more than $220,000 on legal bills to fight the law, a tally that will grow with the appeal. Three counties named as defendants have incurred their own legal costs. Rep. Sarah Anderson, R-Plymouth, said "further attempts to overturn this bipartisan law amount to an exercise in futility coming at the expense of Minnesota taxpayers and counties."
Speaking Thursday after a State Board of Investment meeting, Otto defended her decision to press ahead with an appeal. She had unsuccessfully lobbied the Legislature to repeal the law.
"When they ask me why I am expending resources, I am forced to," she said. "I took an oath. This is a constitutional office. It works on behalf of the people of the state. We serve their best interests and that's who we serve everyday. This office belongs to the taxpayers, not the Legislature."
Otto said the legal fees her office has incurred have come out of her regular budget.
"I've pinched wherever I can," she said.