On three occasions, Glendale voters turned down proposals that would have converted the City Treasurer from an elected position to an appointed one. They should reject it again.

The treasurer oversees a $372-million investment portfolio as part of a full-time job, and it pays relatively well: $129,690 at last look, not including benefits. The main supporters of the measure, Councilman Dave Weaver and current Treasurer Ron Borucki, say the position is too important to be a popularity contest.

This post has been corrected. See below for details. 

In the statement in support of the measure, in fact, Borucki wrote, “The voting booth is not the place to determine the technical skill set for a money specialist.”

This is a false argument: We trust the electorate to make a wise decision, something the Council cannot always be trusted to do.

And besides, the selection of treasurer under Measure A would still be a beauty contest, but with just five votes.

Councilman Rafi Manoukian is running unopposed for treasurer, most likely because few would want to throw their hat in the ring for a position that might disappear. This is a shame, because voters should have a real choice.

The timing just stinks. The Council could have put this measure on the ballot two years ago, or suggested adding educational requirements for the job. That it did neither smells of political gamesmanship, and it should be rejected on that basis alone.

--

FOR THE RECORD: An editorial that ran on March 23 (“No on Measure A”) incorrectly stated that the City Council would choose the City Treasurer if the measure passes. In fact, City Manager Scott Ochoa would have the final decision.