As a general rule, three decades is too long for an elected official to inhabit the same job. Yet the position of county treasurer allows for some caveats to that rule, as sturdy, steadfast, consistent leadership is required when handling the people’s money.
Because of that, The Columbian recommends that Doug Lasher be re-elected as Clark County Treasurer, a position he has held since 1984. As always, this is merely a recommendation, as we have faith in the public’s ability to examine the issues and the candidates before making an informed decision. In studying the race for treasurer, voters will find a worthy challenger in Lauren Colas, who appears capable of handling the job but is unable to make a strong enough case for why Lasher should be replaced.
Criticisms of Lasher ultimately fall short, including one that focuses on the rate of return for the county’s investment pool. Colas says the return on investment has been too low in recent years, even as she notes that the county’s rate has exceeded the return on the state’s investment pool. As Lasher correctly explains, the county’s goal with the investment pool is to take a conservative approach — seeking security for the investments even if that security comes at the expense of possibly higher returns. This is a wise and responsible approach; Lasher should be criticized if he didn’t do that.
Colas also takes Lasher to task for the fact that the Port of Vancouver and the Port of Ridgefield have pulled out of the county’s investment pool. But those actions took place more than a decade ago and likely would have been more relevant in one of Lasher’s previous re-election bids.
Not that Lasher should be free of criticism. Last spring, the county’s online property information center, a repository for all publicly accessible property data, crashed the weekend before taxes were due. This is not solely the purview of Lasher and his office, but the fact that it was just one of multiple crashes in the span of a couple of weeks is problematic. Lasher agrees with Colas’ assertion that an employee should be on call for non-business hours, but he points out that such a budgeting decision rests with the county commissioners.
The question about any employee who has been in the same job for 30 years — be it in public service or private enterprise — is whether they remain innovative and motivated. And Lasher has demonstrated enough verve to suggest that he remains engaged. He has, in recent years, spearheaded vast upgrades to his office’s online accessibility and has worked with other county offices to make services more available. And he says his primary goals for the future include developing a “point of sale” system to improve efficiency, and pushing for legislation that will require more stringent professional credentials for county treasurers across the state.
Colas, meanwhile, says she has performed contract accounting and auditing work over the past 25 years. She criticizes the Treasurer’s office for poor customer service, and adds, “One of the things I would implement is a culture of continuous improvement. There are numerous ways in which improvement can be made. … I’m not insular; I haven’t been in government forever.”
Neither has Lasher, although it might seem that way. Through 30 years as Clark County’s treasurer, he has served admirably, and his enthusiasm for the job remains strong enough to warrant re-election to the position.
