Salt Lake City — The Political Subdivisions Committee on Jan. 22 adopted a first substitute and gave a favorable recommendation to House Bill 235, which would require that county auditors in Utah's counties of the first class hold specified professional auditing credentials.

The change targets auditors in the state's largest counties and would align county-auditor qualifications with standards already applied to other elected officials and licensed professionals.

Salt Lake County Auditor Chris Harding told the committee that the office oversees roughly $1 billion in taxpayer funds and should be staffed by people with professional training. "We already require qualifications for other elected officials such as the district attorney, sheriff, and the assessor," Harding said. "The county auditor is no different." He described peer reviews and continuing professional education as safeguards that protect the public and improve accountability.

Representative Jason Tuscher, who sponsored the bill, said the committee was considering the 1st substitute after a county request to simplify language. Tuscher and other supporters said the change is intentionally limited to counties of the first class because those counties have different auditing requirements and larger budgets than smaller counties.

Susan Spears, chief executive officer of the Utah Association of CPAs, and other supporters said starting with first-class counties creates a model that could later be adapted for smaller counties. "We need to go through some iterations so we get a model down," Spears said, adding that professional qualifications can strengthen oversight and public confidence.

Committee members asked about alternatives, including contracting audits to independent firms. Harding said counties commonly contract external firms for financial-statement audits but argued that an elected auditor who understands county operations plays a different role: conducting performance and internal-control audits, running a fraud hotline, and following up on issues such as payroll and fixed-asset controls. "What they don't do is performance-type audits," Harding said, describing the distinction between contracted financial-statement audits and the broader scope his office performs.

The committee adopted the 1st substitute on a voice vote, and later voted to recommend HB 235 favorably and to place the bill on the consent calendar.

Votes and next steps: The committee recorded passage of the 1st substitute and a favorable recommendation; the sponsor asked for the bill to be placed on the consent calendar. The bill will progress according to the House rules for consent calendar items.

Sources and context: The testimony cited Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards (GAGAS) and peer-review processes used by auditing professionals. Harding said some of those practices, such as peer reviews every three to five years and mandatory continuing professional education, were not being followed in his office before he took office.

The committee's action does not change qualifications for auditors in counties that are not first-class; committee speakers and witnesses said doing so statewide now would cause implementation challenges because many smaller counties combine the auditor role with other offices and have different workloads and staffing.

Speakers (selected): Chris Harding, Salt Lake County Auditor; Representative Jason Tuscher, bill sponsor; Representative Peterson, moved the 1st substitute; Representative Walter, moved the favorable recommendation; Susan Spears, CEO, Utah Association of CPAs; Chair Donegan; Vice Chair Lee.

Clarifying details: Current statutory or practical minimums for county-auditor candidates mentioned in testimony are limited to being at least 18 years old, a county resident and a U.S. citizen; the proposed change would add professional auditing credentials (CPAs, CIAs, CFEs, or similar) and expectations such as continuing professional education and peer review. The committee considered a narrower approach limited to counties of the first class because those counties follow GAGAS and have large budgets and separate auditor offices.

Ending: Supporters said HB 235 is intended to raise professional standards and public confidence in large-county auditing offices; opponents or cautious members asked for a gradual, iterative approach before expanding requirements to smaller counties.