Clark County voters are hearing a new line of attack in the race for County Auditor. Reform Clark County’s Rob Anderson has raised concerns that candidate Mitchell Kelly is presenting a job title – “Deputy County Auditor” – that does not appear in official county human‑resources records.
What the records show
According to Clark County HR data, the only titles Kelly has held are Management Analyst (2016), Policy Analyst (2018) and Administrative Services Manager III (starting in 2019). The agency’s records contain no entry for a position called Deputy County Auditor, nor any documented change to Kelly’s title after 2019.
Kelly’s campaign messaging
Kelly’s campaign materials, including his website, voter pamphlet, and statements at the League of Women Voters forum, repeatedly list “Deputy County Auditor and Reporting Analysis Manager” as his current role. In a June 24 campaign video he says, “I currently serve as Deputy County Auditor and Reporting Analysis Manager in the Auditor Office.” The phrasing suggests a formal, senior position within the auditor’s office.
How the title is used in the office
County officials explain that while some staff members are “deputized” to perform specific duties on behalf of the auditor, this designation is a functional assignment rather than a distinct job title. In other words, an employee may be authorized to act as a deputy for certain tasks without holding a separate “Deputy County Auditor” position.
Why the distinction matters
Anderson argues that the difference between “an administrative services manager authorized to perform deputy duties” and “Deputy County Auditor” is significant. The latter creates the impression of a higher‑ranking, possibly second‑in‑command role, which could influence voters in a crowded primary that also includes well‑known candidates Ty Stober and Sharon Wiley.
Ethics and financial considerations
Beyond the question of accuracy, Anderson notes a financial angle: the elected auditor’s salary is substantially higher than Kelly’s current position. If a candidate uses a title that inflates perceived experience to gain an electoral advantage, it raises an ethics question about the use of public‑sector designations for personal gain.
Calls for voter awareness
Anderson concludes that voters have a right to ask whether Kelly’s portrayal of his experience aligns with the official record. He emphasizes that honesty and integrity are core campaign values and should be reflected in how qualifications are presented.
What’s next?
The issue is likely to surface in upcoming debates and voter‑information sessions as the primary approaches. Voters will need to weigh the candidate’s actual job history against the titles used in campaign messaging.
Original reporting: Clark County Today (Vancouver WA) — read the source article.
