A Senate subcommittee charged responding to demands from the State Auditor seeking to audit the legislature in accordance with last fall’s voter-passed referendum, raised a set of questions and offered a meeting, partial steps that are not sitting well with the Auditor.

The letter sent Mondsay to State Auditor Diana DiZoglio, laid out some concerns and offered a few appointment slots for when lawmakers can meet to further discuss the issues.

DiZoglio blasted the move.

“The Senate has indeed drafted a letter explaining why they are breaking the law. They’ve invited us to meet with them so they may reiterate the concerns they raised throughout their campaign against this issue becoming law,” she told the Herald via text message.

“But the people don’t want another committee report full of excuses, they want the audit they voted for. We will be discussing the Senate’s letter with the AG’s office since we have already initiated the process of pursuing legal action,” she continued.

The Senate subcommittee’s letter — written in response to one sent to lawmakers by DiZoglio earlier this month —  said they are are “driven by a sincere regard for the will of the voters and a duty to fulfill its charge by the Senate,” and so are seeking “prompt and constructive engagement” with the Auditor.

The letter was signed by subcommittee members chairman Sen. Cindy Friedman and Sens. Will Brownsberger, Jo Comerford and Paul Feeney.

“We believe that a comprehensive and productive discussion between the Subcommittee and the OSA is necessary to work through important issues related to the OSA’s audit request,” they wrote, noting they are “particularly mindful of significant constitutional concerns that have been raised.”

“Concerns we cannot ignore consistent with our own constitutional responsibilities,” the group said.

The subcommittee said the scope of DiZoglio’s request is “an open question” that raises new legal issues on its own. They say the auditor’s request is also too vague as to its “temporal scope,” and they took exception to DiZoglio performing the audit.

DiZoglio, a former state lawmaker, is too close to the people she’s attempting to investigate, lawmakers wrote.

The rules governing an auditor’s conduct, they wrote, require that auditors “be independent from the audited entity.” Lawmaker say they are free to discuss the matter with the Auditor on Jan. 29 or 30.

DiZoglio said she’s happy to meet with the subcommittee, but that sitting down won’t prevent her from pursuing legal help in enforcing the new law.

“Nothing we have requested goes beyond basic financial and contracting information which is frankly a matter of public record in most state entities — those who follow the public records law, that is. No other entity of the Commonwealth gets a special privilege of withholding requested financial records from our office and instead forming a subcommittee to avoid abiding by the law,” she said.

DiZoglio has been on a mission to audit the Legislature since taking office nearly two years ago. In that time, her efforts have been stymied by lawmakers who say they are exempt from her authority according to the separation of powers doctrine indicated in the state constitution.

DiZoglio backed a referendum to change to state laws to expressly authorize her watchdog position over House and Senate activities.

That law, Question 1 on last year’s ballot, was approved by more than seven out of 10 Bay State voters. It went into effect earlier this month. Still, enforcement of the law will fall on the Attorney General’s office. AG Andrea Campbell has said in the past that she will defend the Auditor if and when lawmakers have broken a law.

“I still don’t know if the AG supports our audit of the Legislature. I have heard her say she is supporting transparency but we haven’t received any insight into her potential willingness, or unwillingness, to enforce this new audit law. Since our office is limited in the actions it may take to ensure compliance, the AG is in the driver’s seat at this point on whether or not lawmakers will be required to follow the law,” she said.

Campbell’s office did not return a request for comment by press time.

The Senate’s response to DiZoglio’s request for information — or lack thereof, after the 72-hour deadline went unanswered last Thursday — doesn’t sit well with fiscal watchdogs either.

Paul Craney, spokesperson for Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, said its not up to the Senate “to debate the merits of the law. Voters already did that for them. They simply need to comply with the law as the voters instructed.”

The committee set up by Senate President Karen Spilka and made up of “only Democratic senators” is instead trying to ignore the will of the voters, Craney said.

“Their latest attempt is a clear delay tactic. They should be complying with the law, not stalling. Further meetings at the end of the month to discuss their concerns with compliance are only designed to delay the implementation of the law,” said Craney.

If lawmakers won’t comply with the law, and the AG won’t step in to make them, according to DiZoglio the voters will force their hands.

“If action is not taken by the AG soon, an outside group will likely file a lawsuit against us,” she told the Herald.

The Massachusetts State House. (Herald file photo)