> I loved the part of the thread where, instead of going on a rant, he simply replied to the email acknowledging that he wasn't needed for most of his job but still wanted to be sworn in at the next meeting. /s

...yes?

If your job scope is reduced, you still have to go through onboarding. Is that not obvious?

Unless you're objecting to 'next', because it should only take them a couple minutes and there's no reason to delay.

Yeah when my job scope is reduced I normally go on a twitter rant about The Establishment instead of, idk, asking for clarification and asserting the part of the job I still want to do.

Fair point that we don't have the whole story.

It is unclear if he even needs to be sworn in.

The fact that they gave the previously-elected guy the same runaround gives me the impression that it isn't a misunderstanding.

Attacking other users like that will get you banned here. Please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.htmland don't post like that to HN again.

Or they don't want an auditor to see how much the supervisors brother-in-law landscaping company gets for mowing the park lawns.

That's why you need an auditor, hired CPA's will only verify that the checks were indeed sent to the intended party, not that they are used appropriately.

Don't be naive that these things don't happen, they do.

give me a line item that looks off. Jut one.

https://www.sstwp.org/DocumentCenter/View/10907/2022-Final-B...

You must be the mayor. I can't imagine anyone else getting so upset

The parent probably used ’mayor’ in the general sense. Different types of administrative subdivisions have different names for their political leaders depending on where they are in the world, and nobody could possibly be expected to keep track of them all. Even if they are not called mayors in this exact case you full well knew what the parent meant.

>Consider the possibility that I'm genuinely fed up with dumbass useless people running for local office.

I don't mean to make light of a serious problem, but it's funny how widely that sentiment is echoed.

Compare the quality of people running for low-paid local political office to... basically any other vocation. It's a widely echoed sentiment because it is, more often than not, true.

Regardless of anything else, it seems like a good idea to have a budget of 14M dollars audited by the person elected to do so.

Then lobby to have the state law changed I guess?

You already got your answer somewhere else.

OP made 3 equivalent posts asking me the same question.

There is ~20,000 in golf fees and outings.....

In the revenue category...

is this sarcasm?

a con artist will very consistently try to invest in their own scams, does not mean they think of them as genuine

The candidate that wins the most votes in a democratic election shall get the office. That principle should not be up for debate, and It's absolutely terrifying how many people are rejecting democracy in this country right now. It's the system we have for nonviolent transfer of power, and if we let those in power just ignore the results of election, we could find we have no peaceful mechanisms for replacing elected officials.

I think it's unquestionably better to just accept the results of the vote, regardless of what you think about the candidate.

Personal attacks will get you banned here, regardless of how wrong someone else is or you feel they are. No more of this, please.

If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

Edit: it looks like all your comments in the past year have been quite against the intended spirit of the site. We ban accounts that do that. I don't want to ban you, so if you'd please stop doing that, we'd appreciate it.