5 ms·

I wonder if supervisor compensation can be determined for the current year without a quorum of auditors?

maxerickson 5y ago
2 is a quorum, so he and the guy he talked too could do it. Maybe not this year, but next year. I didn't go look up the rule listed there, it might be pretty narrow.
- aahortwwy 5y ago
  Surely that's an incentive for the supervisors to swear in a quorum of auditors? Otherwise who's going to determine their compensation?
  - simonk 5y ago
    The email says they have no supervisors.
    - aahortwwy 5y ago
      Ah, you're right. I got confused because the township managers were incorrectly referred to as "supervisors" earlier in the Twitter thread.
    - ascar 5y ago
      It says they have no supervisor _working for the township_. They do have at least two supervisors that were just sworn in for 6 years according to the meeting agenda posted before. I guess that means they are fulfilling their duties uncompensated and thus no compensation needs to be determined.
giantg2 5y ago
There's a (small) chance none of them are compensated. My municipality is all volunteer.
- throwawaygh 5y ago
  There's an enormous chance none of them are compensated. The township is in the middle of rural PA and has a population of like 17K. I would be astounded if any of the supervisors are compensated.
  - ameister14 5y ago
    They are compensated. They get the max they are allowed under state law. "the compensation for each Supervisor is hereby set at $3,250 per annum"
    - thaumasiotes 5y ago
      That isn't much different from being uncompensated.
      - johnebgd 5y ago
        Most Americans make less than $35k a year. This amount could be substantial to some people.
        thaumasiotes 5y ago
        Well, you'd have to work out how much the pay is on an hourly basis. It doesn't sound like a role that consists of nothing but collecting a stipend. But more broadly, there's an active debate over whether governmental posts should either (a) pay enough that someone could live off of one; or (b) require the person holding the post to have independent means. This is clearly on the (b) side, often felt to exclude many social classes from being able to hold a post in the government. (And sometimes invoked as a reason to overlook corruption by the officeholder - "how else are they supposed to support themselves?")
        giantg2 5y ago
        These generally aren't full time positions and the meetings happen in the evenings. It's possible to have a job and hold office.

2 is a quorum, so he and the guy he talked too could do it. Maybe not this year, but next year. I didn't go look up the rule listed there, it might be pretty narrow.

aahortwwy 5y ago
Surely that's an incentive for the supervisors to swear in a quorum of auditors? Otherwise who's going to determine their compensation?
- simonk 5y ago
  The email says they have no supervisors.
  - aahortwwy 5y ago
    Ah, you're right. I got confused because the township managers were incorrectly referred to as "supervisors" earlier in the Twitter thread.
  - ascar 5y ago
    It says they have no supervisor _working for the township_. They do have at least two supervisors that were just sworn in for 6 years according to the meeting agenda posted before. I guess that means they are fulfilling their duties uncompensated and thus no compensation needs to be determined.

giantg2 5y ago

There's a (small) chance none of them are compensated. My municipality is all volunteer.

throwawaygh 5y ago
There's an enormous chance none of them are compensated. The township is in the middle of rural PA and has a population of like 17K. I would be astounded if any of the supervisors are compensated.
- ameister14 5y ago
  They are compensated. They get the max they are allowed under state law. "the compensation for each Supervisor is hereby set at $3,250 per annum"
  - thaumasiotes 5y ago
    That isn't much different from being uncompensated.
    - johnebgd 5y ago
      Most Americans make less than $35k a year. This amount could be substantial to some people.
      - thaumasiotes 5y ago
        Well, you'd have to work out how much the pay is on an hourly basis. It doesn't sound like a role that consists of nothing but collecting a stipend. But more broadly, there's an active debate over whether governmental posts should either (a) pay enough that someone could live off of one; or (b) require the person holding the post to have independent means. This is clearly on the (b) side, often felt to exclude many social classes from being able to hold a post in the government. (And sometimes invoked as a reason to overlook corruption by the officeholder - "how else are they supposed to support themselves?")
        giantg2 5y ago
        These generally aren't full time positions and the meetings happen in the evenings. It's possible to have a job and hold office.