CookieMonster932 t1_j9271t4 wrote on February 18, 2023 at 5:50 PM

The library holds events for private organizations all the time. The only points of possible contention the article brings up is that the library closed 4hrs early for set up (not sure if that is common for events or not) and a promotion said it was "invite only" which may or may not violate whatever event rules the library has.

Even IF those were contrary to official policy, which it's unclear if it is, who f**king cares. It's so insignificant and a waste of taxpayers dollars to "investigate."

i_live_in_maryland OP t1_j94d17a wrote on February 19, 2023 at 3:37 AM

I think this is one of those cases where (you're right) it was really insignificant. But rather than just cooperate with the auditor for, at worst, a minor finding, they decided to fight against oversight and then double down on it.

IMO oversight is important even if the stuff they find is usually trivial. The fact the library system thinks they're beyond oversight is a problem, and I hope the county council deals with that problem. I don't care one bit about what actually happened with this party/event. It's the "cover up" that bothers me.

runlikethewind5 t1_j97tb61 wrote on February 19, 2023 at 10:31 PM

Check the link I posted. It’s supposed to be open to the public.

edit: It matters. If someone committed an illegal act on the taxpayer’s dime, it matters. Names need to come forth.