You haven't "corrected" anything...you gave your perspective and opinion. I respect it, but I just don't agree with it.
Public sector hiring should as open, honest, and involve as much competition as possible. One man shouldn't be able to make those appointments.
Nobody is "targeting" those poor beleaguered assessors....its about the process.
I'm starting to think you're on Glanz's payroll too.
While your position is laudable, your tilting at windmills here. I thought you worked in government? Do you not get that the rules you and I are hard bound to, simply don't apply at the senior level? Seriously?
You don't understand why Obama gets to hire Valerie Jarrett? Why Hillary got special dispensation for Huma Abedin to double and even triple dip on salaries at State? Do you not understand that virtually every vote in the House and Senate is attached to a wealthy donor's expectations? What rock have you been living under?
If by happenstance you get competence in ANY senior political appointment, you should count your lucky stars. "Ethics" is the annual training course you're required to take as an underling. Any expectation of ethics or avoiding the appearance of a conflict of interest from a senior elected official is pure fantasy.
I'd suggest you wake up from your dream, lest you live your entire life in severe disappointment.