As we pointed out a little over a week ago, Schmitt told the December 30th Anton Newspapers
"There will be an election on Jan. 3 for presiding officer. Someone needs to get 10 votes."
Now in the Feb 10th Massapequan Observer (published by Anton Newspapers), "The wording in the charter is clear [where] it says 'he who has the highest number of votes wins presiding officer and the person from another party with the second highest number of votes is minority leader.' It never mentions 10,"
So the "charter is clear." Why was it unclear to him a month ago? As someone who wants to be presiding officer and a member of the legislature for 10 years, you'd expect a person to be well-versed in the rules that govern the legislature. Or even just be aware of it before you spout off.
Back in December when Schmitt made his first pronouncement (and he made the same one many times after) that you need 10 votes it looked as though his plans could be foiled if Judy got a majority of votes and not 10 or more.
Now that a judge says a PO needs 10 votes and Schmitt is one shy of ten, he changes his story.
Kinda like his college graduation date.
Or many other issues.
Word from his office is that he wasn't sure what the charter said when he was saying that 10 votes are needed. But if the charter is "clear" then he should have known what it said.
Schmitt really has to go.