I strongly disagree. Having been both an employee and a contractor, both in the gig economy sense and the consultant sense of the word, I very much prefer and felt much freer as a contractor. I think the reason states prefer people to be employees is probably the same reason the Roman state mandated farmers and sharecroppers stay on the land, it makes us much easier to tax and control.
There is probably also the added benefit that it's more difficult for employees to move into a position were they can compete with the corporations that pay for the politicians campaigns in democratically elected states.
I don't think it's reasonable to believe they are ignoring the law just because they are lazy or think the accounting firm makes the auditors unnecessary. If they didn't care, they would just swear in auditors and let them preform their other duties as the law requires.
That they are very keen on not having a board of auditors because there is something they think those auditors could do they don't want done. For instance, uncover corruption.
So, it's okay that they refuse to swear in the elected auditors because you think the position is unimportant? In what other circumstances do you think it's okay for government entities to ignore the law?
The auditors have duties beside auditing, and the law[1] explicitly say they "shall perform the other duties of the office" even if an accountant has been appointed. There is clearly a reason the town government dosen't want anyone to preform one or more of these other duties.
There is probably also the added benefit that it's more difficult for employees to move into a position were they can compete with the corporations that pay for the politicians campaigns in democratically elected states.