[0:01] I aliance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the republic
[0:07] for it stands one nation under God
indivisible with liberty and justice for
[0:13] all
[0:21] call here
[0:26] here
Panzer here.
[0:31] Uh, public comments. There's no one
here. So, we move on to new business,
[0:37] policies and procedures. Um, I want to
thank Lori. She has spent tremendous
[0:42] amount of time working on this, updating
it. Um, and we'll just kind of go
[0:47] through it and our attention just kind
of Yeah, we'll go page basically page by
[0:53] page and like, okay, what do you have?
and uh you know if there's questions out
[0:57] or anything of significance we can chat
about
[1:03] my go
and I know this is track changes and so
[1:09] there's a lot of stuff that's like it
was typed to maybe whatever but I did
[1:15] notice in here
[1:20] no you mean zeros as in under 1uction
The first line it says zero, two, three,
[1:28] four, five. Notice there's zero. Can
that be changed? No, that's actually not
[1:33] in my copy. So, what happens is with
these documents, and I have no idea why
[1:37] this is occurring because I we use this
all the time at work. What I see is
[1:42] different than what prints. Okay? And
it's if you are looking at the shared
[1:46] file, it should be the same, but when
you print it, so the numbering, the um
[1:51] table of contents numbers and the
Um the final that am I? Okay.
[2:02] Um the org chart those will be updated
once we ensure that these are the final
[2:09] the final wording everything that you
want. Um yeah there shouldn't there will
[2:13] not be zeros. That was a long way to say
that.
[2:17] Yeah. So like if you look at mine like
even this number one shouldn't be here.
[2:22] It should be one two three. You know
what I'm saying? It will it will wash
[2:26] out to be the way that it's supposed to
be. You're welcome.
[2:34] Let's run with it. Do Well, my question
is, do you want me to call out each of
[2:37] the items or do you just want if you
have a comment on that page? Do you have
[2:42] any
I've reviewed the whole thing, so if we
[2:46] go page by page and see any questions on
this page? Yeah, that sounds good. Okay,
[2:50] so any questions? So, we'll start on
page four because that's really kind of
[2:53] the start. Any questions on page
[2:57] four? Okay. Good. Page four. Question
page five. Okay. Page five. Go for it.
[3:04] Uh, so dress code? Yes.
I like the idea of dress code. My
[3:11] question is, do we should we have a
dress code reference for dayto-day
[3:17] employees versus just
referencing elected and appointed
[3:22] officials? Well, this was just basically
dress codes to meetings and what
[3:27] for the scheduled meetings. Um,
[3:33] okay. So, would
[3:39] you guess is there an expectation. If
so, I would say possibly we should had
[3:45] something that's I mean to me it should
be the same expecting business schedule
[3:50] every day all the time. So maybe to be
simplified to say
[3:55] any or maybe not that might not be the
way to put it but I would say there
[3:59] should be something to prevent any
issues. I wouldn't be opposed to
[4:04] Yeah, we could do
that absolutely. So we could
[4:12] Okay. I think each administrator is
probably expected, right, and express to
[4:18] their employees that are under them what
they're looking for, right?
[4:25] Okay.
Okay. So, I will update that to just
[4:29] every day and the business meetings. I
mean, yeah. I mean, you could do it
[4:34] however you think's best to word it. It
could be a separate line item, but I
[4:37] know it's going to say the same thing.
I think we could say that
[4:44] that's a good way to word it.
Okay. Noted. I will I'm I'm noting in
[4:50] the document as we're going. So I will
make sure that all the updates get in
[4:55] there. Okay. Next up, page six.
Um so you changed shall to should. I
[5:06] felt like it should be shall
So to me sh is a requirement. Should is
[5:12] more of a suggestion.
Got it. Change to
[5:24] sh. Any other
[5:31] items? Page seven.
[5:39] I didn't identify this before, but we
had at one point felt the that we needed
[5:45] to put time. So, we put that 4 p.m. I
see that's removed from the township
[5:49] clerk shall prepare the agenda on the
first Thursday. We did that because
[5:54] sometimes there are day-to-day items,
meetings that Mary is pulled into that
[6:00] she can't get it done right at 4. I'm
okay with that. Just bring it up because
[6:04] I know it was a
some discussion before
[6:10] I say yes I think we've I think we
realize that things are it's a good call
[6:14] out but I also think that the way that
this board has handled themselves too
[6:18] that almost some of these I think really
can go away because
[6:23] it's been very fluent
absolutely but it certainly is a good
[6:27] point Jim you know like to bring this
stuff up
[6:32] I think it's important to remember too
that We're doing this at this meeting,
[6:36] but if there's ever an item in this
document that changes mid year, you
[6:42] would just add it to a meeting and we
can amend the document. I do feel like
[6:45] these type of documents should be
working documents that can be adjusted
[6:49] throughout the year depending on how
your workflow changes or your staffing
[6:53] changes. That's a normal thing to have
it be updated as needed. So, if for some
[6:58] reason you found the four o'clock was an
issue, we could address it for sure. You
[7:02] know, and keep in mind previously before
too when we spent all this time putting
[7:07] this forth this effort it only worked
for the people that were willing to
[7:12] actually follow it. Remember we had we
had we required a signature from
[7:17] everybody. There were several that a few
that would not sign it and would not
[7:23] follow it. I mean right that we we
wanted certain things to be done and
[7:28] they just were flat out not going to do
it. And MTA even stated and said they
[7:32] don't have to do it. It's an elected
official, you know. So, I think it goes
[7:36] back again to where this board is
cohesive and gels. So, it's really going
[7:40] to be about what we're going to we're
trying to put forth what we can
[7:45] to enforce to an degree that's only
going to be enforceable to a certain
[7:49] extent. Absolutely. And I think it shows
the public what your stance is in
[7:54] relation to how you want the operations
to run. And by Yeah. And by following
[8:00] it, it's saying that you
value the township in a way.
[8:08] All right. Um, page eight.
So, I did add in here the invocation.
[8:15] Yes. So, I was gonna So, page eight
nations. I think this is important part
[8:22] of our discussion. First, yeah, thank
you. I I had brought uh requested this
[8:29] previously and situation where I work.
This is exact language that
[8:35] they want to be clear that last time we
tried adding it. The attorney suggested
[8:42] that
we Richmond has had they added it fairly
[8:45] recently meeting within the last 15
years no concern.
[8:51] township they have pastor come in every
meeting it's not no specific say the
[8:59] reason it's important to me of course I
will say whether we prove it or not I
[9:05] will say this in I say this in my head
or something because I think it's
[9:09] important to know that we're here for a
time we're here for the right reason to
[9:13] me whether you're uh believe in God or
not I think we anybody everybody in the
[9:20] wants somebody who uh wants has wisdom
and courage to do what's right. So
[9:26] that's why I think it's important to
it's not intended to be
[9:31] a Christian thing. It's not not trying
to push something. It's more to remind
[9:36] us
and I hope the whole board why we're
[9:41] here. That's the reason I think it's
important.
[9:48] Yeah, this is something I definitely
wanted to make sure that we called
[9:50] attention to that other
[9:55] comments. Do you guys have any issues
with this?
[9:59] I'm not I don't have an issue with two.
[10:07] you want to talk about the I just kind
Yeah. So, some of the changes I've made
[10:12] is is is in the public comment. So, in
the public comments in the beginning of
[10:16] the meeting, that's to address issues
we're specifically addressing that day,
[10:22] items that are on the agenda. So, in the
beginning of the meeting, if somebody
[10:24] wants to discuss if we're talking about
what kind of, you know, approval to buy
[10:28] cups and someone wants to come make a
public comment specifically to that,
[10:31] they can. It's not generalized public
comment. only to address issues that are
[10:36] on the agenda and at the end of the
meeting prior to our comments then it's
[10:40] just generalized public comments and
that's consistent with a lot of
[10:43] communities around so I I have very
strong opinion on this item and I will
[10:48] say that
since the way it's currently
[10:52] written previous
chair have not we have not attempted to
[10:58] follow the way it's currently written
which is the way it's intended to be
[11:02] written and we It really should be kind
of the opposite of what you said at the
[11:08] beginning. Public comments I envisioned
it was intended to be really for non
[11:13] agenda items and then when you have an
item up there's an opportunity which we
[11:19] again we haven't done for the public to
come. So the way it's should work in
[11:24] this way is we talk at a board level
with no interruption and the public has
[11:30] a chance to weigh in and then it comes
back to the board for
[11:34] Everybody here, of course, Mary's been
on the board longer than I've been
[11:37] attending, but so I haven't seen her sit
in the audience, but everybody else here
[11:41] has been in the audience, I'm sure, has
had frustration or things they wanted to
[11:48] say. And it's to me, it's very hard to
to have good comments if you don't know
[11:56] what the board's going to say. One way
or the other, you come in, you see an
[12:00] agenda item, and you have to
You could be either you're you're going
[12:06] to make assumptions of what the board's
saying and you're going to say something
[12:10] probably maybe unnecessary. If it's one
item that you're really against, you
[12:15] have and everybody's passionate about,
you're going to have to sit through
[12:18] potentially a packed house saying the
same thing. Then it comes to the board
[12:21] and the board's already already has the
same opinion. So now you've wasted a lot
[12:26] of time. This is the way I see it. And
so I've been out there very
[12:32] you want now when something comes up and
there's board discussion discussing you
[12:37] your experience may provide some
valuable insight that the board would
[12:40] want to hear but you don't think of that
until you hear the board so in my
[12:44] opinion
it's for our residents and for those
[12:48] specifically those who take the time to
come to the meeting I think it
[12:53] is much better for them to have the
opportunity to speak after we've spoken
[12:57] at board level I I would personally like
to see
[13:02] remain this way or maybe with that minor
language change of non at the beginning
[13:07] again to prevent somebody to make it
clear that you're going to have an
[13:10] opportunity to speak later. I'd like to
see us keep this for now and try to
[13:15] actually utilize that and see how it
floats. I feel like this is right out of
[13:19] MTA's playbook. I went to a meeting and
MTA said in the beginning of the meeting
[13:23] it's it's public comments specifically
to agenda items. During the meeting
[13:27] that's our tenure on the meeting. If we
open it for each issue, it it's not
[13:32] going to have their time. It's it's not
well, it is their time because they're a
[13:36] res. But that's why at the beginning of
the meeting, you want to speak to any
[13:39] agenda item. That's when you when you
say what you said. Doesn't mean I won't
[13:42] entertain something. But having an
argument at home and saying tell me what
[13:45] you want before you even know my opinion
and don't talk to me. You know, like
[13:49] that's not how a real discussion would
go. But this is straight from I actually
[13:53] posed a question in front of 200 people
and they all like Jim would you be so if
[13:58] we went back to public comments at the
top if that were to be non-aggenda items
[14:05] um at the top then we go through approve
the minutes current bills revenue go
[14:10] through everything and then when we get
down to um after correspondence because
[14:15] with unfinished business we potentially
still have if you were to put public
[14:20] comments in there for agenda items only.
That would be at at the start of
[14:25] unfinished business. Because I know what
you're saying, but if somebody if we're
[14:29] making a decision on something like said
to buy the the coffee cups, why would
[14:33] you want it at the end after we already
made the decision? Would you wanted it
[14:36] before? So, Monica says up there and
says, "I don't think you should be
[14:41] buying this. You should buy it from
Sam's Club before we actually discuss it
[14:47] with the unfinished business." That way,
somebody isn't forgetting about it.
[14:50] misunderstanding what I'm saying. So if
we're talking about
[14:55] cups the public so what would happen is
we we talk about okay we'd like to buy
[15:00] them from Sam's Club here's why I bought
a lot is there any comments from the
[15:04] audience this is before we take any
action and they go you know you can buy
[15:08] them cheaper if you go to Staples then
it comes back to the board okay thanks
[15:13] now it's back to board that was actually
I didn't think of that we should buy
[15:18] from Staples and then we would vote on
that's kind of
[15:22] I that and a lot of this I base because
of my experience in the city. This is
[15:26] how the city of Richmond run it and they
don't get that many audience members but
[15:30] when they do that it's been my
observations it's allowed the discussion
[15:38] stay calm you know people get frustrated
when they hear the discussion they're
[15:43] not going to have a chance to speak
really we as people really want a chance
[15:46] to talk before it's too late if you
haven't talked ahead of time in my
[15:52] opinion it just you say a lot that maybe
is unnecessary
[15:56] We may we may decide they may be
thinking Staples is the way to go. Then
[16:01] we talk up here and it's part of our
discussion. Somebody here says, "Hey,
[16:05] it's cheaper at st." So we just leave it
at public comment. They're going to ask
[16:08] questions anyway. Well, if you don't if
you if they don't talk at the beginning
[16:14] about agenda items. No, the beginning is
where they I know what I mean is if you
[16:18] allow the conversation during the item.
If you allow them to talk about an
[16:22] agenda item during the agenda item.
We don't we have we've never done it. So
[16:28] you guys don't have the experience with
that. And if the board doesn't want
[16:32] that's fine. I'm trying to I'm deleting
my case but I'm here to
[16:36] support you have to have one public
period. So we got one in the in the
[16:40] beginning and then one at the end. Yeah.
But what I'm getting at is if you allow
[16:43] it during each agenda item and the board
talks then you give them opportunity to
[16:48] talk and many times there's no
discussion no comments then it comes
[16:51] back to the board.
But when you do that, you technically
[16:57] you don't have public comments on agenda
items at the beginning or else you're
[17:02] wasting time again because they're going
to let them say their comments at the
[17:06] item so the board can consider them or
you you risk it just it's less efficient
[17:13] and I'm confident that it's less
efficient. However, if if the board
[17:17] feels that that's not the way to do it,
okay, but it's important to me. I'm
[17:20] really saying my piece. you guys support
and
[17:24] I know exactly where you're coming from
because I've been out there.
[17:29] I would just yell it out. Well, then I
guess and I think what I just I just did
[17:35] and I and I think that um Chris has been
very
[17:43] gracious and I think you still have the
well again this is this is straight out
[17:51] of MTA's book and I was in a room with
100 supervisors.
[17:57] What I mean is if every meeting
[18:02] says, "Can I
speak to all my you should you can't let
[18:08] somebody talk once and then a different
meeting say I don't want to hear your
[18:11] comment whatever whatever reason." So I
think either you got you got to follow
[18:16] the agenda. So however you think
best is what it is. So Richmond must be
[18:23] and I every township is different. I can
say that probably I I would stand up and
[18:30] say that I probably have the most
experience going for my customers for
[18:34] every township. I have not seen Richmond
do where they go, you know, each agenda
[18:40] item Richmond city. Most
municipalities if they don't only have
[18:46] normally they only have one public
comment where I have seen some that have
[18:51] done this but they've done the top with
only uh non agenda items at the top and
[18:58] then when they get down to the bottom
that they would open it up but it would
[19:00] only be prior to the new business so
that that way it was a little bit
[19:05] fresher so that you weren't missing out
you know you could get through all of
[19:09] that stuff you didn't have to even be
here you could come towards the
[19:12] And I think it can go both ways on how
you do that. But once you start I've
[19:17] never seen municipalities do that at
planning commission or um board level.
[19:22] When we've gone when we got planning
commission approval and we go the next
[19:25] week for board level approval. I've
never seen where they've given those
[19:29] that each agenda item breakdown that
they've given it. And I'm not saying
[19:34] that it's wrong. I'll give you one last
example. We were doing the sewer stuff
[19:37] when I was in the audience was talking
They were not
[19:43] understanding what they were reading.
And I
[19:47] was I I can't remember if they let me
talk or not, but I remember being really
[19:51] frustrated going I just I want to go.
They had the opportunity to go and
[19:54] clarify. No, you're you're not reading
this right because I read these before
[19:59] and I know I had some knowledge there.
So that was really hard for me. That's
[20:03] why I'm here now.
[20:07] But I struggled with that. So that to me
is why I'm so passionate about if you
[20:12] don't allow the public to say something
at the right time, you know,
[20:18] after the board discussion
just keep it at
[20:26] public and that's why beginning
[20:34] the only thing that I can say when I was
writing this and I don't know if I'm
[20:37] allowed to say this But when I was
writing it and talking with Chris and
[20:41] thinking of it as a citizen because I'm
writing it working but I'm thinking as a
[20:46] citizen. The one thing that it does do
is it is it it pushes the citizens to
[20:53] read the agendas so they come to the
meeting with something thoughtful as
[20:59] opposed to waiting to hear what you have
to say and knee-jerk responding where
[21:03] you might get um they might not have
been a had the time to to think through
[21:09] it. But in addition, I think that
the you know one of the things as Chris
[21:15] said there are a lot of ship that that
try to have it agenda items only to
[21:20] start um partly for that reason. So they
read the agenda but in addition let me
[21:26] just say as a citizen none of you are
not you're all accessible. So if there
[21:32] was an agenda meet if there was a
meeting and I had an item that I really
[21:35] was passionate about you all are
available. Chris is here every day. I
[21:39] would be coming in the door and having a
conversation with Chris before that
[21:42] board meeting and saying as a citizen I
want to talk about this and he's more
[21:47] than willing to say here's what we came
up with. I think what's interesting is
[21:51] is the challenges you may have had
previously you wouldn't have now because
[21:55] of the board that you have. That's just
as a citizen. Well, I guess we're
[22:01] assuming that the agenda has enough
detail where proposed true motion that
[22:07] doesn't always happen.
That's true. Okay. The other one, Jim,
[22:12] I'll I'll throw at you again just again
throwing that out there to see if it
[22:16] would work. Again, if you did public
comments at the beginning of non-aggenda
[22:21] items, and then as you get down there,
now keep in mind if we do this where we
[22:25] go through the minutes, the bills, the
say that there's an additional let's say
[22:30] there's 20 minutes additional to that.
Okay? And if you get down to then 10 to
[22:34] public comments, if you Good. Marcia,
ask her a question. If she states
[22:40] something at public comments for an
agenda item though, that if we went the
[22:44] opposite way at the top, but we spent 20
minutes going through the agenda and
[22:49] then we get down there. If we allowed
her to speak just before we're ready to
[22:53] go into the business, it's much fresher
and you know with what she just said,
[22:58] making a statement versus if you say it
at the very top. Sure. If we spent 20
[23:03] minutes, a half hour going through the
the rest of the meeting before we get
[23:07] down there, it's very possible that we
could have forgotten what was said by um
[23:12] you know, the taxpayer out there.
Whereas, if we gave them an opportunity
[23:16] just before we rolled in and we started
going through those items, would that be
[23:19] a little bit better to give them that
interaction? Well, if anybody's going to
[23:23] forget, it would be me because I' been
However, I
[23:26] think I think it would be more
confusing. I prefer it seems like I'm
[23:31] the only this way. So I would say if
we're going to change it back the way it
[23:36] used to, I think there should
be I take notes and I'm sure you guys do
[23:42] the same thing. So you're just saying
generalize public accounts beginning and
[23:44] at the end instead of Steve was saying
should we separate agenda non agenda
[23:50] items and then agenda items a little
later. I think that might get confusing
[23:54] maybe. Well, one of the things I was
thinking about it just popped in my head
[23:58] about making it generalized. If someone
wants to come make a public comment
[24:00] about an event, they probably want to
say at the beginning of the meeting.
[24:03] Yeah, for sure. So, that's a thought,
too. So, you just double it up. Public
[24:07] comment. Public comment. Done. And we
don't have to have two items. You want
[24:10] to say you could just put Just put I
respect what you're saying wanting to do
[24:16] because we've all been outside outside
of Mary.
[24:20] She has been on that other side. But and
there's not I get it, but I also
[24:25] understand that sometimes people can get
really off tangent and get going. We've
[24:30] never really put the clock out there.
I've been Chesterfield. I've just been
[24:33] there the last two two meetings and the
uh person next to the chair sits right
[24:39] there with the phone and you hear the
click through the microphone. Click,
[24:42] there's the timer and it's going and
when it's at three minutes looks right
[24:45] at the chair and the chair is like, I
really don't want to do this and be
[24:49] like, "Okay, sorry, your three minutes
are up." and cuts them off right at
[24:52] three minutes. I've never seen that
happen here. So, I think that again it's
[24:56] back to the gracious of the chair,
right? Ultimately, the chair's meeting
[25:00] can we were told can literally run the
meeting however the chair deems so even
[25:05] if we put this in place, right? And I
think we're much better. Yeah, we've
[25:10] been Well, remember we were told I will
do it as I please. This is my me. I will
[25:15] never forget that thing, you know. So,
but I I like what you're saying.
[25:23] Y so it'll be as yeah we could just
remove the two address item agenda items
[25:29] only. So I moved it to public comments
and then public comments. Well so
[25:35] so right in the beginning they'll have
the option to give public comments and
[25:38] then right do you want that? No, I I
personally think it should just you
[25:42] should put I put public comments and you
can either put nothing after that or put
[25:48] agenda and nonaggenda. You know, that
might be that that also I would just put
[25:53] public. Yeah, that's what I would not
say I would not have a second public
[25:57] comments later on. Just public comments
just later on. This would be when I
[26:02] would say public comments. Anybody who
wish to address whether or make a
[26:06] general conversation and where would you
like it at in the beginning or the end?
[26:11] Keep everything the same. Just make a
public comment. Okay.
[26:18] Do we want Yeah, that's the one I was
referring to.
[26:22] That's one that MTA really pushes. And
here's the reason why. If I make a vote,
[26:27] I'm held accountable because they can
come up afterwards and say they're gonna
[26:29] say, "I thought that was stupid." I
don't see the value, but if they want,
[26:33] that's fine, too. That just
was Yeah. For them to vent and for us to
[26:38] go to that.
Well, by then it's too late.
[26:47] So, what if we give them It's always the
good thing to do three minutes for
[26:50] public comments. What at the bottom if
you give them one minute?
[26:55] So that that way it doesn't turn into
parentheses on the top. Three minutes.
[26:59] Yep. And then the bottom. What about one
minute? Because if you don't like a
[27:03] vote, you should be able to say within a
minute. Two because one just sounds like
[27:09] I was just trying to make it so that
we're speeding it up so that it isn't
[27:13] a and I think it's fair to say a barrage
of three minute public comments. Now at
[27:19] the end of why and how. So three minutes
and then two minutes and I'm fine with
[27:24] two and obviously look at it and treat
it appropriately per case individual but
[27:30] something so that it's there spelled
out. Is that fair? That's fair. Under
[27:34] where it says consent agendas and
reports that needs to go back to consent
[27:39] agenda
[27:44] which includes department reports.
So we will go back then to consent
[27:50] agenda. We're going to keep that as
consent. Well, at least that's a very
[27:53] suggestion. I agree where you would like
you would like it to stay the way that
[27:56] it is. Okay. Any reason? Do you want to
talk longer or do you want to pass down
[28:01] to anybody else? Well, it's it's just
all those you can make one motion for
[28:06] everything. Thing is, we can also add
something if you want to pull something
[28:10] there if somebody has an issue. Um chair
of the meeting may remove such agenda
[28:16] items from the consent agenda for
discussion consideration and move it
[28:22] under you can make it number seven or
number seven.
[28:32] The one thing I will ask is regardless
of which way you go on this is for the
[28:36] fire department budget the fire
department report because they're two
[28:39] and a half times our budget. Um, it's a
huge chief's gonna hate me for this and
[28:44] he brings a lot of information. I want
to piggy back to that. So, if you go
[28:48] back and you look at when uh when chief
came up here and explained about the um
[28:54] fire alarms, he talked about the carbon
monoxide detectors, when he talked about
[28:59] the car seats, when he talked about the
the morale at the fire hall. Um,
[29:07] special reports or but what I'm saying
what I'm getting at, Mary, is that when
[29:11] he came up there and he and he and he
vocalized that I was taken back and it's
[29:16] not even something that I would think
about, you know, to talk to the, you
[29:19] know, to the chief when Jim brings up a
good point where he wants to have public
[29:22] comments on here because he was trying
to interact. Well, we're trying to get
[29:26] interaction to give everybody what we're
talking you know what we're conveying
[29:31] back to as elected officials to our
taxpayers and really we look at this. I
[29:35] realize that there's more motions that
go along behind there. But on the other
[29:38] hand, these meetings last month was 18
minutes long. The meeting prior was No,
[29:44] I think we should go back to have
reading every report. Have a reading to
[29:48] go through them, not just the fire
report. This is me. Mary had hers where
[29:51] she'd like the consent. I think that it
should be open considering that if it
[29:56] picks up another 20 minutes to a
meeting, which I I think is probably
[30:00] reasonable, last month would have put us
at
[30:05] And I agree. I think when
Ken
[30:11] report I think it's important that the
people know what's going on and a lot of
[30:18] them
[30:27] committing commissions and
such
[30:31] think that's their time to this is what
we're doing. We need your input. The
[30:36] audience was in gas or I would say like
you heard I heard them like you heard
[30:41] that you heard you know out of their
mouth in emotion that they vocalized
[30:46] because they had heard what was going on
just at the fire department
[30:51] and I I just think that sometimes if we
get just in a hurry everything just gets
[30:55] rushed.
[31:00] So I used the example before
reading this in your report was kind of
[31:06] like painful for me. But could
could our standard practice be if
[31:11] somebody's here and wants to read it,
they would read it. However, if they're
[31:15] not very
sure I would agree if if if all is good
[31:22] at the uh senior center, they did some
events if you want to summarize it. I
[31:27] think there's nothing wrong with
summarizing it. If there's an issue,
[31:30] right, we're going to discuss the issue,
right? So, we would have not necessarily
[31:34] just pulled it. It's already going to be
out. And if it's a good one, Chris
[31:38] summarizes and highlights it. Just goes
through it real quick and that's it. You
[31:42] know, you the building one, it goes
through really, really quick on there.
[31:45] The ordinance, I mean, okay, you might
spend two minutes on the ordinance uh
[31:51] enforcement going through that. Um, the
fire chief is going to be the biggest
[31:54] one. And the rest of those, Ken's going
to probably have a
[31:59] It may seem five or 10 minutes. It's
probably two minutes when you add those
[32:03] up. Parks and Rex, that's only three
minutes, four months out of the year.
[32:08] That's what I said. We're looking 20
minutes, I would think, at max to add to
[32:14] it. And it puts our meeting now at maybe
7:45, 8:00, even 8:10. We were taken
[32:22] before
before we were making motions to take
[32:27] and extend right when we had those old
meetings before.
[32:33] I don't have a strong position either
way. That's why it wasn't to me. It
[32:38] wasn't just the time. It was the value
of the
[32:45] timebody agenda. That's why we should
comment. Maybe that's one benefit.
[32:51] I would say we would also encourage
[32:56] people as far as Mary's I would agree
with Mary's comment on the consent
[33:00] agenda for that sake that they can read.
However,
[33:05] if the majority of the board wants to
read the reports in one form, that's
[33:10] fine.
[33:17] I do I like the fire report because it
is If we if we want I mean that's so if
[33:22] we had a consent agenda technically you
could say chief could you read the
[33:27] report that's saying but Steve you're
saying you'd prefer that they really
[33:32] gloss over I I think if we go through
them chief does his normal report go
[33:36] through everything like you would Monica
as treasurer is going to give us report
[33:39] say you have in front of you your um
your budget here it is everything is uh
[33:45] balanced out where it's supposed to be
at does anybody have any questions if
[33:49] there's no question. Boom. We're done.
You got that done in 30 seconds. But you
[33:53] at least you you you expressed it saying
here it is rather than everybody out
[33:58] there
wondering where do we even I haven't
[34:01] heard anything. It's been six months
I've been coming and not saying to come
[34:04] to you talking to you personally which
they can but we are here at the meeting
[34:08] to just express some of those things.
Again the senior center that can be
[34:13] summarized and just it's not a very long
deal. I think we forget how long that
[34:18] they never
They the only way they got off the rail
[34:22] was because when we got to sewer and
water, that's where they got off the
[34:25] rail because it was always a
fight. Code enforcement was a fight
[34:30] because we were never given accurate
information, right? We were always
[34:34] misled because of stuff was hidden or we
got it the night of handing. We're
[34:39] sitting here and we're all wondering why
the copy machine's going and it get it
[34:43] got handed here. throw in the garbage.
Again, I I just go back to this board
[34:47] saying it's a completely new board that
if you spend and we go through it
[34:52] briefly, summarize it, a summarization
is totally good. So, the intent of the
[34:56] consent agenda is really not discussion.
So, I would say it sounds like we should
[35:02] consent agenda and it's really not. Then
we just have motion to approve the
[35:05] minutes, motion to approve the bills.
That's only for motion.
[35:11] Yeah. Before we file the reports, we had
the opportunity to make those comments
[35:17] that you guys can speak. We don't have
to read verbatim messages. That's really
[35:22] what was unnecessary to me. But if you
say senior center had three events, they
[35:27] seem like they had a good turnout. If
you need a copy of the report, if it's
[35:30] here or you could highlight, oh, they
did this. That sounded pretty neat. Just
[35:33] basically cliff notes. Okay.
That's the case. Can I get clarity? Are
[35:39] you saying that basically the first
three items are a consent agenda and
[35:42] then the fourth one is a department
report? I'm saying no. They're all
[35:46] separate. You have to approve the
minutes and motion the bills with
[35:50] motion. So would we call so for sake
would the approval minutes be item six
[35:55] current bills or is it still 6B?
We can make it whatever you like.
[36:03] That is what it always has been. And the
only thing that I changed on here was
[36:06] consent agenda to reports. Well, this
most recent update, we changed it to
[36:12] consent agenda. So, prior to that, I
can't remember. This one
[36:27] had two sections.
[36:34] recognition agenda language.
[36:42] So, previously it just said I mean
version I don't know July of 2024. Yeah.
[36:48] So you have to go prior to that there's
but it's not when they did the version
[36:53] it would have had the blue line in it
and there's nothing here. It literally
[36:57] reads that this is always
[37:02] this one has they're in here. Yes, we
met a few times possibly got changed the
[37:07] time before it definitely got changed.
So this one it said updated 2023. So
[37:14] maybe it was the 2023.
[37:20] Got it.
[37:24] Okay. So, you want
to see what it says.
[37:30] What was the other thing you said? I'm
sorry. I'm just going to say bottom of
[37:35] page. Yes.
Yes.
[37:45] The chair will show open discussion
matter to the public. So, that needs to
[37:50] be updated if we're changing the
We're changing that to not open it to
[37:56] the public. So just it should it should
very kind of match your standard agenda
[38:01] language that you put on the bottom. Got
it.
[38:06] So going back to a previous version.
[38:14] Yeah, because the only one I have was
the this one to go off of.
[38:21] That's what because this one was the 24
edition. This is what
[38:25] Okay.
I'll try and send you
[38:29] the rumor to send you a previous version
of this
[38:33] too, which sounds fantast.
That's
[38:43] just the one thing I was kind of hoping
for tonight is is for B to see if we
[38:47] could all come to consensus and agree on
setting that as part of so next meeting
[38:52] we can actually follow that
[38:58] in the order of business under B if we
could adopt that so going forward
[39:02] starting next meeting. So they were all
they were all numbered that's
[39:10] bills or not. Okay, I'll number.
Got it. Do you since you're right here
[39:18] and it's fresh, do you want
to stay right here? Yeah, if we can
[39:24] clean be up because that's one thing I'd
like to to start doing it that way.
[39:28] Okay, that's okay. That's the
[39:33] way you have I want a consensus. I
really do. I like us all agree.
[39:45] Um I just want to agree that this is the
way we can run the meetings and just
[39:49] start doing it that way.
[39:55] Yeah, exactly.
[40:09] B and C.
[40:14] Yeah, B is just the order we update C to
this.
[40:20] C is C would be the order. So like that
you do the call to order. Yeah, B is
[40:25] just how we run the you know the order
in which we run it.
[40:28] section order.
[40:37] Well, see that's on the next page.
Yeah. So, there's changes need to
[40:52] recogn. So, that's that needs to be
updated or needs to be it back to what
[40:58] it previously was. Yes.
[41:03] I have it highlighted in green which
means change it. So we going to take and
[41:09] do B right now to formally make a uh a
vote to it so that we can move forward
[41:14] or not move forward.
[41:27] I just want to start running. It's the
only reason it last I mean the whole
[41:32] like the invocation how the you know
public comments
[41:40] I just don't like well we can also just
like you said the chair can run we want
[41:45] but we all have a verbal agreement that
follow this way. Yeah. I just don't
[41:48] believe and I'm just going to do what I
say. So I want it seems to me like
[41:53] majority we're good I'm good with this
way. Okay. Again, it's not preferred,
[41:58] but the majority and that's fine. So,
I'm okay that I'm going to support that.
[42:02] Okay, that's that's enough, I think.
I'll I'll make a motion that we
[42:08] adopt for tonight so we can start right
away. So, we actually have it as a
[42:12] formal that we uh I make a motion that
we adopt B or an order of business as
[42:20] presented with changes that we
discussed.
[42:27] policy section.
And I'm willing I I can modify that,
[42:33] too.
[42:39] So, we went through and we discussed it
and we're good with where we're at. At
[42:42] least this way. It formalizes it. It's
accurate. I mean, that's what we're here
[42:47] doing. I don't feel that we're I know
you're we're not doing anything behind
[42:51] anybody's. We publicized it. They w
here. We're spending the time to to be
[42:56] here and take the time out to do it.
We're just ready to hit the ground
[43:00] running.
[43:06] Yes.
[43:09] Yes. Yes.
Okay. Go to C.
[43:14] Right. Yeah.
Lord already highlighted that there's
[43:18] some it needs to be changed to be
consistent
[43:31] paragraph interesting the community of
residency.
[43:37] So we we added that because there are so
we've been saying that people have to
[43:43] say their address and finding that that
is not what a lot of townships do. So we
[43:49] figured just saying the community that
they're resident in because it is a
[43:52] public meeting they can attend if they
choose to. But I think it's important
[43:56] that you know is it a resident or isn't
it a resident I mean I think that's
[43:59] helpful. Are we
Another thing that I've noticed if it's
[44:04] too much clerical was that a lot of
municipalities that I've been going to
[44:08] recently have a signin sheet at the
podium
[44:12] so that it's clear when somebody forgets
to say their name and I've seen up here
[44:17] where they start talking and someone
says excuse me I need you to sign in
[44:22] like you're standing we're not letting
you speak until we watch you sign your
[44:26] name address
Even if you're a resident or not, it
[44:31] could be a box right there. Check it
this way. That way we know that we have
[44:36] something. And I'm not looking to add
more clerical work for you, Mary. But I
[44:38] just meant
So if you're saying if they want to
[44:43] speak at the
podium where it's written, we want them
[44:47] to say where they live, but you want
them to write their name and address.
[44:52] They don't have to say their address. It
could be either or. I think that's all
[44:55] it was. Most of the time though we get
majority people will state their name
[44:59] and their address and then they'll start
to kind of like I feel like go downhill
[45:05] and veer away from finishing the rest of
their address of where that they're at
[45:08] because they just think that we know who
they are and we probably do but if we're
[45:12] being held to a certain guideline I
think when you come to the podium to be
[45:16] able to speak you should also you know
conform to the rules that we have here.
[45:21] You speak your name say what your
address is you know you don't have to
[45:24] get
We're not giving, but they need to state
[45:28] it, but I think they should write it
down as well because they still say it
[45:31] both ways.
What's the benefit of writing down so we
[45:35] have a record of it?
[45:47] But like you said, if they were writing
it, we would have it
[45:56] I do like that the idea though of the
residency because we had that one that
[46:01] one when they did the grow ordinance all
these people called in from out. Not a
[46:05] single person from our town, but
everybody else was. And I think it's
[46:08] relative for the board when we're making
a decision to know they live like six
[46:12] counties away. So it's not relative to
our ma. I think you know the residency
[46:16] is important.
[46:20] So I have no issues with the way that do
you want
[46:39] at the end that' be fine.
So,
[46:42] you were wanting to put a piece of paper
that requires them to write their name
[46:48] and their
res on that sign. No, put your address.
[46:54] Yeah. Still need your address. You don't
think so? I think Monica's trying
[47:02] to prevent people feeling intimidated.
So, if Mary's going to attach it to the
[47:07] meeting minutes now, then their address
would be out there. They didn't say that
[47:11] they're not
[47:17] I think that would be helpful in
[47:20] case we find the need to follow up with
somebody at least have their name.
[47:27] was still stating if they're res.
I think that check and check box if
[47:34] you're reset.
[47:46] Well, it should be then up at the
agenda. Well, so under standard agenda
[47:50] language under we would add Oh, right
here it says audience not where maybe
[47:57] commenting from the floor. She'll do so
from the podium ask by their name and
[48:01] community of
residency. Okay.
[48:05] So, you may have to amend that to say
[48:20] all right. Anything else on page?
I'm
[48:24] sorry. page at our top discussion matter
the chair shall open discuss she's gonna
[48:30] update that yes I have I updated that so
I'll make sure we update that to match
[48:39] all right page 10
[48:50] so the says to promote efficient
administration man responsible for
[48:56] day-to-day operations as directed by the
supervisor and then so you eliminated
[49:02] some it was extreme extremely repetitive
dayto-day day dayto day so it's
[49:08] literally now just department managers
are responsible for operations as
[49:13] directed day-to-day operations as
directed by the supervisor done like
[49:17] it's one line then the next line that
was eliminated says the supervisor and
[49:22] the board formulate personnel policies
and office procedures and supervisor
[49:27] will be responsible for the
implementation and that is the purpose
[49:30] of this policy. So the policy is the
policy and procedures and if it's a um
[49:36] an appointed official then the official
is responsible for whatever policies
[49:42] they want that person unnecessary. Yes.
Yeah.
[49:51] Absolutely. All right. Uh page
[50:00] 11. Not a whole lot of changes there.
So the the only thing I added was that
[50:07] the job description will be provided to
the employee upon hire and when updates
[50:11] are made. Like an easy one.
[50:16] page
12. Um, so the one thing that we are
[50:22] going to add in is um a new employee um
review form. I don't know that we'll use
[50:28] the word appraisal. I don't really like
that word for employees, just an annual
[50:32] review form. Um, and I can share that
out. I did not put that in this
[50:36] document, but they each will use it the
way
[50:41] they see fit for
[50:45] but consistency with the document.
[50:56] This page page 13.
[51:01] So
the 1560 hours is 30 hours a week
[51:09] basically. So really everybody
[51:14] part time,
right? They previously had everyone
[51:18] listed as fulltime, which was kind of
odd.
[51:23] I know we had some long discussion
figur.
[51:27] So, basically, we just updated this to
say that all of the general fund
[51:32] employees and specific general fund, not
including the fire department because
[51:35] they're very different. Their schedule
is very different. um that they are
[51:40] considered part-time, that they submit
their time sheets um and we just called
[51:46] out the fact that they are not offered
medical benefits. Um and they are
[51:51] eligible to receive the life insurance
policy that we have. So that you know
[51:55] they are eligible for life insurance
policies and um and called out the fact
[51:59] that if the township is closed during
normal business hours on a holiday, they
[52:03] will have the day off with regular
compensation. So it's not
[52:08] Yeah, the only thing I thought should be
clarified is that pay should be based
[52:14] on their normal hours work or if they so
say they only maybe they don't work
[52:20] Mondays for some reason then I would say
should they be paid for Monday. Agreed.
[52:25] We can note that that it's based on
their normal hours worked. Yeah. Agreed.
[52:41] Um the other section is just around um
just to note that um we did add a line
[52:49] that for under the deputies which
actually kind of goes into the next page
[52:55] but it talks about their total hours
cannot exceed the amount budgeted but
[52:59] that an exception can be made with board
approval only when there are
[53:02] extenduating circumstances.
[53:07] Well, I think it's come up during the
election years where Don does more work
[53:12] on the election stuff.
[53:17] And then we called out kind of all other
township employee uh positions. So they
[53:23] do not receive the vacation or holiday
or briefment. Um so ahead. Nope. Go
[53:30] right ahead.
One was bookkeeper is called out
[53:35] separately and they're not considered
reason it's not under part time. Yes.
[53:39] Because they're not part-time. Um
they're an hourly rate and they don't
[53:43] have a set number of hours they work. So
they're not given the life insurance
[53:46] policy. Um they're they're kind of like
a Yeah.
[53:51] Yeah. So they're just paid based on
their time sheets and it's going to be
[53:55] based on whatever the budget is a little
bit different. Got it. Yep.
[54:02] So
[54:08] then our salary yes it says but there's
a time
[54:22] yes employees
[54:27] not for salaried employees So like I
would
[54:32] enter my time eight hours a day whatever
and then if
[54:40] I work
[54:46] over time
he gets time for respond respond to
[54:53] emergency and that is essentially the
way. So I thought it seemed to have a
[54:59] time law. But then on the same I said,
well,
[55:03] should all the employee salary be
entering their times and would that
[55:09] place the time?
Well, like for the parks and record
[55:13] guys, it's just kind of difficult for
him. Basically, it's just it's just to
[55:16] show that, you know, that they're doing
stuff because I I get comments about
[55:22] certain people leaving early on this. I
can go, no, I have the documentation.
[55:25] It's always there. And like the code
enforcement officer, you know, what does
[55:28] he do during a month? You give him a
stipen. Well, this is what he does
[55:31] during the month. And it's basically
just saying, look, taxpayers, this is
[55:34] this is what they do on a daily
bas I need to I'm expected to be there.
[55:40] So, maybe that's different or maybe
that's not different, but this
[55:50] and I apologize that I just realized I
left a sentence between providing their
[55:54] monthly I put in a line about the code
enforcer, but that's because we changed
[55:59] it and that shouldn't be right there.
That's an odd spot for that.
[56:16] Yeah. And then the liquor inspector is
paid on the stipend. And then kind of
[56:22] down below we get into the fire
department. So obviously fire
[56:26] department's really different um but
there are some similarities. So the
[56:31] full-time um firefighters are on the
bargaining agreement. The part-time
[56:37] firefighters they we wanted to call out
that they will be eligible for the
[56:42] earned sick time that is the new law in
Michigan the law and that time is
[56:47] accured um per policy at one hour for
every 30 hours worked. And
[56:54] um they do not receive vacation or
bereavement days.
[56:59] So did we not have we didn't obviously
didn't have part time or on call before?
[57:04] None of it. No. And then called out the
the on call the on call and I probably
[57:10] should call this out. They do not
receive the ESTA time.
[57:14] Um so I will make sure that we get that
[57:19] noted. Now just Note that when the
collective bargaining right now doesn't
[57:24] include ESTA, but when it comes up for
negotiations, it will it will be part of
[57:29] the negotiation conversation. Are
they below the minimum requirement right
[57:34] now? They're above the minimum
requirement.
[57:38] Shouldn't matter, but you know,
something they can discuss because
[57:41] legally something has to be put in there
documentation wise. Correct. Yeah.
[57:47] All
right. Well, it sounds like
[57:52] They do.
Yeah,
[58:09] so this one we just changed to the
employee compensation. We just changed
[58:12] it just to say that the payroll checks
will be issued in a timely manner by
[58:16] direct deposit. Um, we didn't call out.
It's kind of silly to think like we we
[58:21] we changed the bi-weekly because not all
of us are paid bi-weekly. So, for
[58:27] example, the compensation that's paid to
let's say the people that are on the
[58:32] salary that's might not be a bi-weekly.
I'm not paid bi-weekly. I'm paid based
[58:36] on my time sheet. So, we just called out
that it will be paid in a timely manner
[58:41] based, you know, it's based on your
individual
[58:44] position. Not a huge thing.
Um, we removed number two because that's
[58:52] silly. So, you don't need that. Um, this
is saying that you will review
[58:57] employment compensation will review will
occur during the six months and then it
[59:02] talks about um that it will be adjusted
and this this very old language. So,
[59:09] when you're doing your annual
evaluations, you're going to be
[59:12] determining whether or not they're
meeting the muster of what you need. But
[59:15] then in
addition, you will bring it to your
[59:18] budget meetings when it's time for
budgets. So it's not really something
[59:22] that we would do middle of the year that
often.
[59:28] All right.
Um what other items? Oh, we're getting
[59:32] into the big stuff. All right, let's do
it. Okay,
[59:37] I'm excited. Yes. All right, let's
see. Oh, really? Call out number number
[59:47] two there
at the top near the top where below
[59:52] department manager shall be responsible
then right below it where it says in
[59:55] general it's the township's policy that
compensation is based on and changed it
[59:59] to board approval because it does not
seem that it was based on cost of
[1:00:05] living that can't be.
All right. Um, okay. So, this is where
[1:00:13] we get into the big
details. All right. So, what we would
[1:00:16] like to do is right now your part-time
associates um previously were given
[1:00:25] vacation days. Um, they were given
uh one
[1:00:33] week. Um, they were given one week. And
Mary, correct me if I'm wrong on any of
[1:00:38] this because I'm looking in the cross
talk. Hold on one second. Let me pull
[1:00:42] this up. Make sure I'm saying the right
things here.
[1:00:54] Yes. So, we are changing that.
[1:00:59] We're proposing proposing. Sorry, I
should change those words. Proposing.
[1:01:04] Um, and what this does is it combines
the it combines the PTO with the um,
[1:01:12] ESTA time that they're given. So, you
see hours in there and those are not in
[1:01:16] there because the ESTA is we're going to
there's like an an ESTA estimate, let's
[1:01:22] say. So, we have uh, you know, the
number of hours they work annually. They
[1:01:28] they should get one hour for every 30
hours they work. What we will do is we
[1:01:32] will roll their vacation time into their
ESTA. So they will get, for example, if
[1:01:39] they've worked
between one and three years of service.
[1:01:45] I'm sorry, it would be four actually,
isn't it? It's four. Um, one Chris, did
[1:01:49] we say one and three? I think we said
one and three. Yeah, I'm missing a year.
[1:01:54] I apologize. So one in three years of
service, you would get two weeks of PTO
[1:01:58] plus the ESTA, which would be, you know,
one hour for every 30 hours that they've
[1:02:03] worked. We would put that into one
combined time bank. And the reason we do
[1:02:08] that is
because it's very enticing for a
[1:02:12] professional to be able to utilize that
time the way that they see fit. And the
[1:02:17] law doesn't require us to separate the
banks. You can have them all as one as
[1:02:24] long as you allow the banks to roll
over, which these will roll over
[1:02:29] annually, but they cannot take more time
off than you allow. So that's so
[1:02:35] important to know. So even if there are
four weeks of vacation time sitting in
[1:02:39] this bank, an employee could come up to
any one of you to come up to Chris and
[1:02:43] say, "Hey Chris, I'd like to take four
weeks off." And he's going to say, "That
[1:02:48] does not work for us. You can't have
four weeks off." you know, we can give
[1:02:52] you a week off because that's like our
normal thing. We could give you a week
[1:02:55] and a day. It has to be it has to work
for what the township needs are and we
[1:03:00] have to ensure that when that person is
off there's cross coverage. So the the
[1:03:05] beautiful thing between the two new
employees that we have that we have here
[1:03:09] is that they do cross cover each other.
That's the bulk of who this applies to
[1:03:13] is the two of them and then also um our
our senior center associate.
[1:03:21] Um but in in addition to that what we've
done it sounds like a lot of hours. It
[1:03:27] really isn't because even if we
separated it they still get the time.
[1:03:30] What we're doing is we're saying okay we
value you as an associate. We'd like to
[1:03:35] combine them the two together. We're
making it easy for us. The tracking is
[1:03:38] not difficult. um and they have the
ability to take the time in the way that
[1:03:44] they see fit aligning with the needs of
the township. Um it does roll over but
[1:03:50] they cannot cash it out when they leave.
Previously vacation time they could cash
[1:03:55] it out when they left. So if they were
here five previously if they were here
[1:04:00] five or more years and
they left on you know let's say I'm
[1:04:05] making this up like middle of the year
they would have three weeks loaded into
[1:04:09] their think we would cash that out to
them. So, ESTA is very particular in
[1:04:14] saying whatever your policy is is how we
work it. So, you don't have to cash it
[1:04:19] out. I would recommend you don't cash it
out because that's just a cost to the
[1:04:23] township. If you don't use it, you lose.
Go ahead and get more. Nope. Go for it.
[1:04:29] You said a lot. And I'm not a nature
person, so this is like
[1:04:34] But um
[1:04:38] your opinion you should combine the two.
Yes.
[1:04:44] You said
that they're not required. They don't
[1:04:48] lose it on an annual basis. So it would
continue
[1:04:55] to not say I want to take three weeks
vacation
[1:05:02] quitting vacation and I'm going to quit.
No, you can deny it because I mean you
[1:05:07] don't know they're going to quit
whatever. But you would pro but this is
[1:05:12] where it comes into play that in in a
normal
[1:05:17] world you have to do what works for the
township and what works for the township
[1:05:21] is not granting anybody a three-week
vacation unless there was some
[1:05:25] extenduating circumstances. You know if
someone was like hey my child is getting
[1:05:29] married in England and I need to go over
there and I need to prepare things.
[1:05:32] There may be maybe more than two weeks
that's given but it has to approved by
[1:05:38] whoever their leader is. So there is
there's checks and balance. Yes, there's
[1:05:43] a checks and balance and there's like
minimal room for somebody to take
[1:05:46] advantage of it.
Um there's always a chance that they
[1:05:51] will and if you do that's the employee
you don't want there anyway. So I mean
[1:05:55] obviously say as manager I'll say it's a
pain guys call
[1:06:05] and I
had those discussions
[1:06:18] maybe not
[1:06:23] this benefit doesn't affect the budget
right I do have
[1:06:28] questions I feel like the amount of
vacation that you're proposing I feel
[1:06:33] like it's not typical
Yeah, go for it.
[1:06:40] Previously it was looks like it was
after one year you get a week, three
[1:06:45] years two weeks and five or more you get
three weeks. You're proposing two weeks
[1:06:49] after one year service and four weeks
after four or
[1:06:54] more I feel like that's kind of short.
You're saying short not
[1:07:02] I feel like two weeks after one year is
[1:07:08] I would I guess here's my
opinion after year, two weeks after two
[1:07:14] years, three weeks after five years,
four weeks after 10 years. That's
[1:07:19] probably more standard to get a month
[1:07:23] off at least in my experience
[1:07:28] there. Seems like a lot of vacation.
[1:07:34] This is my two cents though is we're not
hiring 18-y old kids and 20-y old kids.
[1:07:38] We're hiring people that have families
and I want to celebrate the fact that I
[1:07:42] want them to to go on vacation. I want
them to spend time with the family. So,
[1:07:46] I think it's the people we're hiring
isn't typical. You know, they're more
[1:07:50] established in their lives and there's
things they want to do and I, you know,
[1:07:53] and I I want to give that for them. We
bring them in at a wage that isn't, you
[1:07:57] know, high and one of the benefits they
get is is we're awesome to work with,
[1:08:01] obviously, and you know, have that time
off as needed because I do I want to I
[1:08:06] want to support the fact that I want you
to go on vacations with your family, you
[1:08:09] know, because if you're happy then we're
productive. I think it supports the fact
[1:08:13] that we are a township that's for the
citizens, right? That's we are a one big
[1:08:19] family.
Fist, right? And the one thing about
[1:08:23] this time is that if you were I'm just
looking at my own employer at one year
[1:08:28] aligns with two weeks. But that's
because we are hiring people for a
[1:08:32] career, not a job. And that's the one
thing about these two positions. They
[1:08:36] truly are a career. I mean, right now
there is another township with one of
[1:08:39] these positions posted. And the posting
is for 68,000 a year with vacation time.
[1:08:45] So, and I get it. It's a much it's a
much bigger It's a much bigger township.
[1:08:53] It's much bigger, but it also comes with
a much larger staff. It's not just one
[1:08:57] person. So, I think realizing that we're
requesting these associates, even with
[1:09:02] our senior center, we're requesting our
associates to kind of be the jack of all
[1:09:06] trades. They need to be flexible and
say, "Okay, today I'm doing this and I'm
[1:09:10] going to cover this person." And we want
people to make this a career. So,
[1:09:17] good cell. Thank you. Thank you. That is
a good cell. with the fire department.
[1:09:22] Yes.
[1:09:25] What happens is they say contract says
we
[1:09:31] need people and so
when we're paying
[1:09:40] and it may be necessary because that's
the competitive market that they're in
[1:09:43] but that's terrible as far as the
budget. Here is the expectation that we
[1:09:49] have the
We're not having to add staff. Yeah,
[1:09:53] there's no overtime that's going to be
required because
[1:09:57] the fire department is they have a daily
minimum, right? So, they can't they
[1:10:01] can't have a parttime that has a
fulltime over.
[1:10:10] Well, I will support that though. I'll
support the philosophy based on the
[1:10:13] skill set. That's how
[1:10:18] other make
Yeah. And that's just it. So when they
[1:10:21] take time off, there there is no, as I
said, this doesn't change the budget.
[1:10:24] There's no additional, you know, costs
incurred because we have to bring people
[1:10:27] in the back bill. The important part to
also note is um that as you mentioned,
[1:10:33] Steve, it's about the evaluation of the
associates. So when you're doing your
[1:10:39] annual evaluations, if you're finding
that people are taking advantage of time
[1:10:44] off, we're going to be tracking it.
We're going those are things that you
[1:10:47] should be doing regardless. And if
you're finding that somebody is really
[1:10:51] not not handling their PTO properly and
they're not doing what you need as a
[1:10:56] township associate, then that's the time
to move that person up and out and not
[1:11:00] just sit with the status quo. And I
think you have a good board that will
[1:11:04] hold accountable. You know, something
else that I um we struggled with our
[1:11:08] business for a long time was that um
that benefits package. Uh it was always
[1:11:15] uh because it's a lot of money. This is
not affecting us because it's not
[1:11:19] affecting the budget, which is great.
Um, but what we had realized was that
[1:11:24] our employee retention was not as good
as what it is now. Actually, it's great
[1:11:30] now, I will say, because we have looked
at that. I say valuation and I don't
[1:11:35] treat any of our employers like that.
They're like a family to us versus just
[1:11:39] they're not a number, but we say is
evaluation to an employee. But giving
[1:11:43] them more vacation time or looking at
the work with them um makes it and and
[1:11:50] and know these are men. These are not
women. There's I think there's a
[1:11:53] difference sometimes between men and
women in terms of how they most of our
[1:11:57] guys are like I don't want to take the
vacation time because I just want to
[1:11:59] work. Women on the other hand want to
take some vacation time. So there's some
[1:12:02] differences that you juggle. But back to
what we realized was that when we looked
[1:12:07] at trying to offer some more benefits
such as vacation time, they are now
[1:12:13] utilizing it. They're now going out with
their girlfriends and they're going on a
[1:12:17] 4-day weekend. They're two, you know,
Saturday and Sunday, they're obviously
[1:12:21] off on their own. We don't work those
days, but Monday and Friday, they're
[1:12:24] getting paid for and they don't have to
stress about it. They can go enjoy some
[1:12:28] time and they come back with a really
recharged battery. Typically,
[1:12:33] benefit that comes with that is that
when they know that that they've got
[1:12:36] that um support and when their employer
appreciates what's that they you know
[1:12:42] they do. We have people that are now
five, eight, 10. I have a 22year
[1:12:48] employee with us. He's different because
it was you know different times back
[1:12:52] then. But our younger guys though that
are in their mid20s to
[1:12:57] mid30s, they're they're really enjoying
it now. They're not looking for more
[1:13:01] than four weeks because they don't want
to be gone that long. But anywhere from
[1:13:06] and we do two weeks right off the get-go
because the first week is technically
[1:13:10] you we do paid uh holidays. So whatever
days that if they fall, you get paid for
[1:13:15] that and then their second week is
actually their real vacation week that
[1:13:19] they can take off. So even though they
have two paid weeks, really only one is
[1:13:24] if they choose that they don't want to
be paid for the holidays, they can
[1:13:26] choose to do that and then take But then
they don't get paid for those holidays.
[1:13:31] Most of the time they take that pay. But
for the other part that they get that
[1:13:35] they just the retention and then the
other benefit to that keeping them here,
[1:13:40] they're not training somebody. Somebody
else new is not coming in that has
[1:13:43] learned. That's a really big big plus,
right? I mean, when you bring somebody
[1:13:48] in that has been here for us that's been
here for five years, the amount of work
[1:13:52] that they've done versus us bringing in
somebody new, it's just like, holy
[1:13:57] smokes. I have to pick up the I have to
pick up their slack because they're
[1:14:00] gone. I'm trying to train this person.
I'm not giving them the full uh benefit
[1:14:05] and satisfaction that they need to
learn. They then sometimes become
[1:14:08] frustrated to say, "Hey, you know what?
This isn't for me because you haven't
[1:14:12] been able to spend time with them and
then you're sorry because it's like, you
[1:14:16] know, I'm sorry. I didn't realize it."
That's a little different than here, but
[1:14:20] it still applies to that I think where
if we keep people
[1:14:23] here, everything just flows, right? I
It's
[1:14:29] it's a no. Well, then the only which we
added previously only clarification I
[1:14:34] think needs to be made is again it needs
to be based on their average weekly
[1:14:38] hours worked from like the previous
year. Actually we had some language in
[1:14:43] the last time the previous anniversary
year whatever. However you want it
[1:14:49] should be clarified.
[1:14:59] Um, I added in the FMLA, which I was a
little shocked you all didn't have.
[1:15:05] That's a requirement. Um, yep. And so,
and so just to clarify though, an FMLA
[1:15:13] policy is usually about 12 pages long.
You do not have a copy of that here. It
[1:15:18] should be pretty robust. Um, but in the
FMLA policy, if someone had a qualifying
[1:15:24] leave of absence, which there's a whole
host of documentation that satisfies
[1:15:28] being qualified, um, they would be using
one week of that PTO for the first part
[1:15:35] of that leave. So, that's one thing to
note, but the attorney would have to
[1:15:41] give the blessing on that policy. So,
you say please refer to the FMLA policy.
[1:15:46] specific to a township like you should
have one or is that the policy that's
[1:15:50] specific to a policy that I wrote that
you do not have that needs to go to the
[1:15:54] attorney for review just to make sure
all the eyes are dotted into reference
[1:16:01] you can you can but the federal policy
allows one of two things it allows you
[1:16:07] to tweak it a little bit you can require
your employee to use two weeks of PTO
[1:16:11] for the beginning of the FMLA or one
week and Then how you handle the FMLA
[1:16:17] communication can vary slightly based on
your preference. So I thought you were
[1:16:23] they were required to use all.
No. So usually what you do is is that
[1:16:30] you can use one week or two weeks. Those
are the one week is usually the minimum
[1:16:35] that they want to be used. But some
employers will say we'll allow you to
[1:16:39] use two weeks because it's a benefit to
the employee to get paid for that second
[1:16:43] week.
Once the FMLA kicks in, the associate
[1:16:47] has the opportunity to supplement their
pay. So they can say, "I'd like to use
[1:16:53] my PTO or I'd like not to." That's the
FMLA part. That's what covers them to
[1:16:59] say, "Not only is your job secure, but
you have a choice on whether or not you
[1:17:05] want to use your PTO time." Um, and and
that I want your attorney to review
[1:17:12] before we bless that section of
this and because what I did was is
[1:17:18] compare it to other township policies
because they're all a little different.
[1:17:21] Just um so just making sure that we have
that the previous policy did call out a
[1:17:27] personal leave. Um, and that would
basically be if they didn't qualify for
[1:17:32] the FMLA, if they did weren't just
taking a vacation time, if there was
[1:17:36] then they would have the opportunity to
apply for personal leave that is
[1:17:40] strictly granted by the leader of that
person. That's unpaid time. That's if we
[1:17:47] can if we can grant that, we can. And if
not, we we don't. So that was in the
[1:17:53] previous document, but it was that was
the only leave called out in the
[1:17:57] previous document.
[1:18:02] So all right, uh
page I think we're down to page 16, but
[1:18:09] a lot of that was crossed off with the
the PTO.
[1:18:15] Um anything else on that page? Okay,
let's go to 17.
[1:18:23] Um, just on this page, just really
quickly just called out that meal
[1:18:27] periods are provided to employees as
indicated above, but they are not a
[1:18:30] legal requirement. I really loved when
people say that. No, no, no, it's
[1:18:34] legally required. It is not. Um, but we
did add in um nursing mothers because we
[1:18:39] do have younger associates um that are
of could be any age, but just saying um
[1:18:46] and want to make sure that they know
that one of the is that we have to
[1:18:51] provide them reasonable time to pump if
needed and that we provide them a space
[1:18:56] if they would choose that isn't the
bathroom. So, wanted to make sure we
[1:19:00] called that out. Do we have such a
space?
[1:19:05] As long as we have an office that we or
even an area that we can close off,
[1:19:11] we're okay.
It could be as long as it's an area, we
[1:19:16] just have to mark it off. And it's it's
literally cover us. So that way that
[1:19:20] associate knows they could come forward
and request that. Are there mothers who
[1:19:25] have no problem pumping in the bathroom?
Absolutely. But we have to make sure
[1:19:28] that we offer it. It's fair.
Um bereavement days. I just called out
[1:19:34] kind of what is defined as immediate
family because we had that in there, but
[1:19:38] it didn't really define it. It's not
something we're probably going to
[1:19:41] request a death certificate on, but just
making sure that we note it's there.
[1:19:46] Yeah, exactly. So, uh, above that you
referenced it still says fulltime and
[1:19:51] part-time employees will be eliminated.
I thought full time employees. The only
[1:19:55] reason why I left that in is because the
full-time associates at the fire
[1:19:58] department get bereavement days if I
recall.
[1:20:02] Yes, but that's technically in the their
bargaining contract. So, I don't even
[1:20:06] know that I need it in here. I just left
it. So, you're I could take that out.
[1:20:15] All right.
[1:20:19] um employee safety. So you'll see some
duplication in this area to um what I
[1:20:27] would call like citizen public safety
which is later in this document. But
[1:20:31] it's basically just calling out that um
that you know if we have an accident or
[1:20:36] injury that we are going to um that we
are going to notify the direct manager
[1:20:42] or subsequently this would be for
employees. Um and then they're going to
[1:20:46] notify the manager that will be reported
to the supervisor. We have an injury
[1:20:50] report that they would need to complete.
Um if appropriate, we may send them to a
[1:20:54] health or to the ER. Um the township is
insured, so we would notify Mary that
[1:21:00] we've had an injury on the premises and
just want to make sure that we're
[1:21:04] creating a culture of safety in all of
our areas. Are you thinking that safety
[1:21:10] for your should you have I think that
should be attached.
[1:21:18] Yes. Um actually I have two. So there's
one that has um the parts of the body so
[1:21:26] you can kind of identify this is where
the injury occurred and it gives a
[1:21:29] little statement and then there's one
that can be completed by the manager if
[1:21:33] they witnessed it or if there was
another witness.
[1:21:36] Um just good stuff to have on hand.
Correct. Yep. They go together. Yep.
[1:21:41] Good stuff to have on hand. Um just for
us as
[1:21:46] And
[1:21:50] don't cut your finger. This scissor.
Exactly.
[1:21:55] Um, this workforce authorization, I just
deleted the whole thing because this is
[1:22:00] part of your budgeting process. So, if
you needed another associate, you're
[1:22:04] going to bring it through that venue or
bring it to some other venue. So, all
[1:22:11] right. All right. Next section, the only
thing I added was that we would um be
[1:22:16] completing a background check on our
associates that we
[1:22:20] hired. That was it there. And then um as
I mentioned inserting that evaluation
[1:22:26] form, that's why I highlighted it so
that we know that's for me to note to
[1:22:30] insert the evaluation form
there. Um took out this section on
[1:22:37] seniority because it's called out in the
section to be there. All
[1:22:45] right.
[1:22:58] fully support. However, it says if such
actions occur for termination or from
[1:23:05] previously understood that come from the
board by
[1:23:10] well this would be the grounds to bring
it to that venue. So you you guys tell
[1:23:14] me if you want that in there or if you
don't. It's not a
[1:23:17] big it's I just have seen it in other
documents, but I thought if you wanted
[1:23:21] it, you could have it. If not, it's an
easy remove. We could just leave the
[1:23:25] language as is.
Hey, if you're not doing something
[1:23:30] wrong, you shouldn't have to worry about
it. Right. Okay. So, I'll take that
[1:23:33] last.
Are you saying keep that sentence that
[1:23:36] was added or remove that?
No, I mean it can stay. Oh, if you want
[1:23:41] to remove I'm good. Either I'm saying
just if
[1:23:45] you're if you're doing what you're
supposed to be doing, you have nothing
[1:23:48] to worry about.
I was just saying legally should say
[1:23:54] something we can't actually do.
If we keep it, I would say
[1:24:00] take it up. The petition will be started
to
[1:24:04] I took it off. Um
[1:24:09] social media, same thing.
This this was so this is for this is to
[1:24:15] support us as a township and to support
in addition um not just you as the board
[1:24:22] um anyone that works for the township
appointed or not and including our fire
[1:24:26] department. Um so the the intent of the
intent is that we will use social media
[1:24:32] as a means for educating the public and
promoting a positive environment. No
[1:24:36] incident or concern is to be posted
publicly without review from the
[1:24:40] township supervisor first. And I will
give you the context of why I'm adding
[1:24:44] this. Is this Yeah. So, so let's just
say that that uh frequently I see things
[1:24:50] on Facebook and one such item would be
that there was an accident on a major
[1:24:56] freeway and a fire department posted
that that accident occurred
[1:25:02] before anyone at the township level knew
that it occurred. photos were taken. And
[1:25:07] so that was the moment where I thought
to myself, well, it would be really good
[1:25:11] to add that into this document so that
all of our associates know that we do
[1:25:15] not post things on social media because
thinking
[1:25:20] that what's to say that that scene was
set up properly? What's to say that if
[1:25:25] someone got in an accident because of
that photo, you know, just things like I
[1:25:29] don't I don't disagree with that at all.
So, however, you're saying that
[1:25:36] Facebook account. I want to post that
accident. You're saying that I can't do
[1:25:42] that without if you're posting it on
behalf of the township. So, I can
[1:25:45] clarify that if you're posting it as
trusty getser, that's different because
[1:25:50] you're acting on behalf of the township.
But if you're posting it like hey
[1:25:54] family, I saw this this weekend. Yes,
that is your that's your personal. We
[1:25:58] don't have any authority over that. It
should be clarified. That's how I read
[1:26:02] it. Okay. So I can change that. I think
this speaks more to the employees
[1:26:06] though. Yeah. You know, like Well, so
the same thing though. You're an elected
[1:26:09] official. I can't tell you what you can
and can't post. Katie wants to post.
[1:26:13] Everybody here is an
idiot. You're saying she can't do that.
[1:26:17] No, you take So you take Well, no. Take
an employee policy where I work. Take
[1:26:22] the policy where I work. I literally
sign something that if I have any
[1:26:26] defamation of the organization I work
for that is grounds for termination. I
[1:26:30] am not allowed to talk about work. I'm
not to pictures about work the if it's
[1:26:35] in a positive nature. Yes. If I'm
saying, "Hey, we're hiring. Come work
[1:26:39] for us." The good thing is I would never
do that because I work for a great
[1:26:42] organization. But they they realize that
there are people out there and it is
[1:26:46] rounds for a lawsuit. So in our world,
it's a little different because you are
[1:26:50] elected and appointed and all that good
stuff. However, our fire department is
[1:26:56] hired. I mean, these are Yeah. I guess
another example would be the they would
[1:27:00] never do this. are wonderful human
beings, but someone put in a permit for
[1:27:03] something and they post online, can you
believe this city at this address? They
[1:27:06] didn't take care of the property.
Something like that is not okay. Just
[1:27:11] because again, they would never do it.
All I'm only bringing it up because I
[1:27:15] just want to make sure we put it legal
and enforceable. I don't think I can as
[1:27:20] elected officials, I can't tell you what
you can and can't do. I mean, I can't
[1:27:24] you don't have to get approval from me
because you're, you know, you're my
[1:27:26] peer. So, I mean, I think this refers to
more of the employees.
[1:27:31] And we can have the attorney double
check this section. I highlighted it
[1:27:34] just to make sure.
No, you can take on that battle
[1:27:38] yourself.
Oh, it's in here. So, you'll get to
[1:27:42] that.
Um, all right. So, education just took
[1:27:47] out the fact because this was saying
that we won't grant time to employees
[1:27:51] for studying for exams or class prep,
but we would if it's related to work.
[1:27:56] So, we just took that out. I mean,
they're not going to be doing the
[1:27:59] homework here
regardless. Um, page
[1:28:05] 21. Anything on page 21?
[1:28:10] Page 22.
[1:28:23] 23. Tell me if I'm going too fast.
[1:28:29] 24
[1:28:33] says you were
[1:28:37] removed work out subject to discharge.
Yeah, that's not legal to say that. So
[1:28:45] this
um one second
[1:28:52] I was referring to more like a wildat
where slow down. I think that's really
[1:28:57] language before the CBA.
I think that's before like the CBA came
[1:29:03] into
place slow down thing which is wild.
[1:29:09] We'll double check it. I mean,
yeah,
[1:29:15] it was removed. So, I guess I never
really paid much attention to it, but
[1:29:18] now that it's removed, I wonder why.
Yeah.
[1:29:24] Down below the um visitor and taxpayer
incident. Same similar documentation to
[1:29:29] the employee, but just making sure that
we're noting that if any visitor or
[1:29:33] taxpayer has an incident or accident on
any of our premises that we will be
[1:29:37] notified and that we'll do and we'll
have an incident report. We didn't have
[1:29:41] that.
The under the next section is the who's
[1:29:45] authorized to talk to the attorney.
Um I agree with everyone that's
[1:29:50] listened. However, the
village they communicate I believe
[1:29:58] through I was wanted us all to think
about what is the best way to contact
[1:30:04] the
attorney. I've thought before I don't
[1:30:09] email that much when I do I definitely
copy the court. So I think if anything
[1:30:14] we should have to copy the court for
records. However, it may be beneficial
[1:30:20] to even
close have the like email the clerk. I
[1:30:27] could draft the email and send it to
Mary. Mary, can you send this to the
[1:30:31] attorney and then she would maybe copy
me when she sent it to prevent dup? How
[1:30:37] how do we prevent duplicate
communication? trying to figure out is
[1:30:40] there a way to because I might call or
email even if I copied the clerk. Okay,
[1:30:47] before we get a response, Steve does the
same thing. He copies the we all ask the
[1:30:50] same question before we could get
responses and say, "Oh, you know, Mary
[1:30:55] would get a response and maybe
distribute to the whole board, but we're
[1:30:59] all asking potentially there's time
especially if it's a verbal because
[1:31:03] somebody calls now that's physically
time before they can they hang up. I got
[1:31:07] to talk to
Is there something that should we put
[1:31:11] language in here regarding that
minimize duplicate?
[1:31:18] I don't know how you would put it in and
I don't know that anybody abuses it. I
[1:31:21] know what you're getting at but then
we're back to Well, it's not so much
[1:31:27] abuse, but it was because somebody
didn't communicate their question
[1:31:33] in a timely manner. So, how would you
how do you put in something though that
[1:31:39] I would say all communicate. You could
say all communication would go through
[1:31:44] the clerk. Now, it wouldn't be me
saying, "Mary, can you draft an email?"
[1:31:48] It would be me going, "Here's my
question, Mary. Could you forward this
[1:31:51] to the attorney?" And then she might
say, "Steve already asked that question.
[1:31:55] When I get the response, I'll send out."
But I think you're asking I I see. But
[1:32:00] then you're asking Mary to take on more
work that she has to remember or forgot
[1:32:06] that I had already asked that and I
would refer back to saying that as a
[1:32:11] board we all have the ability to contact
there's really that's almost a
[1:32:19] I guess part of our we all have hired
the attorney we all fire the attorney we
[1:32:24] are all elected there's no if you put
something in here there's nothing you
[1:32:30] know about this
yeah I think it's one of those things
[1:32:34] where we could just all emails to the
attorney get CC to you. I would say at a
[1:32:39] minimum that should be the case for
records. I'm okay with it. I'm just tell
[1:32:44] saying that we're trying to put
something into place that really though
[1:32:46] is not enforceable. I'm not looking to
abuse it. I don't think anybody here is,
[1:32:51] but I'm just saying that you're putting
something in potentially into verbiage
[1:32:55] that really by law you can't you can't
say one of us five could not all call up
[1:33:01] and make the same. It would be dumb. I'm
not trying to say that.
[1:33:07] Well, I think the thing is I think
there's enough of the communication that
[1:33:11] we don't have that situation or so I
guess technically if there's
[1:33:17] no there's no
dialogue technically I could email the
[1:33:22] attorney and copy the whole board as
long as you don't respond.
[1:33:28] So that might be a way to in the times
that I've communicated I've definitely
[1:33:34] tried to
As soon as I got a response, I tried to
[1:33:36] send something to the whole board so
they knew that I called. I think rather
[1:33:40] than doing it, I think rather than
spelling it out, I think just the fact
[1:33:43] of knowing that we openly here have all
said we're going to do our best to
[1:33:48] communicate with one another, which I
think has been done for the last four
[1:33:51] months now very well to rather than
putting something into place that says
[1:33:55] it that really can't constrict us from
doing that. Does that make sense?
[1:34:03] Okay. I don't even think we should add
the shoulder. I think a common courtesy
[1:34:08] is I'm only looking to not overburden
Mary from one more item and it doesn't
[1:34:13] seem like a lot, but if there were five
emails, it's five more things that she
[1:34:18] that Mary has to make sure that she gets
to then uh you know pass it along to
[1:34:23] everybody else. I think if you make a a
phone call or an email to the attorney,
[1:34:28] you want to send it out to everybody. I
don't think there's anything wrong with
[1:34:30] that. You just know mentally that you're
going to do that. you're going to
[1:34:33] provide that to your best ability to
confirm it with some of the things more
[1:34:39] ZBA stuff like when you're on ZBA and
you want that it's going to be more
[1:34:42] specific to what you're doing and we're
not asking because you're on the ZBA
[1:34:46] doing that
work like me I do a lot of stuff
[1:34:49] enforcement I just back and forth
attorney
[1:34:53] ask questions yeah I'll think of
questions that are
[1:35:00] one of the things that's really really
nice is
[1:35:02] She's sitting right there. At every
meeting they're there. So, a lot of that
[1:35:06] gives us that not you. You're over here.
No, that is one of the benefits of it as
[1:35:11] we
not as much doing that because the
[1:35:15] attorney's here. I still No offense to
Christine, but I
[1:35:19] still feel that that's not going to be a
solution because obviously we had to
[1:35:24] discuss
[1:35:28] meeting and I still feel like this is
very
[1:35:32] I feel like we're not expecting can't be
expected to have answers on the spot.
[1:35:38] Not entirely supporting that attorney
being here.
[1:35:44] What I would do is I would just
[1:35:49] send
[1:35:58] you good conversation.
All right. Um, page
[1:36:08] 25,
[1:36:14] 26, page 27. Just so you know, that the
items that are marked under the
[1:36:19] assessor, um,
Kylie Kylie, Kylie, Kylie, Sky, I always
[1:36:25] have to like do that. Um,
Kylie updated this based on their
[1:36:30] contract verbage. So, this is align with
what's in their contract. There's
[1:36:34] nothing different. So, she took it right
from that
[1:36:38] playbook. And that goes into page
[1:36:43] 28. All
right. Page
[1:36:49] 29. Page 29. We just that what's in blue
is just aligning the verbage that was
[1:36:57] That's what's Yeah. Yeah. Sorry.
Yeah. It just aligns with what was in
[1:37:04] the other um associates.
I guess I see the word should
[1:37:32] Page 20, I mean page 30.
[1:37:41] Page 31.
[1:37:45] Good
[1:37:47] stuff. Page 32. So, this is just
standard langage. I didn't change
[1:37:53] anything in here because Just normal
[1:38:02] verbage
[1:38:10] 334 highlighted that no expense vouchers
will be on it that was eliminated.
[1:38:19] So just to be clear what that's saying
is expense vouchers from previous
[1:38:24] budget will be
[1:38:38] I know what it said before tonight said
no will be honored from previous years
[1:38:45] being removed I see what you're saying
now that
[1:38:48] it's saying no but you know what's
interesting it wasn't it was not um was
[1:38:53] in here that wasn't honored. So, we're
we're just taking it out, but it's not
[1:38:58] going to happen.
Technically though, if
[1:39:03] somebody shame on them, they don't turn
it in
[1:39:07] timely doesn't mean that they legally
can't. I know we had the problem. I get
[1:39:13] it. But I'm just so I think it is
probably
[1:39:18] even hope that doesn't happen. We were
paying
[1:39:23] Seven months later,
right? No. How do you And how do you
[1:39:27] ever And how do you justify it? How do
you I almost would even be willing that
[1:39:32] you need to have your expense turned in
with 30 days. Yeah. Something that says
[1:39:37] that you have to have it in and if you
don't that you you snooze, you lose.
[1:39:42] We're not going to accept a bill. that
when we get to that
[1:39:45] I know but I just that I would rather
see an actual time rather than not
[1:39:50] anything so that we can't just bring it
back
[1:39:56] unless you brought it here and you
explained to the board hey here's a
[1:39:59] circumstance what happened then the
board could decide if they were going to
[1:40:04] change your opinion on it but at least
have something
[1:40:13] Do you want me to add that in?
Do you think it should go there? This is
[1:40:17] for authorization. Is there like a
different section where we would put
[1:40:23] uh reimbursement or anything like that?
[1:40:29] Do you think this is
the should we add it under
[1:40:41] see there's there's a expenditure
authorization
[1:40:46] there's under page 41 there's
expenditure authorization references
[1:40:52] professional services travel membership
might do that might be
[1:41:05] Actually, there's expense reimbursement
section couple pages later. Page
[1:41:09] 44 right here. Personal
expenses. That's what we're referring
[1:41:14] to, right? So, I think that's where we
should add page 44.
[1:41:26] So, I would I guess I would go a little
bit further than say 30. And reason I
[1:41:31] say this because if you did for a
personal expense, you potentially could
[1:41:36] charge it on your own credit card,
right? So, if you charge it on your own
[1:41:40] credit card, you got to get reimbured.
You at least got to wait for your
[1:41:43] statement to come through or you have
a just to say 45 days. You have a
[1:41:50] receipt, but that's fine, too. But you
You better have a receipt. Not just
[1:41:54] here's my statement right here. See
this? I just meant if you had if you
[1:41:58] gave yourself just instead of a 30day or
45 day just a little bit so that you had
[1:42:03] that statement if there was if there was
a question you could bring that
[1:42:06] statement.
Good thing is you might be doing
[1:42:10] something over a period of time. You're
going to get some receipts.
[1:42:20] So you said we said 45. So under you
could get yours
[1:42:28] credit for me. Are these are these
expenses different than the expenses
[1:42:33] that they're getting reimbured for here?
Um actually so now that
[1:42:38] Yeah. So do you want that just to do you
want me to update just that to 45 days?
[1:42:42] So it already says in here
that expension revers form must be to
[1:42:48] the clerk's office. two weeks of the
date of the expense.
[1:42:54] Well, you know what? There are items
that have never been used. They've been
[1:42:57] in here
for someone's reasoning that they needed
[1:43:02] it.
I personally come with 30 days. Right
[1:43:06] now, it says two weeks. 45 days, but
maybe change it to 30 days or 45 days.
[1:43:12] Okay. Either way,
30 days. 30 to 45 days.
[1:43:17] 45 days. We can't have I say 45. Monica
says 45
[1:43:22] within 45 days of the date of the date
of the Y. I'm assuming that would
[1:43:29] exclude the end of our fiscal year.
Well, we already eliminated that. So
[1:43:34] that's correct.
The expense happens on March 30th.
[1:43:42] You're not going to have you're not
going to turn the date in the next day.
[1:43:45] No, but wouldn't you at least want a
form to you saying I had an expense so
[1:43:50] we can account for it so that way we
know it was a costly normally there's a
[1:43:56] month period that you're getting
expenses right
[1:44:01] you would get you get expenses in April
that get charged to the previous year oh
[1:44:07] you do okay
I mean that happens okay all right we'll
[1:44:12] just leave
so we're going now we're going back
[1:44:18] 45 days. 45 45 days. 45 days. And are we
still going to page? Sorry. Page 35.
[1:44:26] Okay.
[1:44:29] Well, we finished line item 7.1. We
should be at a Yes. bill listings,
[1:44:36] warrant reports.
I like that basic
[1:44:52] Is 150 enough to marry for petty cash?
[1:45:00] Okay.
[1:45:11] 37. Page 38.
[1:45:15] This one we just changed to what the
current practice is um in talking with
[1:45:20] Mary just that she provides the
information to them.
[1:45:27] Shouldn't even say current practice the
practice. This is the way it's
[1:45:34] page 39 that
um the transfer authority that was
[1:45:42] worded
for me to understand.
[1:45:53] Oh, unless when a transfer is made
within a department. So if you're
[1:45:57] transferring money,
sorry. Yes.
[1:46:03] So
[1:46:07] maybe unless instead of unless it could
be accept except when transfer is made.
[1:46:20] Yes. And then the expenditure controls
um just matches what the policy actually
[1:46:26] wrote from the fire department. Yeah.
This is the fire department. So it's a
[1:46:30] little picture. I was a little confused
on page 41. There's the
[1:46:36] quotes for general purp purchases. So, I
felt like there was some redundancy or
[1:46:42] maybe I misunderstood something
[1:46:47] there. And then
[1:46:55] I have a question on page 40.
[1:47:01] We approved this policy
and 40 page
[1:47:09] 40. What's the difference between a
quote and a bid? So I almost feel like
[1:47:16] a bids it's something you do not well
it's not in here.
[1:47:22] It says from purchase of 5 to 10,000
[1:47:30] must it doesn't
actually specify
[1:47:38] but you're spelling it out. Aren't you a
g? So the way it's written though
[1:47:45] purchases are 1,000 to 5,000.
There's there's differences but to me we
[1:47:51] They could both say quotes for those two
sections. It's a bid. I think like Chris
[1:47:57] said is more formal as far as
advertising
[1:48:01] like a fire truck. It's semantics. I get
it, but I feel like it's
[1:48:06] confusing. We could change it
[1:48:11] instead of saying bids we should call
it. So it's consistent with the previous
[1:48:17] threshold with the other.
more of a formal process. So yeah,
[1:48:22] person.
So the five to 10 is a written quote.
[1:48:28] Okay.
[1:48:38] Yes, it is.
I copy and paste. So then it says bids
[1:48:44] later in that same
[1:48:52] Do you need to have that in a separate
meeting or can you approve that in this
[1:48:55] meeting?
[1:49:01] I guess because I think that we should
also add
[1:49:08] everything.
[1:49:17] Yeah. And then there's 10 or
more
[1:49:25] beyond should have different thresholds
for us.
[1:49:29] Well, when we get to
this kind
[1:49:37] one is one policy for everybody. I think
Monica doesn't think so. No. So we
[1:49:41] should have that discussion for the
township. We don't get the kind of money
[1:49:47] gets
[1:49:53] 10,000 because you have to do a seal bid
with it. Those are just thresholds on
[1:49:58] how you purchase things.
So the way this fire policy is
[1:50:09] between00
requires must be the supervisor for
[1:50:16] approval as well as either the township
or the treasure prior to the purchase.
[1:50:22] And then purchases from 5 to 10. It
still quotes but it requires board app.
[1:50:37] So really we're it's still requiring two
[1:50:44] and any of us can say you know what I
want to go to the board I want to take
[1:50:47] the board that's going to be more of a
unique thing of something that I look at
[1:50:51] that as it's not really an emergency but
it's urgent and it falls in that
[1:50:55] threshold so yeah we can do it but most
like Those things I would bring back
[1:50:59] anyways.
So right now remember that was for a
[1:51:04] furnace that had to be
[1:51:09] that's what that was used for the way
the policy
[1:51:18] reads
$2500 which is really low.
[1:51:29] So is that all highlighted just get
removed?
[1:51:32] Well
41 question.
[1:51:36] Yeah, I just highlighted it to show what
descriptive. So to me if we want to kind
[1:51:41] of finish that discussion we have the
general fund purchases
[1:51:47] but
possibly because right now we have
[1:51:51] purchase thresholds. We can eliminate
this whole section just to one. Yeah. So
[1:51:56] I can go I can highlight that whole
section take out all the B here saying Y
[1:52:09] well do
we again we put that in trying to solve
[1:52:14] some problem.
[1:52:20] So on page 40 it says over
$10,000
[1:52:26] notice must be published in a newspaper
at least five days prior to the final
[1:52:31] date of
submitting.
[1:52:35] So I think that that should be changed
to
[1:52:47] midnight including you know we have
local newspaper. I was always the one
[1:52:52] posted on so I was
[1:52:59] put you guys think we should change this
to say that and then five days is pretty
[1:53:04] short.
[1:53:13] Do you want it to say and or
[1:53:20] I think bid should be required. I think
we should not use the term or the the
[1:53:25] company name because it's subject to
change because it used to be municip.
[1:53:28] So I would just put
[1:53:33] soliciting all measures.
[1:53:40] How about all current
allur bid platforms? Well,
[1:53:47] he's would something like the township
utilized uh
[1:53:57] well the current
just put that down if they change it
[1:54:00] we'll change the procedure
the current platform
[1:54:05] and then if they change we'll change the
procedure whatever the current platform
[1:54:08] is
going to be utilizing yeah I think they
[1:54:12] need to use my experience they need to
use depending on the
[1:54:18] not necessarily using the paper. So if
it's
[1:54:23] uh you want to use the paper, but if
it's to put up stadium lights, it's
[1:54:30] probably not maybe there's a contractor
that's going to look in the voice.
[1:54:39] Yeah. So I would shy away from saying
and maybe
[1:54:45] maybe
[1:54:48] I just put what's that I just put
published I just must be published with
[1:54:53] how many days is there anything posted
the paper though
[1:54:59] just well there are some there are some
instances where you are required like
[1:55:05] yeah I mean you could
put any
[1:55:10] and any required platforms
[1:55:14] required something like
Yes, I know like for fire grants we had
[1:55:19] to put in the
[1:55:23] paper days
[1:55:35] 10 days.
[1:55:38] 10 business days.
Yeah. 10 business days.
[1:55:54] Okay.
So, so on
[1:56:01] I think so there's these
exception. So any board member
[1:56:08] department so before above C
Township board may authorize the
[1:56:13] execution of contract without competitor
but I feel like that
[1:56:17] should potentially stay
in
[1:56:23] somewhere at the end of the emergency
page 40 because what it's saying is if
[1:56:30] it's a sole
source it gives you example.
[1:56:43] Yeah, I know we have that
[1:56:47] Yeah, there is the
[1:56:57] emergency on page 42. Do you think we
should be keeping
[1:57:07] Because then you would say
seems like previously.
[1:57:13] What's that? I said seems like
everything was fixed previously. So
[1:57:16] nothing should be broke.
[1:57:21] I I know I've run into this plenty of
times where you got to say I get three
[1:57:25] quotes because the soul source provider
using this and it's the only comes from
[1:57:30] this is the Michigan distributor for
this product.
[1:57:35] So and and below that emergency section
one thing I did note is that it's a
[1:57:39] working document and can be updated or
amended. And the reason that I put that
[1:57:44] below this particular section is because
of what you said. What do you say?
[1:57:48] Yeah. Just because things change so
quickly with the environment, like
[1:57:54] thinking about the fire industry and how
they have such big changes with their
[1:57:57] equipment right now, that would change
how this works.
[1:58:04] But
I'm
[1:58:12] reminding really intended for just the
fire department. to change that. Oh
[1:58:17] yeah, the city fire chief.
[1:58:23] Mentions the fire department, fire
chief. So who would be writing the
[1:58:26] report if you were doing the purchasing?
Yeah. Under emergency purchasing, it
[1:58:31] actually spells out fire department fire
department or citizens because it was a
[1:58:36] fire department. We should probably
change that.
[1:58:40] So I could just take out the health
safety or welfare of of the of the
[1:58:46] township or
[1:58:51] citizen detailed report shall be written
by the
[1:58:55] or just get rid of that
[1:59:01] purchaser purchaser.
[1:59:15] may not work because
[1:59:19] we're the only who's authorized to make
that purchase
[1:59:25] supervisor authority to temporary
suspend
[1:59:30] but then it would also bever The
delegates are right. So supervisor, fire
[1:59:35] chief or delegates.
[1:59:42] So I could leave it
[1:59:47] supervisor forward to the superallen.
[2:00:00] You could just
say forward to
[2:00:13] it. All right.
So, just to be clear on
[2:00:23] 41's
[2:00:26] direction right here.
that whole section right
[2:00:33] but again did we decide do you guys
think we should also remove
[2:00:39] the without competitive the exceptions
that's 9 through
[2:00:46] 13 don't think we need any that's fine
if you guys want to eliminate because it
[2:00:51] kinduses it that's fine would still come
before approval so discussion
[2:00:59] all right So then there's that emergency
purchases. Is that redundant as well?
[2:01:02] That's redundant as well.
Take out C.
[2:01:07] I would think Jim based upon your in
your It's a good question to bring up,
[2:01:12] but eliminating it cleans it up, makes
it more simplified. However, it's a
[2:01:17] living document. If all of a sudden
there was a a string of issues or
[2:01:24] concerns, I think then there would
probably more than easy to bring board
[2:01:28] level to say, "Okay, we need to we need
to revisit." Yeah. Anywhere in there,
[2:01:34] but somewhere in this particular area to
to fix that problem. I think if you're
[2:01:38] taking this amount of time to go through
this, I agree with you, it has to be
[2:01:41] used. So if you find that there's a
problem, you should be
[2:01:52] purchasing there. If all of a sudden
there was a string of issues, okay, hey,
[2:01:56] you know what? Next meeting we're going
to bring this up and we're going to
[2:01:59] revisit the policy procedure manual
because we had three instances where I
[2:02:05] don't think there was appropriate action
and we we address it and we by going
[2:02:12] back and visiting this and changing
that.
[2:02:19] All
right. Anything else on
[2:02:23] 42? All right. What about
[2:02:29] 43 4?
[2:02:34] This one just calling out that for
travel and reimbursement um for general
[2:02:38] fund and fire department they must
receive preapproval for out of town
[2:02:42] travel that require an overnight stays.
[2:03:04] They're very those are important
[2:03:09] and the last person she'll check to see
the coffee or coffee maker they all go
[2:03:15] off by themselves. Oh my gosh. This was
totally
[2:03:24] working.
[2:03:31] This was totally attacking.
That's what this whole paragraph was.
[2:03:36] Well, there was an employee that I know.
I'm just saying this was a total
[2:03:41] This was both parties.
[2:03:46] All
right. Changes. Um we did make some
[2:03:50] changes to the um property. So, just
indicating that um all township
[2:03:59] employees will keep
township property in a secure manner.
[2:04:03] Keys, alarm codes, phones, blah blah
blah. Um, you'll read that all property
[2:04:08] um is dispensed by the supervisor and or
designate. Once given to the employee,
[2:04:12] it's their responsibility. If it's m
misplaced or stolen, we need to be
[2:04:16] notified immediately. A replacement may
be issued. Didn't say shall because it's
[2:04:21] not a given.
Um, as it relates to keys or alarm
[2:04:25] codes, if the supervisor has reason to
believe that the key is um alarm code
[2:04:30] may have been used unauthorized,
um, new locks, new codes can be
[2:04:37] implemented. Pretty standard stuff
here. Um, okay. Township documents. So,
[2:04:45] we added some stuff in this section. So,
um, that's the next page. Sorry. So, we
[2:04:50] added that all township employees will
ensure that township documents are kept
[2:04:54] in a secure manner and that sensitive
information will be kept confidential.
[2:04:58] Documents should never be left in locked
or unlocked vehicles or out for the
[2:05:02] public
view.
[2:05:05] Um, the one thing that we did learn
yesterday is is we need to add
[2:05:10] authorized personnel onto our doors. So,
that's something that we'll work on
[2:05:15] adding and it will every door Yes. Um
what do you mean? Uh to the actual
[2:05:24] doors.
[2:05:28] Yes. Trouble by wanting.
This is a common thing nowadays
[2:05:33] apparently. Yes. Because it's all public
information. So unless we have it noted
[2:05:37] that it's authorized personnel.
Yes.
[2:05:43] Just the office. If they do not
people in their phones. Yeah.
[2:05:57] Yes. Um cyber security. So it is the
responsibility of all township employees
[2:06:01] to ensure that their emails and
electronic documents are stored in a
[2:06:04] compliant manner. Um making sure that
passwords for email and other software
[2:06:08] are never shared and should be kept in a
safe and secure place. Employees are
[2:06:12] cautious with their email and not
clicking on something that they are
[2:06:15] unfamiliar with. And if they receive
those emails, we're going to make sure
[2:06:18] that they know that they need to call
the IT company immediately and the clerk
[2:06:22] or doesn't be notified immediately. Um,
it's important that we make sure that
[2:06:28] all of our associates are updated on
this just with the cyber security issues
[2:06:32] that are existing in the environment.
Um, that's a tough one. Easy to write,
[2:06:38] but tough one. Well, there's a couple of
things that are not in this document
[2:06:42] from a learning that we had yesterday.
So, there was a
[2:06:46] um township, local township that was
that they had a cyber attack and they
[2:06:50] were hacked and held ransom for I think
she said three weeks. Um there is some
[2:06:54] education that we can implement for all
of our employees including the fire
[2:06:58] department because they use the
computers pretty frequently. Um
[2:07:02] and I have the name in my notes. Um it's
a company that will send out like kind
[2:07:07] of fishing emails to us to to help us to
test us and to educate us on it. The
[2:07:13] newest um scam that they were talking
about, which I've experienced in work,
[2:07:17] is um you'll receive a voicemail to your
to your email and you'll say you've
[2:07:23] received a voicemail and it's not. It's
actually it's a way in. Um but one thing
[2:07:29] we'll be talking about in light of this
is making sure our cyber security is up
[2:07:32] to date, making sure we have the
multiffactor authentication. That's what
[2:07:36] I meant
by they're tricky. So it's easy to get
[2:07:43] I was like, "Oh, did you send me an
email?" Don't open that. That's not for
[2:07:48] me. Well, the Google shared do or the um
Outlook shared documents. So, it's
[2:07:54] making sure that when you receive that
email that the extension on the email is
[2:07:58] accurate. So, I people get emails from
me all the time. Lori wants to update
[2:08:02] this was one that the township had that
was talking. We would like to update
[2:08:06] your direct deposit. They got the person
got a phone call. Hi, Susie. This is
[2:08:11] Mary calling from um from Arita Township
wanting to update your direct deposit
[2:08:16] information. Just want to verify your
bank account number. Thankfully, the
[2:08:20] person knew that you like that role
would never call them, but we need to do
[2:08:25] a good job of educating all of our
employees that that's not something,
[2:08:36] right? Most of the townships are moving
to like an like you have a process, you
[2:08:40] follow your process. That's not even in
here, but we'll get there. Um, so term
[2:08:45] end, this was added. You guys, you tell
me if you'd like it. Just that um upon
[2:08:50] the end of of your term or the end of
employment, whether voluntary or
[2:08:54] involuntary, a proper handoff is to
occur occur when appropriate. Emails and
[2:08:59] documents are property of the township
and are not to be destroyed or deleted
[2:09:03] during this period. No documents are to
be copied or shared with self or anyone
[2:09:09] outside of the standing employees or
incumbents.
[2:09:14] So I have a question just about that.
For example, using my iPad that the
[2:09:20] township one. Yes.
It only keeps so many emails and then it
[2:09:25] just
automatically deletes them but they're
[2:09:29] not there. That was me. It might be
archiving. So, but it's still backed up
[2:09:33] though through
it. So, they're always there. I'm just
[2:09:38] saying that on the settings I've tried
to go through because I've noticed them
[2:09:40] like a second. I've only got stuff for
like three weeks. Yeah. But they're I
[2:09:46] haven't deleted them. I'm just asking
though that they're obviously backed up.
[2:09:49] Yeah. Through there. And it's just a
matter of what it shows. We're going to
[2:09:53] schedule a meeting with the IT company
to talk about what their backup process
[2:09:56] is. So, we'll verify that. But for sure,
um But I do think it is backed up
[2:10:02] because we backed up some Oops. I'm
pretty sure. Um, and then just put in
[2:10:08] there that, you know, violation of the
above code could result in litigation
[2:10:13] because I don't even know if that needs
to be called out, but just wanted you to
[2:10:17] know that.
All right, next page.
[2:10:22] Um, well, we removed the long distance
phone calls.
[2:10:27] [Music]
Um, oh my goodness. And
[2:10:33] um, we removed the
uh, computer
[2:10:40] policy here. So, we might have a
separate computer policy, but we don't
[2:10:44] need
And then, um, the emergency repairs fall
[2:10:49] into the other category. So, we're all
set there.
[2:10:55] All right.
questions on page
[2:11:01] 48. Okay. And then what about 49?
So positions on the Z board appeals are
[2:11:09] recommended by the town
supervisor planning commission are
[2:11:13] appointed by the township super. So
recently the attorney clarified that
[2:11:17] anybody on the township board could
recommend somebody for the ZVA.
[2:11:26] So heard you saying that you want to
change. So only the supervisor. No,
[2:11:31] that's why it uses recommended basically
it's the process that the supervisor
[2:11:35] recommends it. Bring it to the board.
You guys say no, we want this guy. Then
[2:11:38] it's a conversation. It basically just
starts the process of who's going to be
[2:11:41] the other one is actually the planning
commission is actually appointed by
[2:11:46] approval. I just think that that should
we're looking to reiterate
[2:11:51] the law. I guess I would It should say
or recommended by a township board
[2:11:58] member and appointed by the board of
trustees. That's how I would
[2:12:04] even like practice to be the supervisor
makes the recommendation. I think
[2:12:09] legally anybody should say that this is
just basically put something in there
[2:12:14] how the process starts and I say I want
you know so John to do it and everyone
[2:12:19] says no and then you say well I want Bob
to do it and everyone says yeah. So even
[2:12:23] like technically even the planning
commission I appointed but it still Oh
[2:12:26] yeah that's that's what it says
oh so it says appointed there so that
[2:12:32] might be incorrect too then I I appoint
them but you have to prove it so as to
[2:12:36] prove it yes so I I think that it should
say recommended by for this
[2:12:45] for recommended by the township board
member
[2:12:50] and approved by the board of trustes And
then the next one should be
[2:12:55] planning recommended by the time of
supervisor approved or appointed. Maybe
[2:13:01] you want to call it point but the
languages are
[2:13:04] consistent. Do you want me to double
check with her because I wrote what she
[2:13:08] said when she was here. I'm pretty sure
it was in the minutes but I I can double
[2:13:13] check. Bob Bob was here when
him. That's him. Do you want me to just
[2:13:19] double check? Double check. I don't
think that's I think that should be I
[2:13:23] have the MTA book too. It actually
spells out. Yeah, I thought that's where
[2:13:27] I but I'll double check it for sure.
It's in green highlighted. Um I just
[2:13:32] didn't the dates that's just for me
because we have to decide when this is
[2:13:36] approved and then obviously uh just the
acknowledgement. So people will
[2:13:41] acknowledge this. We'll make sure that
people get it. If there are any changes
[2:13:45] then they will be resent out. And then
the um only change that will on the
[2:13:50] organizational chart is making sure that
we're adding in the bookkeeper and
[2:13:55] making sure we're including the right
position. So, making sure that that's
[2:13:59] all corrected. Oh, look at that. Jim,
you and I are left out.
[2:14:03] You're just Would you like some
I'm just saying there's no other sub
[2:14:09] lines below us. So, we're the one
where we're under township. No.
[2:14:22] I will happily share two trustees.
[2:14:27] Um, one thing I would really like to do
is if you go back on page 15 and it's
[2:14:31] because, you know, we have employees in
place now under a the time off request.
[2:14:35] If we'd agreed to that language, I would
like to see if we could possibly make
[2:14:39] that active too. Yes. Just because we
have these employees now for a few
[2:14:43] months now. And so, we really need to
make it active in line with the Well,
[2:14:50] that part. Yeah. Just just a everything
under a of a take us that long to bring
[2:14:56] this back to actually
the the verbiage is we agreed. We
[2:15:02] changed the verbiage before we needed
it, right? Yeah. Yeah. So, making sure
[2:15:05] that um that they this would be the
acknowledgement that they do have a
[2:15:09] combined time off bank that is for their
vacation and their ESTA time and we will
[2:15:15] have a tracking mechanism because they
have to request the time off. So the
[2:15:18] approval of just that uh that section
with the law and the fact that so we can
[2:15:24] say to them hey we can have some time
off
[2:15:32] request
[2:15:36] support.
[2:15:42] Yes.
[2:15:46] Yes.
And I should have asked this for but the
[2:15:50] only change we had in there was the
clarification of it's based on their
[2:15:55] which really they haven't acred enough
any vacation in anyway. So one of the
[2:16:00] things that's in here that I realized I
didn't say out loud and it's in here is
[2:16:04] that they will be given this time in two
increments during that first year. So
[2:16:09] it's not like this week we're going to
be frontloading their bank with two
[2:16:13] weeks of vacation time and as they're
going to be given it two increments. So,
[2:16:18] one will come in April, one will come in
November. So, I may have missed. So,
[2:16:23] they don't have one year of service in
yet. So, you're saying the intention is
[2:16:27] they actually they're going to receive
vacation time now even though they're
[2:16:32] not here for a year. Yes. So, so it's a
PTO. It should be clear. Am I the only
[2:16:38] one that misunderstood that? Oh, you're
thinking it should be zero year zero,
[2:16:42] right? Yes. So, it is the intent that in
that first year they would given
[2:16:46] vacation time. I can tell
you dissatisf
[2:17:04] um I don't think that you're wrong with
what you're saying. I would tell you
[2:17:08] that I think again that from all my
years of being in business and what I
[2:17:12] learned from where I was at before to
where I'm at now, you have learn. You
[2:17:16] have had to learn to adapt and change
things
[2:17:20] to I say be a part of the new
generation. There's things that I still
[2:17:24] don't like that I I disagree that I butt
heads with, but you know what? I don't
[2:17:29] want to retrain
somebody maybe
[2:17:33] clarify some sort of a clarification on
what first year service mean. So I can
[2:17:38] just put years of service zero to zero
to to three. So that way that way you
[2:17:43] know it's 0 to three from the beginning
you'll be given this time. Um
[2:17:50] if somebody started now and and had a
wedding in July they could utilize it
[2:17:54] right and coming here they're knowing
that they're that they have that
[2:17:58] opportunity to have it effective
immediately. That to me is more of a
[2:18:02] perk of like you know what I like that I
don't have to be there a year. if they
[2:18:07] you know what that's the gamble that if
you do do that and all of a sudden they
[2:18:10] take that and they quit in August okay
we didn't get a year out of them but you
[2:18:15] know what we may have learned something
about when we interview the next person
[2:18:19] that comes in there or they were just
that type of an employee that did what
[2:18:23] they did and again nice thing is we're
not back filling so there's you know
[2:18:27] that cost of overtime cost
and it really does come down to the
[2:18:33] accountability piece you know I can't
stress that
[2:18:36] when it when when you have whether it's
just the few associates that we have or
[2:18:41] even us that are appointed there is an
expectation that you're holding us
[2:18:46] accountable to the work that we're doing
and if you're not doing that that will
[2:18:49] be when you see these things are abused
um that accountability piece and I I
[2:18:55] can't stress it enough because sometimes
people think that they don't want to
[2:18:58] hold people accountable because it's
more punitive in nature but when you
[2:19:02] don't hold people accountable the ones
that are naturally accountable see it
[2:19:07] like as punitive to them like hey I'm
doing my job and you're not you're not
[2:19:10] holding this person accountable so
luckily we'll hopefully have a lot of
[2:19:15] selfacountability
so you think this is something we can
[2:19:17] have updated for the May meeting yes
okay we'll bring the May meeting for
[2:19:22] updates and kind of go over it and see
where we're at with that okay so we're
[2:19:27] done with that in that
[2:19:31] reg you um just highlight changes we're
making today and accept all the other
[2:19:39] change the changes that are on here now.
So we'll just see the changes. Yeah, I
[2:19:43] put everything in green that we changed
today. So I'll go through I'll accept
[2:19:47] everything else. I'll make sure that the
um table of contents is updated. Make
[2:19:51] sure that the organizational chart is
updated. And then also to run the few
[2:19:57] things by the attorney that we need to
run by. Make sure we're not missing
[2:20:01] anything. Um And then can I say that one
of the things that would be really great
[2:20:06] with this policy and procedure is that
eventually I couldn't do it with this
[2:20:10] time around, but I mean I'm going to be
honest really what I'd like to do is
[2:20:13] throw the whole thing out and written
the whole thing over again. But I knew
[2:20:15] that that would have been a much longer
me. Um what I'd like to see is that we
[2:20:20] go to individualized policies. So it's
not in a per se manual. Some of this
[2:20:24] stuff will be, but an actual policy book
that has individual numbered policies
[2:20:31] that you can flip to and say, "Okay,
this is the PTO policy. This is this
[2:20:36] policy," but not in a document that's 51
pages, if that makes sense. Because I
[2:20:43] feel like it's very hard as an employee.
It It's much easier when it's you only
[2:20:47] want to reference one document and I
have to pull out this whole thing. I can
[2:20:50] just pull out that one polic and say,
"Here's our polic. That's what we see
[2:20:54] from the other townships when you call a
lot of times they have a one pager. For
[2:20:58] some reason we have a whole package.
[2:21:03] Yeah.
[2:21:07] Right. So I think if as we as you move
forward in the years we'll just slowly
[2:21:13] pull things out, make it individualized
and skinny.
[2:21:17] Yes.
[2:21:26] It was a petty book.
[2:21:32] I know there was some things that we
didn't
[2:21:39] want
to think in that sense. But I know what
[2:21:46] you're saying. Yeah. I don't mean it
like that. You I say that the majority
[2:21:49] you can literally go line item by line
item almost outside of the normal
[2:21:53] business stuff and really see where it
was any industry. It's that there's
[2:22:00] always a policy that's there's a rule
for reason because someone's name is
[2:22:03] behind it somewhere. It's true.
[2:22:10] Okay. Uh any comments board members?
Lori, thank you very very much. Thank
[2:22:15] you. I need a motion to second. Go
ahead. I'll second that. 9:22 Mary.
[2:22:24] Yeah. Way to go, Chris. You told me. All
in favor? All in favor? I I