[0:13] personnel policy, code of ethics policy,
remote participation policy and contract
[0:18] negotiation policy. This is a workshop
by the board of select men. No public
[0:23] input will be taken. Um, these policies
will be reviewed at a board of select
[0:29] men's meeting once finalized.
Stand and pledge allegiance.
[0:36] [clears throat]
>> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the
[0:39] United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation
[0:44] under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all.
[0:51] Nancy, because you've been waiting so
long, you get to choose which one we're
[0:55] doing first.
>> Did [laughter] you know that I was gonna
[0:58] say, "Can I pick which one of those
first?"
[1:01] » So,
>> was that a line reader?
[1:04] » Um, I was going to suggest we do the
contract negotiation process of policy
[1:10] because it's really short.
>> Okay. [snorts]
[1:12] But I think
>> you don't like that one. It's
[1:16] confliction with the new charter because
there's something in there for
[1:22] » contract
>> contract negotiations.
[1:25] » Have you read this?
>> I have.
[1:27] » Do you know what part?
>> No.
[1:33] » And we've got two years before the next
contracts are up.
[1:36] » I know. But I know two years.
>> It doesn't really matter anyways. It
[1:40] wouldn't matter. It wouldn't matter
anyways because anything that the
[1:42] charter charter overrides everything.
So, [snorts]
[1:45] » okay.
>> Just so you're aware, right? Charter
[1:48] overrides.
>> Yeah.
[1:51] » Um,
>> do you remember what it said in the
[1:52] charter?
>> What are they trying to accomplish?
[2:02] » I don't think it's any different than
what's here. But do we really want
[2:06] » steal my policy? [laughter]
>> Make yourself look smart.
[2:12] I've heard sal
[snorts]
[2:20] and maybe some of the wording should be
changed because fight for doesn't
[2:23] necessarily sound appropriate. But
[2:31] » so I I think what you're trying to
accomplish is to give the people that
[2:34] are negotiating the contract a little
bit of direction.
[2:38] » Yeah. So, there's multiple things I want
to do here. One is I feel like we're not
[2:43] whoever is going in to negotiate doesn't
really have good direction from the
[2:47] board prior to going in to negotiate.
So, I think that we should set that
[2:51] stage and make sure everybody's clear
about what they're looking for.
[2:55] » But, I also think that board members
aren't necessarily
[2:59] equipped or well-versed on how to
negotiate. And it would be advantageous
[3:04] for us as a town if we hired a
negotiator who actually knows how to
[3:09] negotiate,
[3:13] » which is a lawyer.
>> I would not necessarily agree it's a
[3:17] lawyer because the lawyer has been
looking at these contracts and has never
[3:20] fought for us from what I can tell.
>> Right. You're talking about somebody
[3:24] that's representation to go into
negotiations.
[3:27] » Yes.
[3:29] I mean that you can't you can it's just
an added expense that's all
[3:34] » I agree but I think in the long run I
think there's certain situations where
[3:39] we would have saved money
[3:44] or put ourselves in a better position.
[3:50] Where do you find contract negotiators
do you know that aren't part of unions?
[3:54] So, I looked on the MMA website and it
looked like they might have some some or
[4:01] ways that we
it likely might be a lawyer. I mean,
[4:06] » logically it does fit, but I don't think
it should necessarily be our town
[4:12] lawyer,
>> right?
[4:14] » A lawyer that's first and contract
negotiations. Yeah. [clears throat]
[4:19] » I don't know. I've never been into it.
We've always, but again, attorney, our
[4:24] attorney should be able to, I believe,
should be able to do that for us.
[4:30] » I would agree they should. So, does that
mean opens up a whole different can of
[4:36] worms?
>> Yes. But maybe they did have somebody
[4:38] who didn't have the right person. Or I
think what the attorney does, this is my
[4:44] vision from what I've seen from the last
two contracts because I got slammed with
[4:48] both of them as soon as I got here,
>> is the attorney goes over it as far as
[4:52] what changes we're making. Are they
legal? But I don't think I don't think
[4:57] » as far as negotiating,
>> right? Because they they don't come to
[4:59] the negotiation meetings and say, "Well,
we'll do this if you do that or so." I
[5:05] think that's what you're looking for. I
don't think you want somebody just so
[5:07] much to cross the tees and dot the eyes.
You're looking for somebody to come in
[5:10] and say, "Go over the whole contract and
and try to get
[5:13] » what the priorities are." Yes. And
really
[5:17] negotiate for those so that we come out
with something.
[5:20] » Yeah.
>> Yeah.
[5:26] » I've just seen other instances where
I've sat on the negotiation team and we
[5:32] just basically
Okay. Yep. Sure. And that's not what we
[5:38] should be doing.
>> So that was why I was advocating for
[5:42] that. And if you if Rick, if you think
that we should wait until the charter
[5:47] comes out, I'm happy to set this aside
for a few months because I think we've
[5:52] got more than we can handle in this
meeting.
[5:54] » Oh, yeah. The rest of
>> I'm okay with that.
[5:57] » I just think that we need to have
something
[6:01] » formalized before we go into our next
contract negotiation.
[6:04] » Sure.
>> Yeah. Yeah, I say wait for the for the
[6:08] charter, see what that reads. And like
you said, we've got two years now before
[6:12] either union comes up because we just
did them both. So after the charter, we
[6:16] can sit down with that.
>> Yeah, cuz this is basically for union
[6:19] negotiating, not other contracts that we
like sand and salt.
[6:24] » Correct.
>> No, I'm thinking this is union contract
[6:28] negotiation.
>> Okay. And I think that was spelled out.
[6:32] It definitely spelled out charter thing
that we're working on. So, I wish I
[6:37] would have brought it.
>> Has that I can't bring everything.
[6:39] » Has that passed through the attorney?
>> It's gone back to the attorney again
[6:42] because we had to change a few things.
>> TJ's waiting for that to come back
[6:46] because he's hoping that he gets it
back.
[6:48] » Gets it back in time.
>> He had to have the ballot in today. So,
[6:51] it it's back. It's going to be a hand
count.
[6:53] » Yeah.
>> So, Nancy, you taking notes?
[6:57] » I was going to Yes. So what I what I
wrote down over here as the goals for
[7:02] this contract negotiation process is one
uh get better direction from the board
[7:10] of select men.
Two um how to negotiate the contract.
[7:17] Three,
find somebody
[7:22] » negotiator.
[7:28] » Yeah, I was trying to establish that as
our goals for this
[7:33] going forward.
Um, and I was going to I haven't checked
[7:38] contracts yet, but I was going to look
at the contracts to see what the
[7:41] language is for
renegotiation.
[7:46] There is 180 days there. There are
specifics in the contract
[7:53] if you try to reopen it. That's what you
>> No, to well to reneg negotiate for the
[7:58] next year for the next year. There's I
thought there was lang language that
[8:14] I can find it, George. On Thursday.
>> Okay.
[8:17] » I wrote it down.
[8:38] 120 days. It shall automatically be
renewed from year to year thereafter
[8:43] unless either party shall notify the
other in writing at least 120 days prior
[8:47] to the annivers date and that it desires
to modify this agreement. In the event
[8:54] that such notice is given, negotiation
shall begin no later than 60 days prior
[9:00] to the anniversary and
until notice of termination of this
[9:04] agreement is provided to the other party
in the manner set forth this way. So,
[9:17] and I was pleased. I'm assuming fire is
I mean sorry public works is the same.
[9:27] What's your second choice?
>> Um [laughter]
[9:30] so I I think the second choice would be
just to wrap up the remote policy
[9:36] » before we move on. Um
>> I'd like to see the whole thing just
[9:42] gone.
>> Yep.
[9:45] » Do you have anything in the charter on
that one?
[9:50] So again, it says the policy was
reviewed on June 1st, 2026.
[9:57] [clears throat]
[9:59] We didn't didn't we we reviewed it
and I thought we just set it aside.
[10:06] » Yep. Okay.
>> Because we couldn't
[10:09] » agree on exactly what we wanted to to do
from there.
[10:20] So I guess is it
>> should we put reviewed on the policy
[10:23] even though we talked about it but it
hasn't been formally reviewed per se.
[10:28] » So I think the hangup with this one is
if you do if I I believe if you allow
[10:34] video participation at one meeting then
you have to allow it at all of them. And
[10:39] it's not just the one participant that's
asking to it's not just Rick. If he
[10:43] can't make it, then you have to open it
up to everybody to be allowed to do
[10:46] that. And I think they're just can of
worms. If you can't be here, you can't
[10:50] be here.
>> You can't be here.
[10:55] » I just I think that's just a mess.
>> There's too many different meetings.
[10:59] So then do we want to say that
remote participation
[11:05] is limited to
viewing as a
[11:12] audience member.
That's really all it is. It will
[11:16] continue to do the YouTube, right?
>> Yep.
[11:18] » But we were not going to allow
>> participation board members to
[11:22] participate remotely.
>> Yep.
[11:24] » Or anybody else.
>> That's right. No remote participation.
[11:28] They can watch it just like everybody
else. I mean,
[11:31] » that's why we did this. [clears throat]
>> If you if you can't be here, you can't
[11:35] be here. I mean,
>> even if you're sick, why would you want
[11:38] to do it?
>> Well, that's right. I mean, there's
[11:40] other board members sitting here that
>> show up.
[11:44] » Well, they can make the decisions for
what's going on.
[11:50] » I just think I think that's opening a
can of worms because you got to do it
[11:53] every time. But being devil's advocate
of that, you know, well, is the fact
[11:59] that I'm away on vacation, so
>> have a good time. Enjoy your vacation.
[12:04] » You guys decided to load the on that
particular day.
[12:08] » I'm like, [laughter] we do
[clears throat] now.
[12:09] » No, you would not.
>> But somebody could. [laughter]
[12:15] » Or
>> But somebody could. So that's I just
[12:17] want to
>> Or you do what I do and you figure out
[12:19] when the selectman's meeting are and you
go on vacation in between them. Mhm.
[12:23] [laughter]
>> Yeah. The current policy though does
[12:26] allow for
um I want to say it was emergency
[12:32] » illness. No.
>> Um well, not necessarily illness, but
[12:35] emergency participation
if like a COVID situation or something
[12:42] of that nature, right?
get you put down. If there's a pandemic,
[12:46] we can go back to remote.
>> I don't think you guys see it again.
[12:50] » I just don't think I just think that's a
mess.
[12:54] » You know, when the
>> you go on vacation, George, you call me
[12:57] and I'll table it. [laughter]
[13:03] » I'm not saying us, but whatever we put
forth is going to be a standing policy.
[13:07] And who knows
>> until they get to their
[13:09] » I was very uncomfortable in an executive
session looking at somebody coming in. I
[13:15] didn't feel good about that at all.
That's an executive session. You need to
[13:18] be here for
>> no remote.
[13:21] » Yeah. But we're saying no remote for
anything. We're not saying
[13:24] » that's why that's what turned me right
off to it was that [clears throat]
[13:28] » I don't think too many allow that.
>> No.
[13:31] » I think if you're here, you're here. If
you're not, you're not. Emergencies come
[13:35] up. the board carries on and we just try
to sneak that stuff in past George when
[13:40] he's not around. That's all. [laughter]
>> Yeah. And I think that, you know, if
[13:45] there's controversial stuff that's
there,
[13:47] » it can be
>> on the agenda. I think that it should be
[13:50] t it should be tabled.
>> Absolutely.
[13:52] » So that I think that we talked about
that before. Not not everybody's here.
[13:56] Let's table this so that
>> So
[14:01] there's a thing called a quorum for a
reason though.
[14:03] » Yes.
And I think we have to be careful about
[14:06] saying, well, not everybody's here, so
we're not going to vote on it. I think
[14:09] that if there's a quorum
that as a board, we should be moving
[14:14] forward and doing our work
unless somebody has specifically said,
[14:20] "Okay, I'm not going to be able to be
there. Can we not talk about that
[14:23] because I really want to participate?"
You know, I think there's exception
[14:26] cases, but I think just not doing
something because it's a controversial
[14:32] issue and somebody isn't here.
>> And I agree with that. I mean, George,
[14:37] because the agenda goes out ahead of
time and George, whatever happens, you
[14:40] can't be here. And you call up Nancy and
say, "Hey, I really want to talk. I want
[14:43] to be part of this conversation. Could
you table that?" I think that that's
[14:46] » that's fair. That's fair.
>> And I agree that that's my point. I
[14:50] would I would agree with that. That
that's
[14:52] » Mhm.
>> Yeah. [snorts]
[14:54] Because but I mean there's some things
that don't need to be tabled like the
[14:58] exemptions, the abatements.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
[15:02] » And I agree, but if it was something
again,
[15:04] » a big big one,
>> i.e. hiring a town manager know that the
[15:09] three of us are going to sit here and
vote for that when the two others don't
[15:13] have an opportunity to
>> where the hell am I going? you know
[15:17] [laughter]
that's I mean that just I mean that's
[15:20] but again I think that's a big a big one
you know that people should
[15:26] » yeah no there are big issues
>> there should be a whole town I would
[15:28] look at it that way anyway
>> so we need to we need to revamp this
[15:33] policy then if we're saying that we're
not going to allow remote participation
[15:37] because the way it's word worded right
now is um section two talks about the
[15:43] adoption of remote participation
>> [clears throat]
[15:46] » So that needs to be changed. U
permissible section three is permissible
[15:50] reasons for remote participation.
So we basically remove that because
[15:56] we're saying there's no permissible
reasons for remote participation and
[16:02] then so do we need to revamp it or do we
just say at this point we're not having
[16:06] it and just resend the whole thing?
>> Yeah.
[16:13] And I guess the only question is are we
violating
[16:17] any of the state statutes by not
allowing ro participation?
[16:22] » I don't think so. I can ask that
question but I don't believe so. I think
[16:26] you're violating more by the way we were
doing it than
[16:28] » Yeah. Yeah.
>> Based on what [snorts] TJ had shared
[16:31] with me.
>> We are in violation right now with this
[16:35] policy.
>> Yeah.
[16:37] Because if we're going to do remote
participation from a board member
[16:42] standpoint, we have to allow
>> the public
[16:46] » Yeah.
>> to participate remotely, too. And we
[16:48] don't do that.
>> Right.
[16:50] » We probably would if somebody asked.
>> No.
[16:53] » No, I don't think so.
>> No,
[16:54] » because you have to do it through your
YouTube session.
[16:58] » You'd have to have two different setups.
You'd have to have somebody on here
[17:01] watching it, manning it, saying, "Oh, we
have a question from Jane Doe."
[17:07] » And allowing Jane Doe to speak and then
>> Yeah.
[17:11] » And I think that's where it started to
get really
[17:14] » the clerk.
>> Oh, go ahead and tell him that to his
[17:17] face. [laughter]
[17:21] » He's probably watching.
>> No, he's he's
[17:23] » watching TJ move the camera. [laughter]
[17:28] » Oh, yeah. Zoom in. [laughter]
[17:33] » Okay. I'm document here.
>> Yep.
[17:36] » Go.
>> I'm going to document that we are
[17:39] recommending at the next board meeting
that we resend the remote policy.
[17:43] » Yeah.
>> Yeah.
[17:45] » Is that
>> Yep.
[17:52] » I think that's just cleaner. Then you
don't have to worry about whether you're
[17:55] covered or not.
>> Or,
[17:58] » oh, here we go. [laughter]
>> Should it say
[18:02] the remote participation policy and then
say no remote allowed? That's our remote
[18:07] participation policy.
>> Oh, there we go.
[18:09] » We have a We have a policy. This is the
policy. No remote. No remote.
[18:13] » I like that even better.
>> Well, I just Yeah.
[18:16] » If anybody asks Yeah, we have a policy.
None.
[18:18] » None. Yep.
>> Spelled right out. versus not have not
[18:22] having a policy.
>> Yep.
[18:25] Good idea, George. Then no gray area.
>> Nobody likes great.
[18:33] » Okay,
I guess.
[18:36] » Can we move on?
>> Enough to type.
[18:38] » All right, so that one was done. We're
delaying on the other one.
[18:43] » Yeah. Um,
do you want to do code of ethics because
[18:48] it's shorter than the personnel policy?
>> Sure.
[18:51] » Yeah.
[clears throat]
[18:55] » I didn't do my homework on that one yet.
So, let me
[19:14] Is this This isn't newm. No, this one's
in place right now. Okay. You
[19:20] » look at the second page. It's dated sign
724.
[19:23] » You might not have
>> I don't have the signature.
[19:26] » Yeah, it's right here.
>> That's okay.
[19:29] » Okay. 7 of 24.
[20:15] » [snorts]
[20:26] [clears throat]
>> So, as I'm reading this policy, it's
[20:31] talking about town officials. It's
talking about town employees and then it
[20:35] talks about board of selectmen planning
board and other the town's appointed
[20:40] boards.
>> Isn't town official
[20:46] and an elected board member no matter
what it is? Isn't that shouldn't that be
[20:51] one and the same?
>> I'm wondering if that's not how the I
[20:54] get tied into that. They're calling me
the town official. But you're right.
[20:59] town officials will usually select them
>> because I'm just wondering if we if
[21:04] we're adding that in there, does it
distinguish a difference between the
[21:08] three
[21:14] because
it talks about public about the statues
[21:20] that it addresses and it talks about
public officials, trustees or employees.
[21:27] I just want to make sure that we're
really clear that it applies to all
[21:32] board members.
[21:37] Selectman planning board members members
of appointed boards. Appointed boards
[21:42] says they're calling budget committee
[21:50] [clears throat]
commission. Yeah.
[21:54] » Damn committee.
>> No.
[21:56] » No. That's a whole different thing.
[22:01] Well, I'm not saying it couldn't apply
cuz what we have three Savannah, right?
[22:05] Me,
>> right,
[22:06] » Steve. I don't know. Steve would some uh
mel
[22:13] » Martins Point.
>> Yeah. Martins Point Commission.
[22:16] » Yeah. [snorts]
[22:19] So, the board may impose sanctions on
appointed board and committee members
[22:25] whose conduct does not comply with the
town's policies up to and including
[22:29] removal from office following [snorts]
appropriate due process procedures.
[22:39] » And what are those?
>> I don't know what the due process.
[22:43] [laughter]
>> There he goes again. that devil in a red
[22:46] shirt down there.
>> Well, there's it should be spelled out.
[22:51] » That's right. It should be laid out.
>> So again, it refered officials
[22:55] » to the town.
>> Well, that one specifically says
[22:58] appointed officials.
>> The next one is elected officials. Y
[23:02] » says elected town officials who
repeatedly or intentionally do not
[23:05] follow the code of ethics
>> or other applicable rules or policies
[23:09] may be reprimanded or formally censured
by the board of selectmen or other
[23:13] elected board to which they belong.
[23:18] Is that going to conflict with anything
in the charter?
[23:35] » I don't think there's still anything in
the charter that you'd be able to move
[23:39] anybody.
>> So I guess
[23:42] » well in this case you can't rem
It says censured, but it says nothing
[23:47] about being removed,
>> right? Because I think that's a
[23:51] struggle. But if if it is if something
is happening that is costing this town
[23:58] money,
>> where do what section do we say, right?
[24:04] No matter what your role is, if you're a
financial liability to the town,
[24:11] » here's what happens. And I don't know
where that would fit in here.
[24:20] » [snorts]
>> So
[24:29] let's start with number one in
enforcement. It says
[24:34] » that's but the way it's worded I think
enforcement for one is for staff for
[24:40] » okay that's staff
>> employee
[24:42] » but it says dealings with public
>> so you
[24:45] » the public board selectment and boards
and committees boards and that's what
[24:50] staff interacting with chairs or
appointed boards and committees have
[24:54] » the enforcement would have to be under
three
[25:00] » but it's more about [clears throat]
[25:05] is it compliance? Is it part C where you
would say
[25:14] because I think we need to call out
[25:19] anyone in those categories
>> that is causing a financial liability
[25:27] for the town.
[25:30] I think it would go under C, but you've
got to reward some of that.
[25:33] » Yeah. Yeah.
[clears throat]
[25:37] every
[25:53] » because I think right off the bat you've
got to say town officials, employees,
[25:57] but you also have to include the board
of selectmen or or of all boards.
[26:01] » Still town officials were town
officials. I know but if you read on it
[26:05] says established by the board of
selectmen so I think it should be laid
[26:09] out that the board of selectman is
included in that because if you don't
[26:13] that I think that would be an arguing
[26:37] » [snorts]
[26:44] » Look Is this something that you can look
at and see what other towns have?
[26:49] » Yeah, I can try.
>> And again,
[26:52] » I don't think a lot of town
I can I can see I can see what they
[26:56] have.
[26:59] » And I think too that
the censure thing language under the
[27:07] elected officials.
[27:12] What
what can be c what is the censure
[27:17] » right
>> I mean my understanding is that you
[27:20] can't stop them from voting
>> correct
[27:23] » so
>> censure is just basically a public slap
[27:27] on the a public declaration of
disapproval by the other board members
[27:35] » correct
>> correct
[27:36] » yes I mean that's how I see it
[27:41] » but with no other
ability
[27:46] to do anything else. I'm assuming that
if the voters put me back in, then
[27:53] » I'm stuck with you,
>> right? [laughter] No matter how much you
[27:56] censure me,
I'm still here and I'm still voting
[28:01] and you're not essentially there's no
penalty.
[28:05] » Well, you're not speaking though,
>> but you are. You can't limit You can't
[28:10] limit that to my knowledge.
>> Um I think you can because well if you
[28:15] look at what happened with that woman
from Auburn, didn't they censure her and
[28:20] prevent her from speaking?
>> Speaking
[28:23] in going Yeah. But it did. But then it
got rever to my knowledge it got
[28:26] reversed.
>> Oh, did it?
[28:28] » Finally. It took a while.
>> Right.
[28:30] » But did it get reversed because they
couldn't do it or did it get reversed
[28:34] because enough people didn't agree with
it?
[28:36] » Uh don't know. But we should find that
out.
[28:40] » I've got that written down
>> just to know where we're
[28:44] » I can't remember.
>> Libby. Libby.
[28:47] » Laura Libby.
>> Yes.
[28:50] » Oh, that's right. The one in Congress.
>> Oh, yeah.
[28:54] She couldn't talk.
>> Nope.
[29:02] » I guess that would be a question for MMA
legal, too, you know. Yeah. To give us
[29:05] the
[29:15] because it's it will vary too because
with these different boards
[29:20] um like the budget committee or planning
board it's going to be the chairman's
[29:25] responsibility
to to know if they are in violation of
[29:29] the code.
>> Yes.
[29:32] So the chair and vice chair of boards,
committees and commissions have the
[29:35] responsibility for intervening when
actions of members appear to be in
[29:39] violation of code of ethics.
>> And that is that is in here anyway.
[29:48] » Action may vary from public admonishment
and public censure.
[30:00] elected officials would be member of
select board.
[30:04] » Okay, [clears throat] so it says it
places the board's disapproval and the
[30:08] reasons for it in the official record,
may require corrective measures
[30:12] authorized by an adopted code of
conduct, such as an apology, training,
[30:16] or removal from a committee assignment.
Can damage the member's credibility and
[30:20] serve as a warning that future
violations may lead to stronger action.
[30:24] does not normally remove the selectman
from office, suspend their voting
[30:28] rights, reduce their statutory authority
authority or prevent them from attending
[30:32] meetings.
[30:41] Do we have freedom of access involved in
this? because it should be
[30:46] training
because every elected official or board
[30:50] member or anybody that's appointed needs
to go through that course
[30:54] » but but this is a code of ethics that's
not really
[30:58] » right but
>> they need to go through that course
[31:01] isn't part of the code of ethics
>> I'm looking at other people's code of
[31:06] ethics and it seems to be in all of them
>> really yep
[31:09] » freedom of access training needs to be
A censure should be adopted through a
[31:15] motion or written resolution at a
properly noticed public meeting. The
[31:19] board may be able to discuss allegations
in executive sess session under limited
[31:23] circumstances, but the actual vote in
final action must occur publicly.
[31:30] The accused official has specific
participation in open session rights
[31:33] when charges or complaints are
discussed.
[31:52] It says censure publicly reprimands a
selectman but it usually does not remove
[31:56] or silence them.
[32:05] So the the notes that I've taken so far
just to make sure I'm doing this
[32:11] correctly for code of ethics under part
C
[32:16] we need to add that if an employee
appointed official or elected official
[32:21] um or an employee appointed official or
elected official shall not cause a
[32:27] financial liability for the town.
You can add that in there. Yep.
[32:33] » In some way, shape or fashion. I just
don't know exactly how to word that.
[32:37] » Um
>> I guess that would i.e. have to be
[32:41] defined to
>> what what you may call a financial
[32:45] liability doesn't mean
>> if it cost me a dollar that's a
[32:48] financial liability. But so
>> yeah,
[32:54] » what's the
[32:59] » I don't disagree, but I'm just
>> right
[33:01] » some clarification.
[33:05] I mean,
>> so what I'm thinking is the behaviors of
[33:09] any of these people
cannot position us in a in a way that
[33:15] could
potentially open us up for lawsuits or
[33:20] um extensive um lawyer fees or things of
that nature. I don't know how to word
[33:27] that yet. I'm going to need AI help. And
well, I'm just I'm trying to get away
[33:31] from the subjective look at it, right?
>> And be these are this is the criteria
[33:37] the objective end.
>> So can't do this, can't do that, can't
[33:42] do this versus
what
[33:47] » so we may feel that night versus
>> what do we feel a financial liability
[33:52] is? I mean, in my opinion, it's putting
us in a position that we could be open
[34:00] for
lawsuits,
[34:04] extensive um legal fees,
>> investigation.
[34:10] » Okay. What do you I'm going to capture
those three. Do you have any other that
[34:15] you want added there?
>> I don't at the moment.
[34:17] » Do you agree with those three?
>> Yes. Okay.
[34:30] Nothing went in the chat or about any of
that.
[34:33] That's a bad
[34:43] » I'm sorry, Rick. What was the one that
you said?
[34:47] » I just said um investigations.
investigation
[34:53] [snorts]
[35:00] had it in my hand. I should have brought
it. [snorts]
[35:03] » Okay.
[35:07] » Am I taking these notes? And is the
expectation that I'm going back and
[35:11] doing this work?
>> No. No.
[35:13] » No.
>> I've got I've written things down here.
[35:15] I just [laughter]
>> Well, maybe if you sent your notes out
[35:19] to all of the board that we could all
>> I just needed to know. [laughter]
[35:25] » No, not not from my perspective.
>> I'll take care of
[35:28] » If you want to, Nancy, feel free.
[laughter]
[35:32] » That was nice of you. Thank you.
>> I got that one coming. [laughter]
[35:47] Is there anything else on code of ethics
that
[35:52] we feel should be
added here?
[36:07] Should
[36:13] we add those items as like
in a glossery versus
[36:23] trying to stick them in there somewhere?
But this this is our definition of
[36:30] or you just want to make a whole
separate section.
[36:38] I don't think so.
>> Are we gonna Yeah.
[36:42] » Are we going to include volunteers?
>> Should be
[36:47] » anybody who's representing the town,
right?
[37:04] » [snorts]
[37:07] » And we should try to get these policies
too to match up with the personnel
[37:10] policies.
>> Personnel policy has so much red tape.
[37:15] » Yes.
>> Yellow highlights I should say.
[37:18] I used orange. [laughter]
[37:34] » Are we ready to move on?
>> I am. I was just waiting for those two
[37:39] down there [clears throat] to finish
their research.
[37:42] » Yeah, just reading Ken.
>> That's fine.
[37:48] Burning daylight.
It's all over.
[37:53] » I know. So early already.
Okay. Have to look at the
[37:58] » Okay.
>> All right. So I the consensus on that.
[38:04] We'll rework that and talk about it
again.
[38:07] » See what we can do. Yeah.
[38:12] » So is it now off to personnel policies
the bottom of the the list? Y so
[38:18] » uh
[38:21] [snorts]
>> we're start
[38:23] » What about this conduct of meetings
policy?
[38:26] » It wasn't on the agenda.
>> Okay.
[38:30] Cuz we have that too.
It was signed in 24.
[38:36] » I don't think it was signed by
everybody.
[38:38] » I don't think I've seen that. So if
somebody can
[38:40] » cuz I haven't produced that
>> cuz I haven't. That's the only copy
[38:43] [laughter]
>> cuz somebody cleaned us out over here.
[38:45] There's a lot of stuff that's missing.
>> This one I have
[38:49] » conduct at meetings.
>> Conduct at meetings policy.
[38:53] » Huh.
[38:57] » And it was
>> I'll have to see if I can find it.
[38:59] George is under
>> 220. Everybody Curran, meat,
[39:04] Noel, and Norman JP will [clears throat]
play it.
[39:11] was another one. I just had it when I
was going through everything put in
[39:16] here.
What about So, oh, what about social
[39:20] media?
>> We already approved that one.
[39:22] » I was going to say I thought we settled
that one. Yeah.
[39:24] » So, that one's approved.
>> Oh, it's done.
[39:26] » And that was after you did your thing.
>> It was. Yeah. Most of my thing was like
[39:32] cut and we just added one little claws
at the bottom of it.
[39:35] » Okay.
I just want to make sure.
[39:40] Yeah, I had a lot of
All right.
[39:46] Look at you all the organizers.
[laughter]
[39:50] » All right. Personnel policies. I'm just
going to start in section one. Anything
[39:58] for section one?
[40:03] All right. Section two, general
provisions.
[40:07] » So the first one I had was 2.2.
>> Okay.
[40:11] » Did you have something before then?
>> Nope.
[40:14] » So um 2.2 section A says unless
otherwise covered by a collective
[40:19] bargaining unit. Um
I feel like this should always the
[40:27] personnel policy should cover everybody
all the time. And I'm questioning what
[40:32] was the purpose of having that unless
otherwise covered by a collective
[40:36] bargaining
>> because sometimes the contracts veer off
[40:39] from some of these things especially it
could be insurance coverage could be
[40:43] different. Um
>> that's not a personnel policy though is
[40:47] it?
>> It's insurance. There's all kinds of
[40:50] things in here stated.
>> I mean holidays might be different. I
[40:54] don't think they are but they could be.
>> Okay.
[40:57] because I think your I think your unions
and also your regular employees are
[41:02] pretty much on the same field for the
most part.
[41:11] But I've seen it before where let's say
the police department, it's not here,
[41:16] but the police department gets more of
their insurance paid than everybody else
[41:20] does. So you can't lay it out here.
That's why you have to have the
[41:24] collective bargaining piece.
>> Okay.
[41:27] Um,
all right. I'm not going to fight that
[41:31] battle.
>> No, I'm not fighting. [laughter]
[41:34] » I'll drop that one. On B though, I had a
problem with B2.
[41:39] It says, "All employees shall receive a
copy of a personnel policy at the time
[41:42] of initial hiring."
>> And my question was, should we change
[41:47] that verbiage to say is provided the
location of where the personnel policy
[41:52] is can be found on the website?
[41:57] Well, I think that one personally they
should get a copy. They should sign off
[42:02] on it.
>> Yes. I was just have that
[42:04] » along with the code of ethics.
>> Yes.
[42:06] » Right. So then should it be she'll
receive a copy of the personnel policy
[42:12] and sign off at the time of initial
hiring?
[42:14] » Yes.
>> Yes. I agree with that. If you've got an
[42:16] up-to-date personnel policy, that's that
would be ideal so that everybody's on
[42:20] the same page.
[42:24] Well, every everybody should get a copy
of this one, whether it's whatever is in
[42:28] effect at the time.
[42:39] » Signature page to be put in their
employee file.
[42:43] » Oh, I like that better.
[42:51] This would be posted on our website
anyway, wouldn't it?
[42:54] » It should be. I think it is.
[43:02] » I'm not sure the personnel policies are
there, but
[43:04] » it isn't right now.
>> All right. Okay.
[43:06] » But I think he's right. It should be out
there.
[43:08] » Yes.
>> Um,
[43:12] » all of these policies should be out
there.
[43:14] » Correct. Um the next one was the town
manager shall be responsible for the
[43:19] administration of this policy. The town
manager shall be the hiring and firing
[43:23] authority for all employees subject to
the Sabbatis town charter and applicable
[43:27] to state and federal legal requirements.
And I asked does this align with the
[43:34] suggested changes in the charter?
>> I would say so because you said that was
[43:39] was supposed to be clear and cleaning up
what my responsibilities were.
[43:43] » Yeah.
Um,
[43:48] » hey, why am I not covered by this
policy?
[43:50] » That was my next [laughter] question.
>> Hey,
[43:56] » what you brought up
>> and I said, [laughter] shouldn't the
[43:59] personnel policy apply to everyone? I
would also like the conversation about
[44:03] whether this should apply to boards as
well.
[44:07] » I think
>> Yeah. Everybody should be held to the
[44:10] same standards.
>> Exactly.
[44:12] » Yes.
because there's a lot of things in here
[44:14] that's going to be addressed by the
charter too and the nepotism thing.
[44:18] » Yep.
[44:23] » So I would like to suggest changing D to
say the personnel policy
[44:30] not only
applies to all employees but also to
[44:37] all elected and appointed officials.
[44:48] But then you look at [groaning]
[44:53] eval
do those not count. Um,
[44:58] » sure. You going to do my eval for me?
>> Yes.
[45:00] » Okay.
>> PTO. I mean I So the rest of the stuff
[45:04] in here
>> Oh, I see what you're saying. Doesn't
[45:07] apply to elected officials, right?
>> I get I get what you're saying. or
[45:10] union.
>> I'm cons maybe I'm operating
[45:15] incorrectly on this but I feel like a
personnel policy is not about your
[45:22] benefits. A personnel policy in my mind
is about the behaviors that you have and
[45:29] what is expected of you [clears throat]
>> in the job.
[45:34] So that's what's giving me kind of the
hangup about like insurance or PTO or
[45:39] holidays.
>> Jerry, do
[45:42] » I don't really feel like those are
>> personnel policy items. I feel like
[45:47] those are
benefits of your job. It's not like
[45:53] » which is it's included in this though,
right? Because you got section four is
[45:57] benefits.
>> Yeah. I like you could specify at the
[45:59] top of that. I don't know how it's
written, but I think you could specify
[46:02] that that's for employees only and not
board members or
[46:05] » Yeah.
>> And your union is different, too,
[46:08] » because their benefits could be could be
different. Yeah.
[46:12] » But I also don't want to put us in a
position where somebody says, "Well, I'm
[46:17] an elected official and it says this
policy applies to me, so what do I get
[46:22] for
>> insurance or
[46:27] pay?
[46:32] And maybe
maybe it's certain sections apply,
[46:37] » right? That's what I'm saying. I think
you might need to lay out in front of
[46:40] every section who it applies to. If if
that's the route you're trying to go,
[46:45] » or maybe it's like behaviors identified
in this personnel policy apply to,
[46:51] » maybe that's what it is. Could you could
you do like some of the other stuff here
[46:56] and and just attach that as the extra
>> as an appendex?
[47:01] » Yeah, an addendum.
>> So in here is the driving policy.
[47:07] Um that says see attached.
Um sorry the other ones
[47:14] » I think the drug and alcohol.
>> Yes, drug and alcohol. It's a separate
[47:19] policy.
uh medicinal vehicle operation policy,
[47:23] American with disabilities policy.
Um these are addendums to smoking
[47:30] » harassment and sexual uh yeah harassment
and sexual harassment reimbursement,
[47:36] » drug and alcohol
>> layoffs.
[47:39] » I mean,
>> so what would that what would you
[47:42] consider that addendum to be called? The
appendix [snorts and clears throat]
[47:48] [laughter]
[47:51] can't see [laughter]
>> your face speaks volumes.
[47:59] » That's what it's called today.
>> What do you want me to No, no. I
[48:02] [laughter] mean, what do you want?
If I'm to write something, what am I
[48:07] writing?
What am I saying about that? Am I saying
[48:11] that there's going to be an appendix
about
[48:15] » appendix one, two, three, four, or five?
>> Well, no. So, this this has appendixes.
[48:20] » What does it say? Sorry. Let me
>> Right. But I how do I
[48:25] » I get what you're saying. So,
>> right.
[48:27] » Appendix 17 is
>> which part of
[48:33] » Yeah. board behavior. Yes. and maybe
have a one page that addresses the board
[48:37] issues instead of having it all the way
through.
[48:45] » Okay.
>> Definitely has to be changed. We have
[48:47] people's names on.
>> So, yeah. So, the language in here for
[48:54] municipal vehicle operation refer to
municipal vehicle operation policy
[48:58] approved by the board of select men in
September of 17, 2011. for further
[49:01] details listed as an index number five
in this package.
[49:06] So
I mean
[49:13] i.e. can that code of conduct and stuff
all be put into that one lump sum in the
[49:21] personnel policy?
>> You need the code of ethics.
[49:24] » Yeah.
>> Yeah. and and then added in as an
[49:27] appendix or
>> within the policy
[49:32] » within the personnel policy.
[49:37] » That was a question.
>> I mean, it can, right?
[49:40] » Well, yeah, but um
does it work? Does it not work? Are we
[49:44] accomplishing the
>> same goal,
[49:47] » right?
>> I would think so.
[49:52] » Yeah.
[50:01] All right. So, I create I just said
create an appendex about the sections of
[50:05] this policy that apply to elected and
appointed officials and the town
[50:10] manager.
>> Sure.
[50:22] » [snorts]
>> Um,
[50:26] did you have something before 2.3?
>> No.
[50:31] » So,
[50:34] 2.3.
Um, hold on. Sorry, [snorts] I
[50:39] lost my place.
2.3A,
[50:45] item three. The town manager shall not
post any position that the board of
[50:50] selectmen must confirm appointment of
prior to receiving official approval for
[50:54] such posting.
>> Oh boy.
[50:56] » Upon rece [laughter]
[51:01] upon receiving
>> posting.
[51:04] » Wait, what?
>> I must confirm appointment of that's not
[51:08] how it's written though.
>> That's how I changed it back in 24.
[51:13] [laughter]
Did anybody sign that?
[51:17] » No.
>> Um,
[51:18] » we didn't. I It ended on 2921 actually.
>> So, we were just starting to go through
[51:24] this.
>> And my question was, what are these? Are
[51:27] they in the charter? Can we call these
out here? And do we do this?
[51:31] » They are in the charter.
>> Which positions?
[51:35] » Yes.
>> Okay. So, it's your department head
[51:37] positions basically.
>> Yes.
[51:40] Department heads, town clerk,
treasurer,
[51:55] animal control, building inspector, code
enforcement officer, emergency
[51:58] management director, fire chief, health
officer, local for weights and measures,
[52:02] plumbing inspector, police chief, public
works foreman, sleeper dam commission,
[52:07] tax assessor, tax collector, town clerk,
voter reg, Deputies,
[52:12] treasurer, town attorney, general
assistance administrator, transfer
[52:15] station manager.
[52:20] Okay.
So, you wanted to read, the town manager
[52:24] shall not post any position that the
board of selectman must confirm
[52:27] appointment of upon receiving official.
>> No.
[52:33] » Well, I thought that's what you just
said because it didn't make sense to me
[52:37] after I don't
Well, that's problematic because if you
[52:43] have somebody resign,
>> you're not waiting for the select board,
[52:47] » right?
>> You're going to do it at your job.
[52:50] » Yeah.
[52:53] » I mean, for instance, with
>> I mean, I would still be sitting here
[52:57] waiting and not being able to hire that
position.
[53:00] » Yeah.
>> Then you and then you got to advertise
[53:02] and you've got to wait. So, you're just
pushing that off weeks.
[53:05] » Yeah. I think that's going to be taken
out.
[53:10] What was the purpose of that?
>> Knowing too much control.
[53:17] [snorts]
>> I could see if it was a new position
[53:20] that was being created that wasn't
previously
[53:23] » which you would come to us anyways,
>> right? But I could see that
[53:28] » if I all of a sudden said, "Hey, I want
to add a fifth person in the office that
[53:32] we haven't had." Then I could see that.
But
[53:37] yeah, if id waited, we we'd still be
>> But again, it doesn't say you have to
[53:42] wait for the meeting. I mean, we could
have an emergency meeting to discuss
[53:46] that.
>> I just think that's too
[53:49] » It says official approval.
>> Right.
[53:52] » Matter anyway. We're not the governing
[53:59] » because I think because didn't it hold
on where did it say that?
[54:05] If you go back to 2.2C,
it says I'm responsible for all the
[54:09] hiring and the firing.
But then it's I think that kind of
[54:13] contradicts that.
[54:26] If it's a position we've already had,
it needs to be filled.
[54:31] » I just
I don't know. So, I don't disagree with
[54:37] that,
but let me throw this out there and just
[54:42] tell me what your thoughts are. So, take
like the fire chief position. My
[54:46] understanding is
that
[54:50] is his name Dustin?
>> Yeah. That he asked about working being
[54:54] a part-time fire chief rather than a
full-time fire chief in the interview
[54:57] process.
>> Is that true?
[55:00] » You didn't ask about being parttime. you
were in the interview process.
[55:03] » I don't recall.
>> He didn't ask about parttime.
[55:06] » He didn't ask about parttime. Okay.
[clears throat]
[55:08] » Um so let's just pretend he did.
>> Okay.
[55:11] » Just for the [laughter] sake of my
argument. Okay.
[55:13] » Is that
is that something that we would just
[55:17] immediately say no to or is that
something we would be open to
[55:20] conversation about? And what would the
process look like for that conversation
[55:24] to happen?
>> Well, again,
[55:25] » how does that apply to this particular
line?
[55:29] that's within the hiring and firing and
the and the job descriptions of the town
[55:34] manager.
>> Do you think that would be your call to
[55:37] determine if he said, "Okay, I'd like to
be part-time," then your thought is you
[55:43] could make that call as to whether he
was part-time or not. And because that
[55:48] feels to me maybe not a full that there
need to be. Now, I guess if if you're
[55:55] changing the job description itself,
then maybe that's different,
[55:58] » right? If you're hiring for a full-time
position
[56:01] » and you're only hire and then he wants
to be part, that would be different.
[56:04] Yeah, I could see that.
>> Y
[56:08] and one, you've advertised differently.
You've advertised for a full-time,
[56:11] right?
>> Somebody knew it was going to be a
[56:13] part-time job, but maybe they couldn't
apply group.
[56:16] » Yeah. Right.
>> Yeah.
[56:23] » Yeah. that that I can see.
[56:48] It's all there. So
>> in charge of hiring hiring per charter
[56:55] town charter. [clears throat]
>> Yeah.
[56:57] » I'm I'm eliminating number three.
>> Okay.
[57:01] » Um provided number two
happens.
[57:07] She always does.
Who is this? She
[57:11] » tell somebody that's leaving. [laughter]
>> I'm not
[57:15] I'm not providing this as the current
operation. I mean we we need to make
[57:19] this so that
>> right for anybody that
[57:22] » the next
>> jeez my think in section one
[57:26] » it does still say the towel manager
doesn't matter if it's her she or they
[57:31] » them
>> them the towel manager
[57:34] » yes
>> will notify George Merrill [laughter] of
[57:39] the select board of all job postings
prior to the first day of a job posting
[57:44] » yes
>> yes [cough]
[57:46] [clears throat]
>> I I do believe I'm pretty good about
[57:48] » yes
Monday or Thursday I say so and so has
[57:53] quit today
>> I [laughter] put a strike through yeah
[58:00] » I agree George thanks I'm just messing
with you know that
[58:06] » for a short time
>> where do you think you're going
[58:09] » to censure him Oh.
[laughter]
[58:18] [laughter]
>> Oh, I can see that.
[58:22] » Don't say much now. [laughter]
>> No, you're usually quiet. So,
[58:28] » all right.
>> So, but above that, are we done with
[58:31] that?
>> Yes.
[58:32] » So, I am on A1 in that section.
>> A1. Yep. So announcements of vacancies
[58:42] notices for all vacancies shall be
posted for a minimum of 14 days prior to
[58:45] the permanent selection to fill the
vacancies.
[58:49] Um
um such notice at a minimum shall
[58:53] include the name of the position, brief
description of expected qualification
[58:58] and closing date adding
[59:03] um postings will be at all town
facilities for the defined post period.
[59:10] » Posting of
>> yes vacancy.
[59:15] » What do you mean by that? So you send
out a memo that public works, fire,
[59:21] police, they all get it posted their
board. This is a job. This is a job
[59:25] opening. It gets posted on their
bulletin board.
[59:28] » So just internally posting it as well
>> and wherever yours is here.
[59:32] » It's a bulletin board. Yeah. Posting
internally.
[59:38] [clears throat]
And then I don't I I'm I'll put it
[59:44] either add a section or
um all hirings
[59:51] must be approved by the town manager
in advance and this includes volunteers
[59:58] paid on call.
[1:00:06] should not be having department heads
posting and hiring people without the
[1:00:11] town manager approving
that. You know, if we say that, i.e.,
[1:00:17] I'll just use fire because it's easier.
They have they have a 35 man roster and
[1:00:23] they want to put a 36 person on. There's
no openings.
[1:00:28] » Yeah,
>> that's where I'm
[1:00:30] » So, is that going to be number three
there?
[1:00:33] » Oh, I just made it number two. Oh, okay.
>> But I can put it wherever you want it to
[1:00:38] be.
>> Oh, that's fine.
[1:00:39] » Number Well, whatever works.
>> So, all staff hirings
[1:00:45] » must be approved by the town manager
prior to offers being made.
[1:00:50] » No, before job postings.
[1:00:59] » Oh, job posting and hiring. So,
[1:01:06] This will include promotions.
>> Yes, it's a separate separate section,
[1:01:10] but yes.
>> Okay. [laughter] He has a whole policy
[1:01:13] for that.
[1:01:17] [laughter]
>> I didn't get that far.
[1:01:20] » That's right.
[1:01:23] » He's been waiting for us to talk about
this.
[1:01:27] » Well, that could go So, in relation to
that, would would it be the same for the
[1:01:32] police department, too? Yes.
>> Yes.
[1:01:34] » I think he's saying across the board
department.
[1:01:38] » So, i.e. currently or I'm thinking
anyhow right now we should be
[1:01:41] advertising for a part-time public works
driver on call.
[1:01:45] » Mhm.
>> That should be Raquel that's doing that
[1:01:48] and not the public works foreman who
decides that he's going to advertise for
[1:01:52] that in advance
and hire that on his own.
[1:01:56] » I don't think we advertised for one of
those last year.
[1:01:58] » Right. I mean, but we didn't hire one
either. So just you know it's something
[1:02:03] like that that I we know it's they need
somebody on call but again everything
[1:02:09] should go through in my mind everything
should go through the town manager in
[1:02:12] order to do hiring
>> be surprise hires
[1:02:17] have to spell that out to all of them.
Yeah, that's next week. [laughter]
[1:02:23] » We have a department meeting next week.
[1:02:30] » Hey, good.
>> I'm good.
[1:02:32] » Y
[1:02:43] siring preference.
[1:02:59] I think I had
>> that need to be changed.
[1:03:02] » Okay,
[1:03:06] » go ahead.
>> And I was just looking at the grammatics
[1:03:09] of the first line. If all things are
considered equal, the town will give a
[1:03:14] hiring preference to applicants
that have colon or it spells
[1:03:21] [clears throat] it out in the next four
or five lines here, but I didn't know
[1:03:24] just grammatically.
>> Yeah, that doesn't end. It's kind of
[1:03:27] just dead right there, right?
>> Yeah.
[1:03:30] » So, our strro is removed.
If all things are considered equal,
[1:03:36] » I'm saying I will be giving a hiring
preference to applicants. Towns will
[1:03:40] give a hiring preference to applicants
[1:03:46] under the following criteria. Yeah.
>> For
[1:03:49] » Yeah, they did. It's like they didn't
finish the sentence,
[1:03:50] » right?
>> Yeah.
[1:03:52] » But it explains it in the next
>> right
[1:03:55] » five or six lines there, but it just it
was just the grammatic of okay, what is
[1:04:01] it? [clears throat]
And if there were i.e. bullet points for
[1:04:05] the next,
you know, see and then then one, two,
[1:04:09] three, four, five, six items that are
there. If you could do that,
[1:04:15] if we could see what those what those
are quickly versus kind of stumbling
[1:04:20] through the paragraph.
[1:04:27] » Is that your phone?
>> I keep looking at mine every time the
[1:04:31] noise goes. [laughter]
[1:04:55] Hey,
[1:05:12] » [snorts]
[1:05:18] » Okay.
>> All right.
[1:05:19] » I've captured all that.
>> Okay. Good. All right. Anybody else? C D
[1:05:25] E.
>> Yes.
[1:05:29] » Um, so hiring process for police
officers. So, I basically just said,
[1:05:33] "Are we doing this for only full-time
employees? Does it include part-time
[1:05:37] employees?"
[1:05:42] Because I don't
if we were actually following this, we
[1:05:47] wouldn't have had an employee who
couldn't pass their alert.
[1:05:52] » I mean, their their Yes.
>> So, I think
[1:05:56] my comment was more about we're not
following our policy.
[1:06:04] Is the alert test the same as the
>> No, sorry. She
[1:06:08] » alert test is I'm talking about the
physical agility test
[1:06:13] » section two
[1:06:19] if applicable.
>> It is applicable. It would be for an
[1:06:23] officer
>> that says training program. But wouldn't
[1:06:27] that be just for your full-timers
because part- timerrs have to do that?
[1:06:32] » Well, they've already been established
as an officer.
[1:06:36] » I don't think that I don't know what the
the exam is for reserves for a green pin
[1:06:42] because they've already gone through it.
>> No,
[1:06:44] » if they're that if they're already an
officer,
[1:06:45] » if they're a blue pin, they've already
gone through it, right? But
[1:06:48] » some of these
>> we hire we hire green pin green pins as
[1:06:52] reserves.
>> Yeah, green pin is a reserve. Mhm.
[1:06:56] » A blue pin is a full-time officer
>> most of the time.
[1:07:00] » Yeah. [clears throat]
[1:07:04] » And then I was questioning number, do we
have an oral board that has been
[1:07:10] established by the town?
>> Not that I know of.
[1:07:19] » So number two,
>> so four, five, and six. I don't know
[1:07:22] that we do those for part- timerrs.
>> I don't think
[1:07:27] » and I
>> What do you consider an oral board?
[1:07:29] Because I don't even know if we do that
for the full time.
[1:07:31] » That would be the Thomas Sabbatis page.
[1:07:37] [laughter]
[1:07:41] I'm kidding.
[snorts]
[1:07:46] » Yeah, there is none. again.
>> And would that be laid out in their No,
[1:07:49] because if they're parttime, they
wouldn't be covered by the contract,
[1:07:52] » right?
[1:07:59] » Huh.
>> Is there anything in their contract?
[1:08:01] » Wouldn't be for part- timerrs?
>> No, nothing part time. You sure?
[1:08:05] » Yeah.
>> So, wait,
[1:08:06] » we don't Well, we don't have any part-
timerrs that are in the union.
[1:08:12] » I just think we should look at this
section and have a conversation with
[1:08:15] [clears throat] our new chief. Yeah.
>> And figure out what are we doing and
[1:08:19] what are we not doing and what do we
need to do here because
[1:08:22] » it might help us
>> a little bit if we followed it.
[1:08:28] » Yes. Correct.
>> And also number 10.
[1:08:32] » Oh, I was there too.
>> Hold on. Did we say five, six, seven,
[1:08:35] eight, nine were okay? Hold on.
>> No, they're all I think they're all pro
[1:08:39] problematic. I don't think we're
following any of these. Okay.
[1:08:42] » I mean, maybe eight.
Yes,
[1:08:46] » I think you have Oh, wait.
>> But that adds in some post-secary
[1:08:50] education, which
>> I honestly don't agree with that
[1:08:54] » with what a 60 credit hour.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
[1:08:56] » I don't I don't think that is a criteria
we should have for a part-time officer,
[1:09:02] but that's just
>> But again, that's something we can go
[1:09:04] over with the chief, I would think.
>> Yes.
[1:09:07] » Um, but number 10,
>> let him because he's going to be the
[1:09:10] hiring guy, right?
>> And I Yeah.
[1:09:12] » Yep.
I like to see what he has.
[1:09:16] » Yeah.
>> Number 10 says, "To become a reserve or
[1:09:19] part-time officer, the applicant must
already be a certified full-time police
[1:09:23] officer working for another police
department.
[1:09:26] » Yeah,
>> that's not true. We don't do that."
[1:09:29] » I mean, I guess I just feel like we
should not have stuff in here that we
[1:09:33] know we're not going to do, right?
>> Okay. So, [laughter]
[1:09:37] » I the same thing I had it crossed out on
my list. Just take that out.
[1:09:40] » I'll talk to him about those. He'll be
He worked today.
[1:09:44] He's not here full-time yet,
>> but he's working two days next week as
[1:09:48] well.
>> Here.
[1:09:49] » Yep.
>> Okay.
[1:09:51] » Yep. And then he starts full-time the
following week.
[1:09:54] » And the other chief,
>> Jeff?
[1:09:56] » Yep. Is he still here?
>> Yeah.
[1:09:58] » Okay.
>> For now, his golf clubs are ready to
[1:10:01] roll.
>> Good. [laughter]
[1:10:03] » Four.
>> Two. Four.
[1:10:07] » Yes.
>> Okay.
[1:10:14] And I'm just
>> I'm just back again to the Nancy
[1:10:17] question with that. Are we
>> enforcing this, reviewing this? If we
[1:10:22] have part-time people working 35 hours a
week, they're considered full-time,
[1:10:28] » right?
>> You'll notice I believe that has
[1:10:32] stopped.
>> Yeah. I just want to [laughter]
[1:10:34] » Yeah.
So I just and and if if you can get
[1:10:39] clarification for us what that number
really is and what what constitutes
[1:10:44] [laughter] continuous.
>> I think after the conversation you and I
[1:10:48] had that day, I think I googled it and I
said, "Oh, George is right. We need to
[1:10:52] stop this cease and desist." [laughter]
>> Yes. But I can I'll get a hold of legal
[1:10:58] and ask.
>> All right.
[1:11:00] » What that constitutes
>> and and the same it's not in here.
[1:11:11] » Okay.
[1:11:15] Anything else under the section 2.4?
Anybody?
[1:11:18] 2.5
>> a
[1:11:21] » a [snorts]
>> um [clears throat] talks about
[1:11:24] probationary period and probationary
employees shall be formally reviewed
[1:11:28] during the first 90 days of employment.
My question is how often are we doing
[1:11:32] that?
>> 90 days.
[1:11:35] » Yep.
>> No, I hit the six months.
[1:11:40] I guess I didn't realize it was 90. It
can be.
[1:11:43] » So
>> that one that one can stay. I can do
[1:11:46] that. just kind of calling it out,
>> right? Me, too. I That was on my That
[1:11:50] was on my list, too.
As well as
[1:11:55] » um
the annual
[1:11:57] » 30 6090
>> the annual
[1:12:00] » three months
>> evaluation that
[1:12:04] » every employee needs.
[1:12:08] » But are they?
>> Mhm. They are now. So, firefighter B has
[1:12:14] » Well, I can't tell you what he's they've
been since my new people have come on,
[1:12:18] but they know to do them.
>> Okay. Well, I'm asking and who's who's
[1:12:22] double-checking that.
>> Yes.
[1:12:23] » We need to decide that every employee in
the town needs correct needs an
[1:12:27] evaluation every year.
>> And
[1:12:30] » yep. Again, I know it's probably a lot
of work, but I'm looking at the biggest
[1:12:35] department we have, 35 volunteers or
call paid. They all have a eval in their
[1:12:42] personnel file here at the town office.
>> Even volunteers,
[1:12:46] » I said there's no volunteers, so they're
all pretty that. But I've got three
[1:12:50] volunteer applications on my desk.
[laughter]
[1:12:55] » Well, I think that
>> Yeah,
[1:12:56] » they live local,
>> I believe. So,
[1:12:59] » that's what it's supposed to be. Again,
I think that they should know where they
[1:13:03] stand
>> if they're g if they're volunteering and
[1:13:06] and and we're talking fire, you know,
that
[1:13:11] they should know whether they're in good
standing, whether they're meeting their
[1:13:14] their requirements, you know, and I'm
sure that they're having those
[1:13:17] discussions, but something formal should
be in place.
[1:13:20] » Document it.
[1:13:24] 90 days,
[1:13:28] six months, one year.
[1:13:33] Are you all set with the rest of the
probation area period? All right. 2.6
[1:13:39] promotions.
[1:13:45] So, I made a note that
all promotions again should be posted
[1:13:53] for the 14-day minimum just like any
other job opening.
[1:14:03] And
again, all all those postings will be
[1:14:07] approved by the town manager prior to
posting
[1:14:15] is what I've added to that section.
[1:14:20] » I'm not sure that I agree with that.
>> Sure. Now that I wrote it down,
[1:14:26] [laughter]
>> just because George said it doesn't make
[1:14:29] it gospel truth.
>> Hey, George speaks.
[1:14:33] » [laughter]
>> Well, I guess
[1:14:35] » he's already rewrote this whole thing.
>> Yeah,
[1:14:41] [clears throat]
>> I do believe that before any promotion,
[1:14:45] no matter what it is,
Raquel should be aware of it and have
[1:14:52] some say in whether it should be filled
or not and
[1:14:57] kind of some say as to who is getting
the role. Now, does it go back to the
[1:15:03] existing employees have first dibs?
>> So, I
[1:15:07] » only if
>> I guess let's say it's a a title with
[1:15:12] the fire department, police department,
something like that. In that scenario,
[1:15:18] I don't necessarily feel like it should
have to be posted.
[1:15:23] The reason I don't is that department
head should know their people well
[1:15:28] enough that do you go through this whole
interview process with 10 different
[1:15:32] people when you already know exactly who
you're going to hire or promote. Now
[1:15:38] sometimes you might not. Sometimes you
might say there's two or three people
[1:15:41] who are qualified for that position and
then you post it and you go through that
[1:15:45] process. But if you're like, it's very
clear the deputy chief should be XYZ
[1:15:50] person.
I don't see value in wasting people's
[1:15:55] time going through that whole process.
That's that's just my two cents worth.
[1:16:00] » Yeah. Why would somebody want to come
here and not be be able to advance
[1:16:05] on based on what you're saying,
>> right?
[1:16:08] » And not have to go through like you said
posting. And but on the other on the
[1:16:13] other side of that, that [clears throat]
may be the case, but
[1:16:18] to not post it and to say, "Hey, John, I
think you should have this position and
[1:16:23] you're the right person for the job, so
we're not going to post it. We're just
[1:16:27] going to promote you into this
position." I think is is does a
[1:16:31] disservice for there may be a Sally over
there who's the quietest best employee
[1:16:38] you have and hasn't shown you know has
has the credentials has the stuff to do
[1:16:44] that with but doesn't get asked to apply
for that position and maybe if she gets
[1:16:49] an opportunity to apply and we can see
the resume and see that she's interested
[1:16:54] and see that she's done this IE
schooling or or or whatever
[1:16:59] that maybe maybe she is a good candidate
for that position. But if you don't post
[1:17:03] it, you don't know if others are
interested or maybe interested, maybe
[1:17:08] it's a good way to build, you know, but
to me by just hand selecting and I you
[1:17:16] know that I know I know that this person
is the best person with the job. I'm
[1:17:19] just going to
>> I guess I'm not saying that every time
[1:17:23] it has to be done that way. I'm just
saying that there might be times when
[1:17:26] it's very clear who the person should
be. And I don't think if you put it in
[1:17:31] here, you're tying yourself to a process
that I don't think is always beneficial.
[1:17:36] » I do understand what he's saying.
>> It's posting within though. See, I'm
[1:17:42] thinking outside.
>> No, this would be posting.
[1:17:44] » This would be posting within. Yeah. No,
absolutely.
[1:17:48] » I know what this He's right. That's
really You really should be posting
[1:17:52] within because that would avoid some
issues that we've had.
[1:17:55] » A lot of it.
>> Yeah.
[1:17:56] » And a lot of it here.
>> Yeah.
[1:17:58] » It just gives everybody if they would
apply.
[1:18:00] » Yes.
>> And it gives the town manager the
[1:18:03] ability to to say to the department
head,
[1:18:06] » why not this person? Look at this
resume. Why not this person?
[1:18:10] » Right.
>> And the department head then has to
[1:18:12] explain
why this and why not that. You know, it
[1:18:15] gives that person the ability
>> to have some dialogue and input versus,
[1:18:21] you know, I've select I've selected this
person.
[1:18:24] » Exactly. Why didn't Yeah. Why didn't you
even ask me?
[1:18:27] » Right.
>> Right.
[1:18:28] » Y
>> and if you post it, then every person
[1:18:30] sees the posting has an opportunity to
apply.
[1:18:36] » And I think that doesn't that does a
good service to our employees to
[1:18:40] » right recognize it. Well, and and it
gives them um the ability to go through
[1:18:45] that process for the next time
>> to be able to climb a ladder,
[1:18:50] » right?
>> So, how do you want it? You want it
[1:18:52] position should be posted internally
>> for the 14 days. The same as a hiring,
[1:19:07] but again, only after the approval of
the town manager.
[1:19:11] She want to create something that's not
there, right? Can't,
[1:19:24] you know, I'll and I'll just I'll go to
public works this time. You know, we've
[1:19:29] decided that we want a deputy foreman
down there. the public works foreman
[1:19:36] decides that who that's going to Oh, I
just think that he's good for the job
[1:19:40] and
process.
[1:19:44] [laughter]
>> Okay.
[1:19:47] » So, I [snorts] you killing me.
[laughter]
[1:19:50] » I try to be entertaining for you. You
are all right. Very much. So I will say
[1:19:55] the one thing I think I mentioned this
to Rick but I feel like we as a board
[1:20:01] need to start giving better direction to
Raquel and I want to add this to our
[1:20:06] next agenda for our board meeting is
what are we looking for in the some of
[1:20:12] these positions or in I guess in the
staffing because
[1:20:18] you know I will tell Raquel what I want
maybe she does it maybe she doesn't do
[1:20:23] it. Then I'm like, "Well, Marquel, you
didn't do what I told you to do."
[1:20:27] » Oh, that's George, too. Yeah. [laughter]
>> I mean, her response should be, "Yeah,
[1:20:33] well, you just told me the board didn't,
right?" So, I think we need to do a
[1:20:36] better job of going back and saying,
"Okay, we only want," and I'm just
[1:20:41] making up numbers, but we only want 25
people on the roster for the fire
[1:20:45] department. So if we have 35 right now,
one person gets done, that doesn't mean
[1:20:49] we're going to backfill that position,
you know, because she doesn't she, as
[1:20:52] far as I know, she has not been given
that direction by this board,
[1:20:56] » right? [clears throat]
>> I've given her a lot of thought.
[1:20:59] [laughter]
>> So I think we need to do a better job of
[1:21:02] doing that.
>> And during the project process to define
[1:21:06] that,
>> I don't think it should be weighted.
[1:21:09] Well, no, but but if you only but if you
only budgeted for 25,
[1:21:14] » right?
>> Then
[1:21:16] » that's true. Yeah,
>> that I guess that's when it gets very
[1:21:19] clear when the budgets are cut and
they're not covered.
[1:21:24] » Yeah. All that you got to remember.
>> Okay, I've added that in there.
[1:21:30] » All right. Anything else under that?
>> Um I had anything there.
[1:21:37] » Okay. 2.7 Disability Accommodations.
[1:21:43] » 2.8 training, education, and
conferences.
[1:21:48] » 2.9 Safety Policy.
[1:21:55] 210 Personnel Records.
[1:22:02] Two. Um, yeah.
So,
[1:22:08] » which one are you in?
>> Personal records.
[1:22:10] » Okay.
>> Are there personal records for select
[1:22:15] people or board members?
>> No.
[1:22:19] » Should there be?
>> Oh, I say no, but there might be. She
[1:22:24] may have folders up there.
>> Well, yes, there probably is because we
[1:22:28] had to do
>> Right. You had to do your W TWS or
[1:22:31] whatever your I9.
>> Yeah.
[1:22:34] And there should be a
I don't know if it's called a personnel
[1:22:39] record, but if you're censuring people
or something, there should be
[1:22:42] documented.
>> Yes.
[1:22:44] » It's got to be something it's got to go
into to be
[1:22:46] » there.
>> I'll find out. I mean, that's easy
[1:22:50] enough to start if they're not. But she
may have something up there
[1:22:54] » because there should be other things in
that personel
[1:22:58] » record, the foyer stuff, the things that
they're supposed to you were supposed to
[1:23:02] do,
>> right? any sign off on any media or any
[1:23:05] workshop or anything you've been to.
Yeah.
[1:23:10] » Yeah. Now that you say that, yeah,
should be.
[1:23:13] » Because if we're not included in the
personnel policy, we are included in the
[1:23:19] ethics policy,
>> right? Yeah.
[1:23:21] » Code of ethics. [snorts]
I just feel we should
[1:23:27] » there may be
[1:23:35] all right and 211 job description
evaluations.
[1:23:41] So, I highlighted this one
um because I feel like somewhere in here
[1:23:49] we should be stating that
the town manager needs to kind of
[1:23:57] understand what is being said in those
reviews.
[1:24:01] So
if for example
[1:24:06] somebody was getting a review stating
they were failing to do their job,
[1:24:11] » you should be aware of that
>> and be able to be have a conversation
[1:24:14] with that department head to say are we
putting them on an action plan? Are we
[1:24:18] doing you know how are we addressing
this step
[1:24:20] » rather than it just be addressed
>> with that review and nothing happened.
[1:24:26] So you you at least know the context of
what's happening. Also the vice versa
[1:24:30] where you you're an excellent employee
but maybe everybody doesn't feel that
[1:24:34] way.
>> Yep.
[1:24:36] » You know those evaluations are kept here
anyway, right? Public horse, we keep
[1:24:39] theirs there.
>> No, we have everybody's personnel's
[1:24:41] files here. They may keep copies, but
that the originals should be upstairs.
[1:24:46] » Yes. All personnel file should be here
and not
[1:24:48] » so he should be when he's re-evaluating
somebody or a department's reeval like
[1:24:54] any of them Jerry or them
>> fire
[1:24:58] » all those records are kept here.
[laughter]
[1:25:00] » Mhm.
[1:25:03] [clears throat]
>> Okay.
[1:25:05] Sure about that?
>> Like I said they may keep copies but the
[1:25:09] original should all be upstairs.
should I want the answer to be they are
[1:25:15] » they are George
[laughter]
[1:25:20] » I can't speak to what took place before
I got here
[1:25:23] » no I know I'm just so who but the
department heads are keeping are the
[1:25:27] ones that are keeping track of that or
are you
[1:25:29] » no the department heads keep track of
their employees within their department
[1:25:33] » to reval evalue yes for their
evaluations
[1:25:36] » yes
>> but I believe the town manager should be
[1:25:39] asking that these raw it should be able
to see them.
[1:25:43] » You should have Yes. Yes.
>> They should come across her desk before
[1:25:45] they get in the file. Correct.
>> So she knows that every employee in the
[1:25:49] community in the town has been evaluated
annually.
[1:25:52] » Yep. But
>> so these questions that you ask at your
[1:25:54] » department,
>> sorry, your media department meetings,
[1:25:56] have you got any new evaluations? I need
them. Okay. But she needs to also be
[1:26:01] aware of that before it's delivered to
the employee because if she doesn't
[1:26:05] agree with it, she needs to be able
>> You can't give somebody a great
[1:26:10] evaluation and have [laughter]
Raquel's like, "Uh-uh.
[1:26:16] It has to happen in advance."
>> That doesn't happen. But I agree that
[1:26:20] would be handy.
>> I think that's what needs to happen
[1:26:23] though because ultimately we would be
going to you saying, "What the heck?"
[1:26:28] Yeah.
>> And in order for you to be able to be
[1:26:31] covered.
>> Yeah.
[1:26:38] » It also says here that each employee
should be afforded at least one meeting
[1:26:43] six months prior to to their formal
evaluation to informally discuss with
[1:26:47] their supervisor their performance. So
we should ensure that's happening as
[1:26:52] well.
[1:26:56] one meeting as close to six months prior
to the formal.
[1:27:00] » Wow.
>> Huh.
[1:27:04] » Well, that's not going on.
>> But again, that's not for me. That's not
[1:27:07] a formal sit down,
>> right?
[1:27:10] » Well, it's a sit down. It's it's maybe
it's a if I'm a public works employee,
[1:27:16] maybe I'm in the truck riding with my
boss having a conversation about my
[1:27:20] work, right? You know, and that's fine.
It does it doesn't have to be written
[1:27:24] with somebody signing a paper. It's just
having that conversation to say, "Hey,
[1:27:28] you're doing good." Or, "Hey, I really
need you to step it up here."
[1:27:32] » Yeah.
>> And are all the job descriptions up to
[1:27:35] date?
Every employee has a job description.
[1:27:41] » They're in the S drive, but I can't say
that they're all perfect.
[1:27:45] The ones we haven't had to hire, I
couldn't tell you. the only it's only
[1:27:49] the positions that I've had to hire that
I would be able to say you where they're
[1:27:52] where they need to be.
>> But that would be something that we
[1:27:55] would have to do that would have to be
updated to know what their roles are.
[1:28:01] » I suppose
>> because we're Yeah. For me, specifically
[1:28:05] the front office now that roles are
changing.
[1:28:07] » Yep.
>> They sure are.
[1:28:08] » Yeah.
>> That their job description should
[1:28:11] include that so they know what the
expectations are. Mhm.
[1:28:14] » Yeah.
>> And other duties as assigned on every
[1:28:17] job description.
>> Right. Right.
[1:28:19] » Yeah. Find out three weeks. I'm not
doing that.
[1:28:22] » Yeah.
>> That's not my job.
[1:28:25] » The other thing it states here is all
probationary employees must receive an
[1:28:30] acceptable performance review prior to
the end of their probationary period as
[1:28:34] a minimum to off be offered a regular
employee status.
[1:28:37] » Yes, that's at six months.
[1:28:51] So, I'm going to I'm going to go back up
to the top for a second of that page.
[1:28:55] Uh, so it'll be 2.8 C.
It talks about travel and then on the
[1:29:03] second on the top of the next page uh
the employee at uh sorry the town will
[1:29:09] reimburse the employee at the acceptable
mileage rate. Um further in the document
[1:29:15] it talks about the IRS rate. So, I was
just trying to clean that up and make it
[1:29:21] the same.
[1:29:25] I find the
hour.
[1:29:43] So, if we could if we could make it the
same so that
[1:29:48] » [clears throat]
>> Can't find it now.
[1:30:03] Uh yeah. So under 3.20 20 mileage
reimbursement. All employees using their
[1:30:08] privately owned vehicles
in the conduct of official town business
[1:30:12] shall be reimbured for mileage at the
standard rate allowed by the Internal
[1:30:16] Revenue Service.
That should be the language that's in
[1:30:20] there.
Just take out acceptable mileage rate
[1:30:24] and put in
the internal uh the yeah the standard
[1:30:30] rate allowed by the Internal Revenue
Service because it's flexible. It
[1:30:35] changes.
>> Yeah.
[1:30:37] » 56 men.
[1:30:56] [snorts]
[1:31:00] » Okay. I added it.
>> All right. I didn't feel like fighting
[1:31:04] with you about that.
>> All right.
[1:31:07] [laughter]
>> She's picking her battle.
[1:31:09] » Yes.
>> Yeah.
[1:31:14] » All right.
[1:31:24] So, let me just add it's 10 minutes of
8. How long do we want to go?
[1:31:31] I was suggesting was going to suggest
two hours at the beginning.
[1:31:38] What do we just
>> I don't think you're going to get
[1:31:42] through the whole thing tonight
regardless.
[1:31:47] » So 8:00 to quit for everybody. All
right. So conditions of employment in
[1:31:54] the ethical standards
[1:32:00] 32 employee conduct and public relations
[1:32:07] 33 confidentiality
[1:32:12] 34
attendance.
[1:32:20] Oh, whoops. Sorry. Hold on.
>> Y
[1:32:24] » that's all right.
[1:32:34] » Yes. Okay.
[1:32:39] » So, where were you? Sorry.
>> I I'm at 3.8 is where I have my next
[1:32:44] question.
>> Okay.
[1:32:47] So the only I guess the only item when I
was looking at ethical standards and
[1:32:51] trying to to put that with our code of
ethics
[1:32:55] » and maybe that's where we add that
>> that in
[1:32:58] » that in for elected officials.
>> Yep.
[1:33:05] All right.
So 35 [clears throat] violence free
[1:33:11] workplace
attendance
[1:33:16] 34 is attendance 35 violence free
workplace
[1:33:21] 3.6 conflict of interest
[snorts] 3.7
[1:33:27] seniority
3.8 eight outside or non duty
[1:33:33] employment.
>> I had a question on that one.
[1:33:38] » I just put is this legal? It
[1:33:43] it felt like
we were saying we have to know about
[1:33:49] every part-time position anyone has.
I don't think that's really what it
[1:33:55] means to say.
[1:34:04] Great. So, I um I'll use the public
works department. Um, one of them is
[1:34:11] working
part-time for another town
[1:34:17] and it's a snow day.
>> Mhm.
[1:34:20] » And they're supposed to be called in,
but now they're working somewhere else
[1:34:25] or they're working for a private plow
contractor
[1:34:29] who they can't get here on time.
[1:34:35] is that
that's affecting our operation
[1:34:40] because they're working a job that
conflicts with their current job.
[1:34:48] So, that one to me is pretty cut and
dry. Where I start to get, you know, the
[1:34:54] way I'm reading it is where I start to
get kind of questionable is like, okay,
[1:35:01] let's take that
person. It says may subject the town to
[1:35:08] public criticism or embarrassment.
So
[1:35:13] what if they work at the local strip
club?
[1:35:14] » I was just going to say that. [laughter]
[1:35:18] » Is that what that's what is that talking
about? [laughter]
[1:35:21] Where is that?
[1:35:26] [laughter]
[1:35:31] [laughter]
>> It says employers must inform their
[1:35:34] department superi supervisor of their
outside employment. I mean, you know,
[1:35:40] » somebody in the town office who works as
waitress on the weekend, right?
[1:35:44] » Why do they need to tell you that? I
mean,
[1:35:46] » I I just feel like
>> I understand. I think what you're
[1:35:50] talking about is what we're trying to
get to here, but we've made it so
[1:35:55] generic.
I don't know.
[1:36:02] And who's to say it does or doesn't
embarrass the town?
[1:36:06] » Well, again, though, but what if
using your example,
[1:36:13] [laughter] one of the front office staff
is working in that club we talked about.
[1:36:18] [laughter]
Is that an issue?
[1:36:21] » As long as they're not doing it during
work hours, [laughter]
[1:36:24] I don't know.
>> Well, that's again, I mean, do you have
[1:36:27] the right to tell people what they can
and can't do during their time off if
[1:36:30] it's not infringing upon the work hours?
>> Right.
[1:36:33] » I don't know. That's a good question
whether that's even legal. You're right.
[1:36:36] » I I mean,
>> we should get an answer
[1:36:41] on that.
I think,
[1:36:46] you know, definitely like for example,
if you know, say we had another
[1:36:50] situation like in Lewon with the
shooting, you know, we want to know that
[1:36:54] we have officers who would be available
to come in and make this their priority.
[1:36:58] I I totally get that
>> and maybe that does need to be here
[1:37:03] somehow, but
there's other things and maybe it
[1:37:08] references like, I don't know, on call
or I don't know. I I just feel like some
[1:37:13] of what's there maybe
is overstepping.
[1:37:22] » Yeah. I mean, if Raquel can reach out to
>> Yeah, I've got it written down to see
[1:37:26] I'll get a hold of MMA
>> and [snorts] see what their thought is,
[1:37:31] » but I was
>> And maybe you should clarify. We don't
[1:37:34] have anything. [laughter]
>> There are
[1:37:36] » We don't know that yet.
>> There are a lot of people that have
[1:37:39] second jobs.
>> Absolutely. Exactly. And I don't think
[1:37:42] that they should have to justify, you
know, working as a waitress or, you
[1:37:46] know, doing any of those things.
>> As long as there's an impede there,
[1:37:49] » right? As long as they can show up here
when their hours are supposed to be.
[1:37:53] Yeah.
[1:37:59] » Um,
>> go.
[1:38:02] » My next one was going to be in 310.
>> Okay.
[1:38:09] Go ahead.
So employees of the town of Sabatis may
[1:38:13] seek election to any office in town
government. However, such employees
[1:38:17] shall be placed on an unpaid leave of
absence from the date of candidacy for
[1:38:22] such a position when nomination papers
are taken out for a position until the
[1:38:26] completion of the election process for
said employee.
[1:38:33] I don't think we're doing that.
That is well when you started reading
[1:38:38] that I was thinking of bigger than just
the town but as you went on it's just I
[1:38:42] believe it's just town a town position
right
[1:38:45] » it says if the employee is elected to a
town position then the employee will be
[1:38:49] terminated once the officially elected
>> correct paid employee
[1:38:55] [clears throat]
so to me that would be if somebody was
[1:38:59] run
>> the select board
[1:39:00] » select board yeah
>> so let's say a Austin yeah No, we didn't
[1:39:05] do that.
>> Select board budget committee.
[1:39:09] » It's It doesn't
>> specified for just one, right?
[1:39:16] » Charter.
>> I was going to say, didn't something
[1:39:17] happen in the charter with that?
>> Yeah.
[1:39:24] » So, are you telling me that we don't
need to do anything with that because
[1:39:26] it's being accountable?
>> I think so. Yes.
[1:39:28] » Yes. It is.
>> I'll put a question by that one.
[1:39:32] Charter.
[1:39:36] All right. 311 discipline.
[1:39:42] 312 grievances.
Um, so I have a problem. Well, I don't
[1:39:48] necessarily have a problem with it, but
312 we're not following. And I'm not
[1:39:52] sure the way that we're handling
grievances if it's feasible to expect us
[1:39:58] to be able to hit this. So if you think
about the most recent grievance that we
[1:40:02] have within five working days of the
event or the employee having knowledge
[1:40:07] of the event, they shall notify us
within 10 working days of receiving the
[1:40:11] notice. The supervisor shall respond in
writing with a determination.
[1:40:17] » The determination would be the issue.
You can you can acknowledge that within
[1:40:21] 10 days. That's not a problem. But you
might not have the determination within
[1:40:25] 10 days. I don't see how you could if
you think about
[1:40:29] » right it depends on how in-depth it is.
>> Yeah.
[1:40:31] » Yeah.
>> So I question whether it
[1:40:36] » I understand. I think it's it should be
something about in a timely fashion.
[1:40:43] » But if you read on to the to the next
unresolved
[1:40:48] » so the the next determination is
um we're moving on to the next step.
[1:40:53] It's unresolved.
>> Okay. Then you have 10 more days from
[1:40:56] then,
>> right? But it's either resolved or
[1:40:58] unresolved. But then it goes, it's
somebody else's responsibility. It drops
[1:41:01] into the town managers.
>> Yeah.
[1:41:06] » But at the end, you've only got 30,
let's see,
[1:41:09] » 30 days. Yes.
[1:41:14] » And then if it still goes, then it comes
to you guys.
[1:41:17] » Yep.
>> Right.
[1:41:18] So I I just
[1:41:25] » I think they have the 10 days in there
to keep things moving so that it doesn't
[1:41:28] become stagnant and just dropped.
>> But I feel like in the examples that
[1:41:34] I've been part of,
>> if they happen the day after we have a
[1:41:38] board meeting,
>> right,
[1:41:40] » you're already 10 days into it before we
even have a conversation. Correct. And I
[1:41:45] don't think that's a good practice. No.
So my comment is not that this is wrong.
[1:41:51] My comment is more about we as a board
maybe need to come up with a different
[1:41:56] way of doing this so that it can be
acted on quicker.
[1:42:02] » Our our involvement is in number five
only.
[1:42:06] » It should be. It's just the things that
she's been involved in involves the
[1:42:09] board.
>> Well, I know it's a little different.
[1:42:11] Yeah,
>> but you're right. But I'm not sure that
[1:42:14] that's
again that could be addressed above, you
[1:42:20] know,
>> we got it, we're looking into it. Um,
[1:42:26] we're going to the next step or
something versus
[1:42:30] I mean, what I'm thinking of is i.e. I
didn't get paid the right amount. You
[1:42:35] know, that's e, you know, okay, well,
looks like I had it. Yeah. Okay, you
[1:42:39] didn't. We'll pay you next week. Cut you
a check. Um,
[1:42:44] I didn't get my clothing allowance. Um,
yeah, you know, just
[1:42:52] the the everyday little things that
certainly should be able to get passed
[1:42:57] in in this short amount of time.
>> Yes. If it wasn't if it didn't involve a
[1:43:04] board member, then
these things would be fine. That's when
[1:43:09] that's where you're getting hung up.
>> Yep. Yeah.
[1:43:18] » Anything else in that section?
>> No.
[1:43:20] » Right. Transfers.
[1:43:25] 314 is town property.
So employees must not directly or
[1:43:32] indirectly use or allow the use of town
property of any kind for other than
[1:43:37] official activities. Town telephones,
cell phones, computers, etc. may be used
[1:43:42] for personal business only on an
emergency basis. Employees must maintain
[1:43:46] all town equipment and immediately
report any damage that occurs to town
[1:43:51] property.
What I've added to the end of that is
[1:43:57] um emails are included in that
[1:44:02] and should not town email should not be
used for personal business.
[1:44:10] And the example I have for you is the
bargaining units
[1:44:15] who use their sebatis.org email address.
Um, if they're bargaining for their
[1:44:22] union, then they should have a union
email address and not be using the town
[1:44:27] email address to do their personal
business. It's not town business then.
[1:44:34] » I think it's still town business.
But they were they were acting in a
[1:44:38] different capacity and potentially being
>> I've given a lot. George, do you really
[1:44:44] want to fight that battle? [laughter]
>> Whatever. Use your satis.org email
[1:44:50] address again. [laughter]
>> Damn it.
[1:44:56] » I just put it out there. And um
>> yeah, I
[1:45:00] I guess I feel like in in that
particular example,
[1:45:06] I feel like that is town business.
[1:45:11] [snorts] That's my take on it.
I just wanted an opportunity to try to
[1:45:16] get you to All right. Bend
[laughter]
[1:45:20] » sometimes.
>> Oh, it's after eight.
[1:45:26] » Even count.
>> [laughter]
[1:45:29] » We're putting a pin just above that to
bring it up on [laughter] the next
[1:45:33] topic. There's more people here.
[1:45:37] [laughter]
>> Are we at a good stop there?
[1:45:40] » Yep. All right.
>> Do we want to set another date to
[1:45:47] continue the process?
>> Probably.
[1:45:52] My
>> Are you so busy that you have to look at
[1:45:56] your calendar?
>> I do, man.
[1:46:00] » I don't have one of those 9 to five
jobs, you know.
[1:46:03] » I don't either, unfortunately.
>> Me either.
[1:46:08] » So, do we want to shoot for the 22nd,
which is
[1:46:15] » an off the 22nd or the 6th? Right.
That would be more.
[1:46:20] » But the 20 The 29th is here.
>> Yeah. But the 29th is a regular board
[1:46:24] meeting, right?
>> No. Two meetings. We had two meetings
[1:46:27] this month. So that's an extra
[1:46:32] » Yep.
>> So our next meeting is the 14th. Yeah.
[1:46:36] Next week the 15th.
[1:46:40] » 15th. Yes.
Mhm. Okay. So, do we 22nd, 29th?
[1:46:48] » I don't care. I can do either.
>> Okay.
[1:46:50] » Yep.
>> 22nd.
[1:46:52] » 22nd.
>> All right. 22nd 6:00 again.
[1:46:57] » Mhm.
>> All right.
[1:47:01] Thank you very much.
It is now.
[1:47:05] » So then we'll be 04.
>> We'll be going back. We'll be continuing
[1:47:08] this and then going back over what we
find out on these other ones.
[1:47:13] » Yes.
>> Policy.
[1:47:16] Okay. Yeah, this is really the only one
we did a we can say a complete is the
[1:47:19] remote participation one.
Okay.
[1:47:23] » And as we look through the personnel
policies, I'm assuming that we're going
[1:47:27] to review the appendix,
the index as well.
[1:47:31] » So the drug policy, drug and alcohol,
driving,
[1:47:38] harassment,
[1:47:46] » [clears throat]
[1:47:51] » All right.
Keep going.