Lets Rescind The Police Salary Vote Due to the Following...

The debate with Town Hall continues ... only one item requested under the State’s freedom of information statute on March 30th, intended for Town meeting purposes, has been made available.  The statute stipulates “within ten days”, it is now nearly 90.  The Town Manager wrote a letter, delivered in 30 days and not the statutory 10 days, giving specious and nonsensical reasons why the material could not be produced, ... “is not in the format requested” ... and that one of the responses was attached.  It was not attached.  The absence of any phone call or a meeting set up within the statutory ten days to discuss any “format” matter or other issues; instead nothing could be provided without cost to the taxpayer requester!  And this was so noted - written on one of the request forms.  He did note, however, in one case that he could not understand the specific request made, and I can agree with this assessment only!

I guess that since Town Meeting is over, and that the data requested cannot be used for that meeting, that the requests no longer have standing.  And will never be acted on!

Last Tuesday, at the Selectmen’s meeting, we were lectured to by the Manager/lawyer on the Law, it’s strict interpretation and implementation for more than 20 minutes.  Especially where it concerns the “strong” Town Manager statute.  This was in response to the personnel wage board question on the agenda.  There is a difference of opinion as to whether by-laws passed by prior Town Meetings over 40 years and acted upon by Town Boards establish an intent, or whether the new statute supercedes anything or everything from the past as only the Town Manager determines.  Article 6 of this statute clearly disputes complete negation of all  preceding actions of the Town.  The Town Manager stated that he is now responsible for negotiating contracts and attempted to include the Personnel board, but they “could not make the time”, but have done so for more than 40 years.  Why?  The Town Manager added the meetings were in the afternoon ... is this the reason?

How do you feel about Town Employees bargaining a Town Employee contract with Town Employees?  Especially when prior by-laws first prohibited any town employee member representing the Town, and secondly, amended in ‘96 adding the Town Manager, a Finance person, and the Department head to this five member team for their expertise.  But this team remained for 14 years with two “townees” from the Personnel Wage Board.  The Taxpayer was still represented.  We now are excluded, not because of the Town Manager, but that the Personnel Wage Board cannot meet this Manager’s requirements!  Over past years they would miss a meeting or two that they were assigned to, but were always updated by the Manager.  There had never been a total absence.  There are  rumors resonating from Town Hall that the personnel board will be eliminated.  I guess it has already occurred.

We are now also told, by the Manager, that the taxpayer on any union settlement can only bless or reject the dollar amount at Town Meeting ... we can not amend it or change it in any manner ... to do so is illegal!  Any debate or discussion can only occur before the Selectmen as Town Meeting attendance continues to be loaded as a single article crowd.  And when the existing 1% raise for Fiscal Year ‘11 and ‘12 matter was brought up, it was ignored.  Their “directive” of the ZERO/3% was accomplished by the Town Manager and  so stated both at the February Selectmen’s  meeting and in the “memo of understanding”.  (It is interesting that this ZERO was never mentioned or published in this memo!  I wonder why?  Was it because one member of the four in the room was already collecting this in his paycheck and a second was well aware of it?)  And again as presented before the AdCom and Town Meeting.  I gave copies of the 1% contract sheet to the AdCom at their meeting, but they still voted to approve the ZERO/3% as presented.  The Town Manager and Finance Director at Town Meeting admitted to the 1% but stated that it involves only a few, than later a small majority of employees.  In fact 26 of the 29 employees are on max. 

I have questioned the legality of this 1% item. I am told it is in an approved contract ... it took effect as stated on July 1, 2010.  The contract’s expiration date was June 30, 2010!  Either it is not legal, and the employees owe the Town money, or we already had an agreement for 1% for the indefinite future  ... fiscal ‘11 and beyond?  It cannot be both or neither.  Instead we are told by the Town Manager and the Selectmen that it is both!  And this is not ZERO/3% but a total of 5%!  It was already 2%!

And from a strict interpretation of the statute, the clause in the statute on the Manager’s salary clearly states, “not to exceed an amount appropriated by the town meeting”.  As the new amount exceeded the Town Meeting number, the Town Manager merely had the Finance Director sign a transfer request for some $12,000 which was approved by the Advisory Committee under the transfer by-law.  Was AdCom advised of this clause in the Town Manager statute?   So much for the statute and Town Meeting!  Incidentally prior to this year all requests of this type made by the Manager were signed by the Manager and not the Finance Director.  And the Selectmen have not answered the inquiry as to whether they are informed of transfers in advance, as there is no record of this in their minutes.

How do you like them apples?