I now call to order the Monday, November 17th meeting of the Gardener City Council. The clerk will now please call the role. >> Council Brooks, >> present. >> Council Craig, >> present. >> Council Dawis, >> present. >> Council Harder, >> present. >> Council Heath, >> present. >> Council Hegel, >> present. >> Council Kazinskus, >> present. Council Math,
>> present. Council Tone, >> Council Tibo Munoz >> present, >> and President Tyrus >> present. Those who wish may now rise for the opening prayer, pledge of allegiance. >> Almighty God, we thank thee for bringing us together this evening. Inspire us to worthy deeds and sound decisions and
direct us towards the attainment of good city government. We pray thee to bless and protect all the people of our city and to so guide and inspire us that we may deliberate in unity and harmony. Amen. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic
for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Announcement of open meeting recordings. Any person may make an audio or video recording of any open session of a meeting or may transmit the meeting
through any medium subject to reasonable requirements of the chair as to the number, placement, and operational equipment used so as to not interfere with the conduct of the meeting. Any person intending to make such recording should notify the chair forth with all documents, exhibits used or referenced at the meeting must be submitted in
duplicate to the chair as it become part of the meeting minutes. Is anyone recording tonight's meeting? Reading of minutes of prior meetings. We'll begin with the reading and approval of the July 7th, 2025 joint public hearing with the planning board
meeting minutes, the July 7th, 2025 regular meeting minutes and the August 4th, 2025 informal meeting minutes. Council Cormier >> move to wave the reading of the minutes and accept them as printed. >> Second >> motion made by councelor Cormier, second by councelor Kazinskus to wave the reading of the minutes and accept them
as presented. Is there discussion? All those in favor? I. >> I. >> All those opposed, no. Motion passes. >> There are no public hearings. There are no communications from the mayor.
Petitions, applications, communications, etc. Item 11730, plan number 3082599, Pleasant Street, Main Street, West Line Street, National Grid, to install a new
handhold in the sidewalk on Pleasant Street. Install new transformer pad with ballards in the sidewalk behind 8 Main Street and extend the sidewalk out around the pad to make room for pedestrians. Install duct bank between
the handhole and pad about 140 ft and between the pad and existing MH200 on West Line Street. Council Cormier. >> Uh yes. Move to schedule a public hearing and refer to the public service committee for study and report. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Cormier. Second
by councelor Dur allowance to refer this item to the public service committee and schedule a public hearing. Is there discussion? >> All those in favor? I. >> I. >> All those opposed? No. Motion passes. Item 11731,
plan number 31105 017, Derby Drive, West Line Street, National Grid to install new handhold in West Line near the back of 8 Main Street with conduit from there to pad 200-1
to refeed 8 Main Street. Replacing old conduits to pads 200-1 and 200-2. Installing about 204 of conduit from NH200 to new SGMH-1
at rear of 58 Main Street off Derby Drive. Council Cormier. >> Uh move to refer to the public service committee for further study and report and to schedule a public hearing. Motion made by councelor Cormier, second by councelor Hardurn to refer this item to the public service committee and to
schedule a public hearing. Is there discussion? All those in favor? I >> I motion pass. All those against motion passes. Safety committee. Item 11729,
an application for motor vehicle dealer's license class 2 for FJ Drive Zone Corp at 407 Chestnut Street. Councelor Cormier. >> Uh, thank you, Mr. President. The safety committee had a chance to meet on this application on Friday. Uh, we discussed
this with the chief, the city clerk, uh, and the building inspector. There were no objections to granting this application, and we unanimously recommend to approve. So, I so move to approve the application. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Cormier, second by councelor Harder to approve the
application. Is there discussion? >> All those in favor? I. >> I. All those against? No. Motion passes. Welfare committee. Item 11688, an ordinance to amend chapter 675 of the
code of the city of Gardener, thereof entitled zoning to allow for the operation and use of cottage kitchens in the residential districts within the city of gardener. Councelor Mack. >> Thank you, council president. There was a joint public hearing with the planning board on November 3rd. I make a motion
to send the ordinance to first printing. Second >> motion made by councelor Mack, second by councelor Heath to send this item to its first printing. Is there discussion? >> All those in favor? I. >> All those against? No. >> Motion passes.
Item 11704, an ordinance to amend chapter 675 of the code of the city of gardener thereof entitled zoning to promote housing growth and production in the city. Councelor Mack. >> Thank you. Thank you. I make a motion to send the ordinance to first printing.
>> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Mack, second by councelor Tibo Munos to send this item to its first printing. Is there discussion? Councelor Mack. >> Thank you. Um I just want to get back after the joint public hearing with the uh planning board on November 3rd. The planning board voted unanimously to
recommend passage of the ordinance. The only recommendation being they supported the change from the that occurred in the welfare department that an ADU shall not exceed half the gross floor of the area of the principal dwelling or 1,250
square ft which whichever is smaller. Uh this was a change from the original 1900 ft maximum. Thank you. >> Thank you councelor Mack. Any further discussion? Councelor Heg. >> Thank you Mr. President. Uh I think this both these packages and this one in
particular I very much support. Um when looking through though I had one thing I caught uh and I'm going to offer a little amendment to it. Uh in section three um it ends up being a subsection E or clause subsection E clause 3 on the
ADUs. The current language says ADUs may be rented or occupied by family members but may not be sold separately from the principal dwelling. So leading to my motion to amend um I worry a little bit that the word may is too ambiguous. A
lot of times shall is used in place of that to make it a you just stronger language. And then looking at the state's original act that this stems from really they they do put a lot of emphasis on us not restricting but being able to go broader. And so a lot of that language, you know, wouldn't restrict it
to just family members, right? because you may want to rent to a veteran, a friend, um, or just someone you're looking to make rent from. So, I do worry about where we're trying to expand housing and promote housing, having that language be strictly to family members. I don't know how we would either enforce
that as well. Uh so with that I'm moving to amend the ordinance in section three subsection E clause 3 by striking may be rented or occupied by family members but may and replacing therew with shallow uh
to keep that a little stronger and to keep it open-ended. Second >> motion made by councelor Hegeland, second by councelor Mack to amend section 3 subsection E clause three by striking may be rented or occupied by
family members but may and replacing it there with shall. Is there discussion? >> Council councelor Kazinskus. >> I support the councelor's amendment. Uh I think another reason to make it shall
is to make is to make it definitive and he said you know he mentioned it being open-ended right now. I think it's really important especially with this being new that it is very clear on the intentions and again especially in the city we want to support the options for
housing. Um and I think that will help make it pretty I think it will help go in that direction. Thank you. Thank you, Council. Any further discussion? Council Brooks. >> Thank you, Mr. President. I don't have a problem with the the change. My question
would be should we send a notification back to the planning board just advising that we have made this change in case they see a reason that we shouldn't. Their recommendation was to approve it as is with with the change from 900 to
1250. Are you making a motion to amend the secondary amendment? >> No, I'm just I'm just asking it that would it make if we approve this, should we also be just going back to the sending the information? Should I make a motion?
>> You can make a secondary motion if you wish on top of this. >> Okay. So then I guess if I can add to that that to uh notify the planning board of the change. >> That make sense? Second >> motion made by councelor Brooks, second
by councelor Dur allowitz to make a secondary amendment to the motion to add notifying the planning board of the changes being made here tonight. Is there discussion? Councelor Mack. >> Um I would just like the planning board if they have any concerns to respond before this is uh at our next meeting to
go to go to second printing. Thank you. >> Thank you. Any further discussion? This vote will be on the secondary amendment. All in favor? I >> I >> All oppose. Motion or the secondary amendment passes. Now we'll be discussing and voting on the main
amendment. >> Is there discussion? >> All those in favor? I. >> I. I. >> All those opposed? No. The amendment passes. Therefore, we will now be moving on to the main motion as amended to send this item to first printed as amended.
>> Is there further discussion? >> All those in favor? I. >> I. >> All those guns? Motion passes. Finance Committee. Item 11718. A communication from the mayor regarding certification of the FY 2026 tax rate
tax recalculation form and levy limit worksheet. Councelor Mack. I make a motion to place the communication on file. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Mack, second by councelor journal allowance to place the communication on file. Is there discussion? Councelor Mack. >> Thank you, council president. This is the annual tax certification which is
determined by the Massachusetts Department of Revenue. The FY26 property tax amount will be in the amount of $13.77 per thousand. This is a drop from the $14.36 for FY25. However, property assessments have
increased based on new growth and will be reflective in the property bills. The city assessor submits the necessary documentation to the department of revenue. This is known as the tax recap and this document with the supplement supplemental information sets the annual tax rate. I'd like to thank um the city
assessor for all of her work in this process. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Mack. Any further discussion? >> Motions to place on file. All those in favor I. >> All those against? No. Motion passes. Item 11719, a measure authorizing the city to enter
into a contract for up to 5 years for on call engineering services for the Garden Municipal Airport. Councelor Mack. >> Thank you, Council President. Uh I make a motion to authorize the order. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Mack, second by councelor Dalawitz to authorize the measure. Is there discussion? Councelor
Mack. >> Thank you. This is for ongoing in uh call on call engineering services for the airport. Um as the airport requires more specific um area of expertise and knowledge to oversee the master plan and execute it. Um it's important that we
have somebody on call um as the airport is regulated by FF FAA requirements. Um and this again is on an as needed basis. We're not paying out a specific um salary or stipen for services not needed. Thank you. Thank you, Council Mack. Any further discussion? All those
in favor? I. >> All those against? No. Motion passes. >> Item 11720, a measure authorizing the payment of prior fiscal year salary expenditure. Board of Health and Conservation Commission. Councelor Mack. >> Thank you. This is to pay three
commission commission and board members. One from the board of health and two from the conservation commission. There was an oversight in the process which has been changed to avoid this from occurring in the future. I make a motion to authorize the measure. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Mack, second by councelor Dowitz to authorize the
measure. Is there discussion? All those in favor? I. All those against no. >> Motion passes. A communication or sorry item 11722 a communication from the mayor regarding the certification of the FY 2025 free
cash and retained earnings. Council General Allowance. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, this communication outlines certified free cash in the general fund and the retained earnings in each of the five enterprise accounts. That's golf, sewer, water, landfill, and solid waste. Uh, the mayor has submitted additional appropriations related to the free cash,
some of which are on our agenda tonight. And the finance committee um was unanimous in um and I move to place this communication on file. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Dawit, second by councelor Mack to place this communication on file. Is there discussion?
All those in favor, I. >> All those against, no. Motion passes. >> Item 1124, an order appropriating $20,196 from free cash to the city's other postemployment benefits, OPEB,
stabilization account. Council General All. >> Thank you again, Mr. President. uh this order and the next order are in alignment with the city's administrative fiscal policies uh to fund this account at 1% of free cash as outlined by the mayor. This approach appropriations contribute to the trust fund that will
fund retirement liabilities if the city um was ever uh ever ceases to exist. Um in order to maintain our bond rating uh we do need to fund this account annually annually at a nominal level. Um the mayor and many members if not all members of the council have expressed at some point you know their dissatisf
dissatisfaction of having to do do this but um in order to keep our bond rating um it is necessary. Finance committee was in favor and I move the order. >> Second a motion made by councelor journal out second by councelor hegland to move the order. Is there discussion? >> This me uh this order requires a roll
call vote. The clerk will now please call the role. >> Councelor Brooks. >> Yes. >> Councelor Pormier. >> Yes. Council General, >> yes. >> Councilor Harder, >> yes. >> Council Heath, >> yes. >> Council Hegler, >> yes. >> Council Kazinskus, >> yes. >> Council Math, >> yes. >> Council Tivos, >> yes. >> And President Tyrus, >> yes.
>> 10. >> 10 years. The motion passes. >> Item 11725, an order appropriating $21,951 from free cash to the Department of Public Works road resurfacing account. Council journal. >> Thank you, Mr. President. This order is
also in alignment with the minimum 10% outline in the fiscal policies to fund road repaving in the city from the available free cash. Finance committee was in favor and I move the order. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor journal out. Second by councelor hegwin to move the order. Is there discussion?
>> Cler will now please call the role. >> Councelor Brooks. >> Yes. >> Councelor Craig Warmier. >> Yes. >> Councelor Dawitz. >> Yes. >> Councelor Harder. >> Yes. >> Councelor Heath. >> Yes. >> Councelor Heglin. >> Yes. >> Councelor Kazinsquecus. >> Yes. >> Council Matt. Yes. Council Toss. >> Yes. >> And President Tyros.
>> Yes. >> 10 years. The motion passes. >> Item 11727, an order appropriating $100,000 from free cash to the landfill pump repair account. Council journal. >> Thank you again, Mr. President. The Lee pump has completely failed at the city's
landfill. Um, and this appropriation would be for a full repair replacement of the equipment. There is currently a temporary fix going on. An outside service is coming in. Those invoices um were part of our packet and some of what the finance committee asked for for additional information. There's also
additional information on the bid um the bid process in there from the mayor uh which was asked for as well. Uh there are still a couple of key pieces of information that are still required on this the overall cost of the project and outline of that as well as the total
amount of funding and where it's coming from being used. There was a pre previous transfer appropriation from the council earlier in the spring um as well as this one and just want to be able to tie it all in together. So um as long as I would like to actually move to send this item back to finance committee for
further study and report. >> Motion made by councelor hegland second by sorry motion made by councelor journal second by councelor heglin to move this item to the finance committee for further study and report. Is there discussion? Councelor Heglin. >> Thank you Mr. President. I just want to agree uh with councelor journal. Uh I
would made the motion originally to recommend this to uh the full council with the caveat that all of that information was received. I do want to thank Angela Drima who's our acting and interim uh department head for the health department for getting us as much info as she did, but it did not have all
of the pieces we need. Um and I think where it did come quickly, it is a large document. There's a lot of pages there to sort through. I think a little more time will hurt either to sort through those. So I appreciate and will be supporting this motion. Thank you, Council Hegel. Any further discussion?
Motion's to refer this item back to finance committee for further study and report. All those in favor? I. >> All those against? No. >> Motion passes. Item 11732, Council Lazison, November Waterford Community Center update. Councelor Hegman.
>> Thank you, Mr. President. As many of you saw or attended, uh, Growing Places had a ribbon cutting ceremony to celebrate their being fully operational. While there's still some potential for them to lease additional space, some minor work to be done, things are running smoothly for them. Uh, in further updates, the
CAC continues to make progress towards outfitting their space with the hope of still being able to fully open late spring, early summer. Director Julie Mian has been diligent and a strong communicator with the city and with myself as she follows all the proper steps to get work done. So, I want to thank her for all of those efforts and
constant communication. Additionally, I do want to give a thank you to State Representative John Slottnik who recently secured another $100,000 earmark uh for the organization and their work in moving to the new community center from the legislature. Uh so, this will go towards again the next phase and steps of their buildout.
So, thank you to him as well for that and supporting gardener and the CAC. I also had a chance to meet with historical commission member Alanelli to discuss the potential of adding a couple of rooms uh in the back area where they're expecting to be located to be used as viewing and research rooms for
residents. So essentially they would have the storage space in the current old former locker rooms that they are existing at the time with the hope of being able to move things out either for display or specific research so people don't have to be going to the storage area and to make that more efficient. It
seemed like a great idea. The mayor was certainly open to that as well. Uh we've also discussed finding someone with the right expertise to advise the city on what work such as shelving or climate control would be needed to properly store our archived items. And there's more information hopefully to be coming
on that. But I do want to again thank Mr. Ognelli for his constant communication. Uh it was greatly appreciated. He's been again very thorough and diligent as I'm sure we all know and expect. The senior center entryway I'm excited to report has begun to see some work. A concrete pad and
ramp has been worked on as a precursor to the storefront style doors that will eventually be installed. I think some fencing was also put up there as well. The doors will likely at this point arrive in 6 to 8 weeks. It was originally an 8 to 10 week, but by, you know, in the time it's lapsed since they were ordered, probably six to eight
weeks before those doors arrived. Uh, director Josh Cormier was a big part in making sure that contract happened. Uh, and again, he's been incredibly uh, diligent about communicating and keeping me up to date on things, especially when it comes to bids and contracts. So, I want to give him um a little shout out
and some and and thank you to him as well for his communication. As for the building in general, progress certainly has been slow. There are several things underway, but they have been for a while. And when you compare what the nonprofits have uh accomplished
with the space they're leasing in the same amount of time, the difference is certainly stark. And I think the pace is holding up moving forward with the use of the building. Obviously, things take time. Um parts have lead times. We have more steps that we have to go through as a municipality. Um, but that was the
case in many ways for the organizations currently leasing space as well. And I think the difference that I've seen and what I found in my time as liaison and communication specialist is that they made it really a top priority for them. This was their sole focus. Um, and in my opinion, we've had a lot of things going
on in the city and I don't feel that the city has necessarily been able to put all the time and resources into this project. And I do think the administration hopefully in this new term upcoming will prioritize and drive this project more than they have. And so I want to take a step back and take in
what's on the list to get done. Two bathrooms need to be renovated. And by renovated specifically, there's fixture replacements and AD improvements happening. The doors to the senior center, as previously mentioned, need to be finished. The HVAC for the senior center needs to be finished. While the
mini splits have been installed, the compressor has been installed. There's still some hooking up and connecting to do to make those functioning. There are other investments and improvements that we've approved and there's a lengthy list of smaller items from locks to signage and everything in between that needs to get done. But my point with
this is that I think we need to keep the scale of this in perspective and not over complicate things. And we also need to stop accepting that speed of government argument. I think there is more that we can be doing as a city to move these things along. And so part of my concern is that when we approved
these capital improvements for the community center at the beginning of the year, we also approved other very needed projects at city hall and elsewhere in the city. By dollar amount, the community center is actually the smaller portion. And as far as I can tell, none or little of that work has begun, which leads me to my next concern that if
we're struggling to get new fixtures put in the bathrooms and doors replaced, understanding lead times and parts. Uh, and it's, you know, really 3 years since this project has begun. I think we do need to keep a close eye on the rest of the list. Um, I worry about delays,
meaning cost increases down the line. Uh, and I know the mayor is aware of that as well, and he's certainly paying attention. But, you know, understanding that some delays are out of the mayor's administration's control, I do hope to see that a better job will be done with the elements that are completely in
their control. So, when I took this task on, I believed in the project. I still do. I think this is a great um asset for the city and I'm really excited about the prospect of this. I think it's going to be great for us and um our community and I do think it's a much better way to deal with the
old buildings that we have. Um better than the way we used to for sure. So, I do want to applaud the council and the mayor uh for changing course on that because for too many years, right, we left these buildings to fall into disrepair until either like we recently saw with the pool, it has to come down
uh and that ultimately ends up being the only option available to us. So, I think we also need to understand though that while there are challenges, we can't overcome those challenges without leaning into them. So, I feel that, you know, I've done a good job of improving communications between the council and mayor, and I want to thank the mayor for
that as well and his role in it. Um, and certainly between the city and tenants, I think we've really improved communications there as well. And of course, there's still room for improvement. Uh, and I do not feel that there's much more I can do in my current role. Like with the nonprofits, I think
someone at city hall really needs to be put in a position to drive the project and to be empowered to do so. someone that is a day-to-day employee with the time and hours, you know, dedicated to this role. So, I let the president know and I let the mayor know that I'm going to step down as council liazison and
communication specialists for the project. So, this will be my last update, but I have recommended to the council president that further updates on the project be handled through one of our standing subcommittees. I think that'd be the best avenue for this during the appropriate department head updates. Uh, and we'll see what goes
from there. I think we're just that's at a point really where we're at and thank you. Uh with that I move to replace the update on file. >> Second >> motion made by councelor Hegeland second by councelor allowance to place the update on file. Is there discussion? >> Councelor Kazinskus
councelor Heglin's suggestion to have updates in the future on this. Um and if I can the only question I have through the chair to the counselor is who would be delivering those updates? council.
>> Thank you, Mr. President. That's a great question. At this time, um I do know the building commissioner is still fairly involved with the project, so she I think at the time and the mayor would be the best people. Um but certainly we'll have to see if the mayor ends up appointing anyone. Um I know there's
talks about that and there's conversations around that, but I don't believe that's been determined yet as to who might be the lead or what entity might be the lead on the project. So that is a little up in the air um and something we would need to figure out. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And I either way I would support those
updates and I thank council hein for the work that he's done and um the uh effort that's been given and the acknowledgement that the council be involved in the communication on the project. Waterford is a wonderful project for this community. It's it's
going to be great when it's done. I really appreciate all that information. It's something that we've needed for a long time and we need to make sure that we have good information out there and I I've stressed that before when you've given your updates and I believe the same for today. I I do, like I said, I
totally support the um suggestion for the future because I think it's important that we get updates and I think it's been really made clear um through councelor Hegel and these updates that this project has to be a priority and needs to get finished and I appreciate the information you gave
supporting that as well. Thank you. >> Thank you councelor Kazinskus for the discussion. Councelor Mack, >> I just want to echo many of uh councelor Kazinskus' comments and thank councelor Hegeland. Um, I do want to support the idea of getting a like a facilities manager. Um, if you have a project like a clerk of the works to oversee this.
Um, it it has gone on much further than we anticipated. There's been a lot of change in move in dates. There's been a lot of incorrect information floating around over the past few months. Um, and I just time is money and we need somebody more hands-on there on a frequent basis to make sure things are
being done in a correct fashion because mistakes are going to not only extend um the ability for uh the senior center, the CC and other places to move in or for us to lease other areas of the building. Um but it it it's also at this
point it's um I don't want to see any more cost um associated with the with this project that needs to be and I don't want to see any mistakes made i.e. Mackie Park that we have to go back and fix for the down. Thank you. >> Thank you councelor Mack. Any further
discussion? >> Motion to place the item on file. All those in favor I. All those against? No. >> Motion passes. Item 11 1733, an ordinance to amend the code of the city of Gardner, chapter 8, attachment E, thereof entitled non-UN
compensation schedule, by removing positions into a new attachment F and setting the compensation for such positions. Council, >> thank you, Mr. President. I uh move for the ordinance to be uh sent to first
printing. Thank you. >> Second. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Hegelin, second by councelor Gernal. Send this item to its first printing. Uh before there is discussion, I would like to call upon the mayor to um get asked to present a short deck for the council.
>> Uh on this item, Mr. Mayor, >> a lot shorter than the text hearing. Um uh so thank you very much, Mr. President. Uh councils for the time, too. This is something that's been in the works for quite some time. As I notified the uh council earlier that we had created an ad hoc committee to look
at the various different compensation proposals for our non-in employees that have been put forward. Uh so the topics that we'll have uh for tonight's presentation are listed before here. Just a review of that committee and their work. Uh the proposal enhancements that are before you right now uh talking
about how those step systems would be interpreted for our employees. uh cost analysis of such and then the initial feedback we've started to receive from our staff uh on the proposal that is before you this evening. The ad hoc committee has met on three different occasions reviewing various different proposals that came before it. Uh
looking mainly at the initial compensation proposal that I submitted to the council as part of the budget project process, excuse me, the proposal that was submitted by the finance committee. uh as well as looking at various different other step scales that were received from uh different communities through the Massachusetts
Human Resources Association. That's a subset of the Massachusetts Municipal Association that Director Morris is a part of uh who put out an all call asking for different copies of what other communities do. We received several different copies. Uh those are available on the city's website, agenda center, uh for the ad hoc committee
where you can review these at any time as well. Uh, Attorney Puseteri also um followed up uh with to the committee uh providing the same communication that was previously submitted via email to all of the city councilors about the uh potential uh unionization of some of our
department head positions uh notifying us that we were not to touch those as a part of this process in order to make sure that we were following all department of labor standards. Uh so those are not included in the proposal that you see before you today. That is why only those five department heads uh that are listed in the ordinance are those that were excluded in the filing
with the department of labor relations by those uh looking to potentially unionize. Uh the proposal that you see before you worked through those uh conversations that were brought up through the finance committee's proposal on creating a uniform step system across uh various
different um positions that we have here in the city. making it so that within groupings there's consistent percentages between each steps uh and making it more defined as to what positions fall into each grouping. Uh for the lower groupings mainly for our uh supervisory
staff and our hourly staff creating that one-year step uh because their pays are so much lower than our department head steps uh to make sure that that's recognized by adding a lower percentage one-year step. That's why if you look at our supervisory staff uh it's 2% between the steps and our hourly staff it's a percent and a quarter between the steps
whereas for the department heads where it's a longer phrase it's 3 and a/4%. Uh and then adjusting the years across the steps too to make sure that we have that system in place there too. Uh really creating a step system is what that last bullet means. Other pieces of feedback that we received we're trying
to find ways to recognize previous service for the city in determining the step scale. We're going to get to that a little bit more in a couple slides down the line. Uh but in using that in order to create a clear roadmap for longevity growth for our employees who have been with us for quite some time. In the
spirit of transparency, there are some things that this proposal did not address. The first being tying the ordinance and pay raises to a performance review system. I've said this from this podium before uh but for uh the point of saying it again here in the context of this discussion and for those benefit the benefit of the public
who may be watching this evening who may not have seen earlier I personally am not in favor of tying pay raises through this uh ordinance particularly because it's set by ordinance to a performance review mainly on the grounds that it adds a very high level of subjectivity to what we're budgeting for on the
city's end of things. Uh, I think that performance reviews are important and I'm not saying that that's not something we should look at. It is something we are looking at implementing in the administration, but tying it to pay raises that affect the budget in terms of how much we need in a given fiscal year, particularly where uh this
proposal has increases on an employees anniversary date, not on a fiscal year date. It creates it so that there could be some fluctuation in what we're budgeting for there, too. So to make it more of an objective system that's codified in the city code itself. That's
why it's a uh years of service based system and not a performance-based system. Uh another thing that wasn't able to be recognized in this round because I think where we are right now we needed to start with a starting point and then build off of that at some point. So this is not saying that this isn't something that could be looked at
in the future but make sure we're at least acknowledging that it's not included in this now is prior service in a different municipality or the private sector. This ordinance proposal itself recognizes service within the city in various departments. Whether you were promoted, transferred to a different department, had a lateral move or
something like that nature, not if you were to come from another municipality going in. Where that is reflected, however, is that it does still allow flexibility in the first step hire that the mayor can come to the council and request a step two hire instead of a step one hire. Uh so there is some ways that that's included there too, but not
by adding a year-to-year basis for it. And then another thing that I believe does need to be looked at but is not included in this proposal itself is looking at the city's current longevity payments uh ordinance that we have right now. Right now when an employee gets to a certain number of years they receive an annual stipen of $50 per year of
service. That is one of the lowest paid longevity payments that we have across our city contracts that we have. Uh but it's not something that's included in this. Again I feel felt like we needed to start somewhere once a system is in place. I feel like seeing how it's actually implemented, seeing how it's rolling, there's times that you can look
to uh, you know, improve a system that's there, but I think this proposal does put our best step forward and getting us into something that we can be with our uh, employees to where we need to be working toward. Uh, so a walkthrough of where employees would fall under the steps step grid
under the language of this ordinance. uh I've borrowed from uh the finance committee proposal through councelor heglin uh to recognize up to 75% of previous years of service in another
city position. So for instance if an employee worked as a assistant director in their department for 10 years and got promoted to a director in that department and had served in that director position for two years. the
previous years of service from that 10 years as an assistant director would allow them to carry over 7 and a half years of service into the step scale system when they got promoted because that's 75% of that 10 years but then they have two years of service in that
department head role so their years of service counted for the steps scale system would be 9 and a half years so they would fall into the appropriate step for 9 and a half years of service this allows us to capture some of that previous years of service that the employee has with the city to promote and incentivize staying with the city
long term. So you see that upward growth. It prevents us having any issues of someone getting promoted to a different step and then having to start at step one and then maybe looking at a finding a trying to fix where someone may have a look like they have a reduction in pay but trying to address that in the long term. Uh so all of
those things are things that are addressed by allowing this look back uh period if you will. But the other thing I want to say too is it also caps how much we carry over from that look bad period at a period of 10 years. What that does is it allows a financial stop gap to make sure we're not increasing
too much by implementing this proposal newly now in this fiscal year and can have that evaluated as we go forward. However, if a position if an employee has been in the same exact position for however many years that they've been here, they carry over a full total years
of service for that. If an employee was hired in that position eight years ago, they'd fall at eight years of service in the step scale. If that employee was hired in that position 12 years ago, they'd carry over at a 12-ear step for that. So your years in position are 100%
counted. Your year years in previous positions are where that 75% come into play. So that's how uh we would be looking at setting those steps moving forward. Uh my goal is on the administration side that if and whenever this should make it to second printing
from the city council. The same vote that a vote for second printing would come forward, I would also submit the years of service per the language of this ordinance that says the mayor will submit something to the city council that if someone starts at a step higher than step one or we're recognizing years of service from a previous position
within the city that those years of service be ratified by the city council, that would be when I would per put that forward there too. So that not only would people see where employees fell into the steps, but the full actual this is where this employee falls within that step scale would be submitted at that
time for council ratification to for that moving forward. That's not something that would have to be done on an annual basis because once we've voted to recognize their years of service, that would be where that person falls. But if a new hire was made or a new promotion was made, that process would start over again at that point to make sure we're recognizing an employes's
previous years of service for the city. Um so again while the look back caps at 10 years for previous positions that look back does not exist if you've maintained your same position with the city over the course of years you carry your full years of service within that position. That's really the main goal
here. That's the TV remote itself. So without turning the TVs off going to the next slide. Uh for the cost analysis of this the total cost of implementing this uh ordinance proposal will be $110,000. that is $30,000 less than my original proposal that I submitted through the
budget process and then a $10,000 uh uh less than the finance committee's proposal that was done. Uh but again, just noting that those positions are not included in this that were included in the previous proposals. Uh initial feedback, I have begun meeting one-on-one with the staff that's included in this ordinance to talk about
what led to this ordinance being constructed. Uh what information was used to work to set these SK steps. uh what uh criteria would be used in determining that employee steps and where they would fall on this step grid based off of their individual years of service. Uh so
those uh meetings have uh I've met with about 75% of the employees uh who are included in this ordinance. Uh have largely been positive. I we really haven't received negative feedback on this from the employees who I've spoken to. In fact, many are thankful to see that we're recognizing some form of uh
previous service uh from the city. Uh so that was really the biggest uh feedback that we've received is that's been a welcomed site to be able to see because it does incentivize them to say and recognizes them for being with the city for some of them decades. Uh so it's really uh you know good to see that they
were interested in that there too. Um going back uh to something I mentioned in the previous slide about not recognizing years of service from other communities. That's something that when our ad hoc committee voted uh earlier to recommend this to the city council at
our six o'clock meeting this evening, uh the question came up of can an example of that be given of what that would look like if we did that. Uh what that would look like is the best example we have right now is in our police union contracts that if someone worked eight years as a police officer in the town of
Westminster and then came here to the city of Gardner under or I'll use 10 years to use an example that is easy to do with the math. If you worked 10 years in Westminster, you came to Gardener. Under this proposal here, you carry over the seven and a half years of service under 75. If you worked for the city of
Gardener for 10 years, under this proposal, we would not be counting your 10 years of service from Westminster when you came here. Under the police department's contract that we currently have, we recognize years of service in another municipality when you come to the city as a police officer. So, you
would start at a 10-year step uh as a new police officer if you transferred from the town of Westminster and had 10 years there. That's not included in this proposal. This proposal only counts our internal employees that we have right now. Uh and their internal positions that they've had from the previous not employment in the private sector nor
employment in another municipality. Again, we needed to start somewhere and I think that that's the easiest way to ease into this new system. Um but I think getting some type of system and starting somewhere is where we need to be at this point. So I do believe that this proposal is in the best interest of the city. I do believe this is uh where
we should be working towards. This has my full support on this proposal and I'm happy to answer any questions that the council may have. >> Thank you, Mayor Nicholson. Do any counselors have questions for the mayor while he's uh up at the podium? >> Tunes.
>> Thank you, President Tyrros. Um, few questions. Um I'm wondering about the um labor standards that you're referring to like what is there are there more specifics in terms of um uh
why um choose I lost my train I thought >> why those positions weren't included. Uh so the opinion that was written by the city solicitors and um emailed out by the law department to all of us um that can certainly be resent uh made
available is uh working through an outside labor attorney that we're uh contracted with uh who specializes in this work. Uh if where those depart where those department heads have notified the department of labor relations that they are exploring the option of electing whether or not to
join a union or not. any action that's taken as a result related to the work of that work compensation, time off pay, any benefits that would could be included in a collective bargaining agreement that's now taken since the city's been made on notice that they are going through that profit uh process
could be viewed as an unfair labor practice under the Department of Labor Relations as a way to almost bribe those employees of voting against joining a union or unionizing. Uh so we want to make sure that we're following those proposals. That's not something that came from me. that came from the law department directly and any questions like that I'm sure attorney will be
happy to answer but that's the summary of what he included in that legal opinion that has been emailed out so that's why we went with that opinion >> and um I I want just want to reiterate what I said in in the last time we discussed this that importance of keeping and um attracting keeping good
employees and and attracting the best candidates um I'm just wondering why like is it in relation to this proposal why it is that um 14 department heads have decided to unionize and what is it that they're looking to to gain by doing
that I mean is there something that's um and and and we just had a another resignation of a department head what is the relationship between that if any >> I'm going to interject and caution against diving into that topic
>> counselor >> about why people want to unionize we can just talk about that or is that that >> we have to discuss matters related to this proposal. Any action that's been taken by individuals uh outside of this proposal would not be proper for this
council to discuss right now. >> Any further questions for the mayor? >> Thank you, Mayor N. >> Thank you, Mr. President. >> Any further discussion on this item? Councelor Heg. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, I'll start by saying, you know, I want to I
appreciate the work done by the mayor, the rest of the ad hoc committee, uh, to get this done before us tonight. Uh, as I've said before, this is not a small or easy undertaking. It's a challenge, and there are reasons it's not been done in decades up to this point. What we're doing and what we should focus on is
that our compensation system is being modernized, depoliticized, and standardized. We talked a lot about equity in our previous discussions and making sure that there's an equitable objective system. Even as the mayor said tonight, there's dozens of problems and issues with our current system and this doesn't solve all of them, but it does
give us a some system in which we can solve those problems far easier and far quicker than we could in the past. Importantly, it addresses issues we've had with retraction and retention, which is something I think we've all been concerned with, and certainly wanting to reward our employees. Um, you know, it
was clear that this group and the mayor were committed to coming up with something. And I think this allows for longtime employees to be rewarded for their continued service, not only in the same job, but for related work as well. It also allows the mayor and the council some degree of flexibility when hiring brand new employees. All of these are
good for the city's hiring practices and good for the taxpayer because ultimately high and unnecessary turnover costs, money, opportunities, and services. I also want to say uh that I think this has been a healthy process. uh will hopefully pass the document that is before us tonight which is the third
version filed by the council. Each evolution has made meaningful and important changes taking into account feedback from counselors, employees and constituents. And lastly, as the mayor said, I want to reiterate that this is a start. There are several other areas that need attention that we should look into at uh
the near future like the stipen system, longevity, maybe outside service, clothing allowance, as well as um other items that we'll I'm sure we'll come across. I don't think it's likely that we'll ever find a perfect system to start with, but getting a system, and I think this is a strong one, I think is
the right move. Um, which is why in addition to those other items, I think one of the most important changes we're making to this ordinance is the mandatory periodic reviews. Uh there is language in there that'll not that we can't come back to this quicker, not that we can't consider colas at any time, but at the very least every three
years there is language that this be reviewed um so that it won't go years and years and years without being updated, modernized and making sure we're reflecting um you know the modern society at that time. So, this should hopefully promote incremental changes and updates to better keep pace with our
needs and hopefully a future council will not find themselves in the situation we've been in this year. With that, I am going to also offer an amendment uh and leading to that motion. It is a friendly amendment that I've worked on with the mayor uh just to fix a technical correction through
conversations with the ad hoc committee when we made the organizational change to the chart concerning the placement of the assistants in council departments because we ultimately did move them to a group of their own. So for those of you that may have the chart in front of you, it's group 2B. It has the assistant um
clerk, treasurer, and auditor. Their formulas were unintentionally changed impacting their salaries, the starting salaries. Uh the amendment corrects that error and keeps their compensation in line with where they were intended to be. This doesn't impact our cost estimates as those were calculated based
on what they were meant to receive. Uh essentially when we copy and paste them down, there was an error in the formula copy and pasting down in the spreadsheet. And so the amendment will correct that. With that, uh, I move to amend the ordinance in exhibit F,
therefore entitled primary non-UN employee compensation schedule by striking the lines for group 2B in their entirety and in place thereof the following chart again with their titles, the group, and the appropriate salaries
going across the scale. And I'll uh bring this up to the clerk, and I certainly would understand if a recess was needed to make copies and distribute for everyone's review. Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> Councelor Mac seconds councelor Hegund's amendment uh that I will now read.
Apologize for the reach. Thank you, counselor. Uh there's been an amendment on the floor that's been seconded uh in the ordinance in exhibit F thereof entitled primary non-unit employee compensation schedule by striking lines for group 2B in their
entirety and in place thereof the following and there is a chart uh for the assistant city clerk, assistant city auditor, assistant city treasurer, collector and uh in accordance with rule eight of our city council. I will be calling a 10-minute recess for counselors to review this amendment.
Thank you. We are now back to order. Uh on the table is an amendment to item 11733. Council Hegelin has moved to amend the ordinance in exhibit F. There have entitled primary non-union employee compensation schedule by striking the
lines for group 2B in their entirety and replacing it in place with the following chart. Uh motion was made by councelor Hegeland, second by councelor Mack. Is there discussion on the amendment? >> Councelor Kasinskus. >> This is discussion on the amendment. >> Discussion on the amendment.
>> Thank you. >> Any discussion on the amendment? If not, >> all those in favor? I >> I. All those against? No. The amendment passes. Therefore, we will now move to discussion on the main motion by councelor Hegund, second by councelor journal Alex as amended. Is there
discussion? Councelor Mack. >> Yes. Um to make things a little bit more confusing, I would like to offer an amendment to one line um under the seasonal employees, the lifeguards. Um this is something that
has been discussed numerous times in a few years uh within the welfare committee and uh with the mayor during budget season. Um because of the responsibility and the training that they have to undertake, um I would like to make an amendment to change the
lifeguard line 3A to less than one year to $19, step one to 1929, and step two to 1958. Um, when you look at the other part-time positions here, such as I'm just going to take one assistant wreck department person for $26,
not only the training, but the responsibility of our lifeguards is um to me is is is totally different with the enormous um tasks that they have and also um in order to be competitive with other areas including the state which
starts at $25 an hour. Um I'd like to make this amendment. Thank you. Second >> amendment proposed by councelor Mack, second by councelor Heath. Councelor Mac, do you have a copy of that amendment? The amendment is to strike in its
entirety uh line 3A and replace it with uh lifeguard 3A uh less than one year $19 an hour. Step one 1929 step two 1958. >> Correct. That's what the percentages. >> Councelor Kazinskus
>> through the chair to the counselor. Is this this is the line that only says lifeguard? It's not head lifeguard. It's nothing else. It's the last line. >> It's just the lifeguard, right? >> Okay. >> The initial lifeguard. >> So, it goes from 17 and step one to 19 >> $19 for $19 for less than one year.
Okay. >> Um step one would be 1929 and step two would be 1958. And this is with these same line percentages um with the other positions. Okay. Council >> since this is fine. Thank you. Council
Cormier >> through through the chair to council may. >> Yes. Um it does because I failed to do the math for and to include the head lifeguard position. Um which I would do at if if I could make an amendment to add to my amendment. Um, I'd start it at
$20 for the first year and then add the same percentages for the following two, which if you um, >> Council General, >> I quickly did the math. I think it's 20 $20.30 and $2060
for the next two steps. >> Thank you. >> I'll second that. >> One moment, please. >> Thank you, Councelor Corm. Uh, council Mack, you are uh modifying your amendment to include the headlifeguard
line to strike evidence entirely and replace uh less than one year to $20. Step one, $20.30 an hour. Step two, $20.60 an hour. >> Correct. Thank you. >> Uh, council seconded. Uh, before we have
discussion, would the council like a few minutes in recess to review this? Hearing none, I'll entertain discussion. Any discussion on this amendment? Council Brooks. >> Uh, thank you, Mr. President. Above those is there's a certified pool
operator lifeguard and a certified pool operator head lifeguard who have higher in the original proposal had higher hourly rates. I'm not sure what the difference is. I guess I would just ask that if I have no problem with the change. I just suggest that somebody
needs to look at it when we're done to make sure that we don't need to make adjustments on those two as well. >> Councilor Mac, >> my understanding is they all have to be certified in order to be lifeguards and keep up their certification as well as their CPR and first aid. So I think you
have to be certified to be hired as a lifeguard. Council looks like a certified pool operator as well as >> Oh, I'm sorry. Yep. >> Any further discussion?
>> The vote will be on the uh modified amendment to adjust the lifeguard and head lifeguard uh less than one year step one and step two rates uh to replace in their entirety. as previously mentioned. Is there uh all those in favor? I >> I
>> All those against no. The amendment passes. Uh back to the main item uh by councelor Hegund uh second by councelor journal to send this item to first printing as amended. Is there discussion? Councelor
Kazinskus. >> Thank you, President Tyros. I fully support uh councelor Hegeland's comments. Uh also being a member of the ad hoc committee for the salary ordinance review. Uh we had um some
productive discussion information that we asked for from the mayor was provided two weeks before the meeting that we had tonight and it was very helpful to have that in front of us uh for a couple of weeks before we were able to meet. Then of course we received this proposal um
when the meeting was posted and I really appreciate the explanation he gave us during the meeting as well as today for the full council. Um just wanted to touch on a couple of items within there. Um, you know, as the city council and mayor up to this point, starting this
discussion in May, have made it clear that the salary ordinance needed to be addressed and we have done that and we're moving it forward as we said that we would and a multi-million dollar adjustment to the city's budget can't and shouldn't be rushed through in just
a few meetings and it wasn't. It was considered over months at a time. There was good discussion and information that was requested and that was fulfilled. This is a major decision. It has long-term implications. Um I am super encouraged that um you know it's been 20
years since a real change in the salary ordinance and we were able to get work through the uh working group that the mayor had described the mayor um councelor hegeland the finance committee and take time uh and then um have the
mayor form the ad hoc committee um and you know continue with it and keep moving moving forward without giving up on it. Uh, and I think that's a real tribute to this council, to this mayor, and trying to work here to get the uh,
employees of the city some fair compensation and to take a large step forward to do that. And I think that we've we've done that. I am in support. As we said, the ad hoc committee this evening uh, voted to recommend this proposal uh, be passed by the council.
Uh and so a couple of things within it. Um the mayor discussed the performance review piece. I support his reasoning on that. I think we do need to implement a system in the city and I think it is important for both the employees and the city to have a performance review
system. However, I don't think it's necessary to tie it um to um compensation and as he had mentioned the subjectivity of it um because if an employee has a satisfactory performance review then that means that they
continue in their position and then they work towards another year um to their next step which are very clearly laid out. they know what they're looking for. And from the comm the uh perspective of being part of the appointments committee, a performance review also
helps to justify the mayor's appointments. It helps with um the HR's work that they need to do um with the performances of each of our employees. And so while we should absolutely implement a system, um I do agree with
what the mayor had presented in terms of the salary ordinance and um and so I just wanted to to that piece of it because I was glad that he did acknowledge it uh and explain it. And along the way, we have to remember too there there we've had cost of living
adjustments all along. There haven't been these steps. There haven't been these things to work towards for raises. And so that is still something that I think is worth mentioning that colas will still be able to be entertained each and every year. Um we'll know more about affordability in the future if
we're able to do that. Um but before when a cola was the only option for getting some sort of raisin. There wasn't um a system in place. there was a lot of subjectivity involved if there was um any type of salary changes and um
colas could always be entertained but they weren't always guaranteed and that was all you knew you may get along the way um and I think that addresses that and I think it does it in a in a um a sustainable and affordable way but also with the chance of a cola on top of that
um it's something more that our employees can receive and you know having this be a new proposal uh We have had the mayor's proposal and the finance committee proposal in front of us for a number of months since May and um although we didn't decide on one of
those proposals, this proposal was clearly built from those proposals and includes a lot from them. So kind of retaining and processing that over the last couple of days was um was something that was uh it was supported by the information that we had previously. And
so all of that work was for something and we did speak uh you know throughout this process about how we wanted to work towards something and um we really haven't missed a beat in that process. Um and so you know I just I just wanted
to emphasize that I'm in support of it. Um again I echo a lot of what councelor Hegland had said. I appreciate the mayor um and city solicitor and the HR director and all their time um for the on the committee that we had, but this
proposal is organized. It is very clear and includes all the decisions that it can include at this time and um I really appreciate the presentation of it because I think it really cleared up a lot of things. Uh it is to me it's our best foot forward. Uh it's not set in stone. We do we will review it every
three years as the counselor had reiterated and we spoke earlier about our ad hoc meeting this evening. I think that's also really important to to note. Uh but we can we can entertain this at any time. And the bottom line is it really hasn't been in 20 years. And we've done more in the last six months
than has been done in the last 20 years. And that's exciting for the city. It's exciting for the city council and it is exciting for the mayor in my opinion. um and to come up with something that is workable, doable and sustainable uh is is also a step in that right direction um with also keeping the city afloat
with the financial um piece that we as city councilors have to do. So um those are my comments. Thank you, Mr. President. >> Thank you, Councilus. Uh Councelor Mack. >> Yes. I just want to thank the mayor for this proposal. All along when we started this process, I said in multiple
meetings that the proposal needed to come from the mayor for the salary steps. Um I think the council did the right thing by taking our time to review all the options that were before us. Um I thank the ad hoc committee for all of their work. uh but we have the
responsibility of doing a good faith effort not only for the employees but for the citizens of this city and what we could financially afford and I think that this document um will adequately
um show the good faith efforts that we have and I applaud the non-UN employees covered under this for their patience and um the fact that this can be reviewed at any time and um you after 20 years that that we're seeing finally
steps. I remember my first year on the council. Um a former counselor, councelor Walsh and I were saying we need to see steps and that this is finally occurring. Um I think is a is a huge step forward and um I I look forward to continuing to review this um
in regards to colar or other things that can be improve the benefits and the salary of our our employees um within the best interest of the city. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council Mack. further discussion. Council General Outs. >> Thank you, Mr. President. I just kind of want to reate thanking everyone who's worked so hard on this, the mayor, um
his team, counselors here. Um it's been a long process. Um I did have a question through the chair to the mayor if possible um about the intent of one section just so for clarification. Um Mr. Mayor is willing to come back up
here. Um I don't if you have a copy of yours in front of you um or not uh the ordinance but in section two the determination of starting step for employees hired on or after December 2nd 2025
um in both so section two both the subsections one and two uh item C is the maximum credit time award shall not exceed 10 years in both those sections. The intent is for each of those to not be awarded more than 10 years or overall
not more than 10 years. You know, do you follow? >> So, one's about current service with the city and one's about service outside of the city and awarding past time and >> is the intent to only award the maximum of 10 overall or the maximum 10 for each
>> for overall. >> Okay. So that being the case, my I'd like to make a motion to remove item 1 C and 2 C and move that to sub number three. So it's it shows it's applicable to both and not each individually more
clearly. Yeah, it that if you follow >> Yeah. >> Um so just to re reiterate that again starts with section one here, then it goes section two subsections one and two both have an item C. The maximum credited time awarded shall not exceed 10 years. uh I would remove that in both
1 C and 2C, make that a number three and make it the maximum credited time awarded shall not exceed 10 years. Uh and then accordingly move up D and E in each section to the corresponding letters. Second >> motion made by councelor journal allow
second by councelor heglin to remove section one 1 c and create a section three uh and move item what were the letters uh >> uh just it D and E up in that section in section one and subsection one and two it's in both those subsections so
deleting C in section two subsection one and subsection two the item that lines C and creating that same information Same line as a new subsection 3. >> Subsection three. Okay. Creation of subsection 3. Is there discussion?
>> All those in favor? I. >> I. >> All oppose? No. The amendment passes. Uh we will also be requesting those amendments in writing for the clerk um to post uh to its first printing, which is the original motion after our three
amendments. Any further discussion? Kazinskas. >> Uh, I just wanted to emphasize to something councelor Mack resonated with me that the employees have been patient over the past six months and if you really want to put together some of them
6 months and 20 years, but I want to thank them for their patience with this. Um, but also highlight that if this does pass first and second printing and go into effect, it is retroactive. So, they will be paid back to that six months as
well. Um, I just wanted to be sure that that that was clear. And also in the ad hoc committee, we did discuss the possibilities moving forward because we did make this recommendation, but we recognize that the council may or may not pass it through first and second printing. And so we had um the
contingency on that where if not, then we would reconvene and and we would um chat again if if not. If so, we will still reconvene. We didn't um we haven't disbanded the committee at all. Uh we will reconvene and we will review this
um down the road if it does pass to get together and see where it's at, what's going on because there is the the budget. We're actually start talking about 2027 budget pretty soon. Um so um we wanted to be sure that we had a plan for that. So that is in place just for
information purposes. Thank you. >> Thank you councelor Kazinskus. Further discussion. >> Council Brooks. >> Thank you, Mr. President. I know we've been working on this salary ordinance for non-union positions for about six months and we need to complete our work.
Um, I just want to make sure we're doing it right. Um, I have a couple of housekeeping uh issues that I want to bring up. First one is the grid begins with a starting salary column and then proceeds to step one, step two, and so on. All other
labor contracts and previous city ordinances start with step one. Would it make sense to number the steps in this ordinance in a similar fashion beginning with step one for less than a year so that all salary and wage schedules in the city have a similar format.
Just putting it out there. I think these are these housekeeping things I look at is um I don't want to make an amendment here because I think it we get bogged down. I think this is something that I would ask the mayor to look at or or the members of the ad hoc committee just
look at and say does this make sense or not? That's that's kind of where I am. Second, uh upon review, the projected FY26 salaries for four positions according to the way I'm calculating it, police chief, deputy police chief, and
the two library maintenance craftsmen appear to be less than the FY25 salaries. If that analysis is correct, do we need to adjust the salary table? And if the salary table as presented is
correct, how are we planning to handle a projected lower salary? So, I've just I'm putting these questions out there. Um third, uh there's several positions in the current salary ordinance that have
All right, someone in the current salary ordinance that have steps. Yeah, they all do. the salary range. Oh, okay. Current the current salary ordinance has some positions that have steps. The salary range in the current ordinance,
the one that we have now is greater than what is being proposed. As an example, administrative assistant in the new ordinance that's being proposed, the salary range is $18.96 an hour to $2043
an hour. In the current one or the old one, it's $1896 to $24.26. So while the initial pay is the same, the top rate drops from $24.26 an hour to $2043 an hour.
Do we need My question is, do we need to adjust the proposed salary ordinance? Is there something going on? >> Councelor, would you like any of those questions to the mayor through the chair? I think this is something that's going to require him to look at and so I will I will give him something after the meeting to just say okay here can you
just look at these. >> Okay, >> that's all right. >> That you're certainly welcome to do that. >> Okay, >> Council Kazinskus, >> I know this is my third time, but I just want to I have a question for the counselor. >> Yes. >> So through the >> through the chair >> chair to the counselor. >> Do you have suggestions for answers to
these questions? Like is there a direction you want to see this go in or are these just >> questions? There are questions because I'm not sure which way the proposal is being done. What I'm guess looking at is that the
projected pay is less than what they're currently making. So, is there an error in the projection of where they should be going or is it or is there error on my part where I'm not seeing something right? >> Thank you. >> It could be me. I'm I'm actually going
to call on the mayor to uh uh come speak on this uh because I think your questions have have significance if the math is correct. Uh Mayor Nixon, would you mind addressing questions? >> Councelor, if I forget a part of your question, please let me know and I'll be sure to answer it. Uh in terms of the
police chief and deputy chief, right now uh they both fall higher than what the starting step is on this. Uh the current rate for the police chief in the ordinance for
someone with a master's degree is $145,627. uh where Chief Mcave with his years of service and his previous positions as patrol lieutenant and sergeant and then in his years of service with the city in uh the chief's
position that'd be 160,13399 in a year step five uh similar with the the deputy chief and uh there I should say in every position and we looked at every position individually no one is receiving a pay reduction and everyone
is receiving some increase in pay. Uh in terms of the formatting question, I see what you're saying where we do have a starting salary uh column and then step one begins basically after your probationary period is done. Uh it's I mean for a matter of formatting on our end. Um it doesn't change the numbers
within it just the way that the steps. >> It doesn't correct. It doesn't change the numbers. It's just making it consistent with >> all the other salary ordinances or or >> wage schedules. >> Yeah. >> It's it's Yeah. Do you have further answers to to the questions I already stated?
>> I just I think the overall answer to it is that in in this proposal, no one is receiving any reduction and no one is staying the same. Everyone was receiving some type of increase uh as a result of these numbers that they have here and their years of service. >> Thank you, Mayor N. >> Well, the mayor's up there. >> Mayor N for clarification on that. I think you
may have said this during your presentation, but obviously it was a lot of information. I believe you're meeting with each individual correct and as you talking over where they're going to fall, correct? So >> yeah. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> You know I I do have I do have another question for you. >> Do you have another before you go? Does
anybody else have questions for the mayor or discussion on this topic? >> I I do for him. Yes. >> Okay. >> Proceedings. >> Yeah. I see it. >> Anybody? Councelor Brooks, please proceed. >> Okay. Thank Thank you, Mr. President. Uh
section six makes the payments retroactive to July 1 of 25 except for the pool employees. >> Yes. >> Which I understand. So does that mean we're going to do retro pay increases for other seasonal health, public works,
recreation, golf course? >> If they're included in this ordinance, then yes. But I don't believe there's that big of a bump for those positions. >> Seasonal employees. Yes. >> Okay, that's fine. >> Yeah. Yeah. The temporary seasonal, if you'll actually notice, those are the ones that don't have steps included in
those, but rather a flat rate because there aren't projected for long-term. That's why they're temporary in the title of the ordinance. >> Okay. And we had So, okay, that's fine. >> Are you also at council >> with him? Yes. >> Thank you, ma'am.
>> Any further discussion, Council Brooks? >> Okay. So, this is where I guess I'm going to uh be out of step with my fellow counselors. Um, I have two problems with what's being proposed. The first is section seven that requires
where applicable that an employee be reappointed by the mayor and confirmed by the city council before a retroactive step increase is paid. In my opinion, that requirement is very unfair to the employees. The step increase is dependent on the mayor and city council
doing its job in a timely manner, which is something out of the employees control. Why should an employee wait for a step increase because we or the mayor are slow to act? My other concern is with section two and section five
that allows employees to be placed at a higher step based on service with the city or service with another employee. In my opinion, it conflates time in the position with time with the city. Time with the city is already recognized in
the longevity payments made annually to qualifying employees. Most of the time being discussed here is experience that helps a person qualify for the position or that gives them an advantage over other applicants. In my opinion, there first needs to be a
strong statement saying that steps are based on time in the position and not time with the city. Allowing a new employee to start on a higher step should be an exception and not the rule. The exception might be for a person who has held a similar position in a smaller
community and has received state certification to do the work. It is not for a person looking for an internal promotion. In my experience as city auditor, being the assistant city auditor for 10 years
provides only minimal experience in doing the work of the city auditor. It does not warrant a higher starting step. Likewise, most police chiefs and fire chiefs will have 15 to 20 years on the force, but that experience is not the
same as actually being the chief. On the other hand, being a town accountant or chief from a neighboring town may provide sufficient experience to warrant a higher starting step. Second, the criteria included in section two and section five for a higher step
is open to interpretation and consequently in my opinion inserts too much subjectivity into the process. If we want employees to live to have confidence in how rate pay rates are established, it must be clear and objective. In my opinion, this language
is not. While I believe the mayor and city council will be fair and equitable in determining steps at hire, I'm going to repeat myself. While I do believe the mayor and city council will be fair and equitable in determining steps at hire,
the perception the perception among employees will become the view that those employees with connections to the mayor and city council will get a better deal. That's just how I feel. So my current position on this ordinance
is that I will not be supporting it as it is written. uh if there are changes uh to section sevens and sections two and five uh that that shift uh language uh to be time in the position rather
than time with the city uh then I am certainly willing to reconsider my position on this ordinance. Uh I know we've been working on this issue for well over six months and need to successfully complete this project and I'm trying to help move this forward.
Thank you. Thank you, councelor. Uh, just to be clear, there were no amendments proposed in what you No, sir. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any further discussion? Councelor Mac. Um, I think it's fruitful, um, when these things come before us that when we're examining things that we might
want to change or, um, we have questions about, um, is to take the opportunity to ask questions for, in this case, the mayor and get the answers and and to see if we can, you know, come up with amendments, not to delay any processes,
but also sometimes to seek further clarification of things that we may um, misinterpret or misunderstand. I think in this in this specific case, I think that being a small municipality, we need to
um compensate our people fairly. We need to ensure that they're going to stay and promote within. I disagree. I think being a firefighter or a police officer is invaluable education to learn how to become an officer. it doesn't mean mean
you have to become the chief but those are the things that help pe that knowledge helps people promote through the ranks. Um so again as has been previously stated a few times this evening this is a continual work in process and that it's something that can be um re-evaluated in the future but I
strongly support um the mayor's amendment mayor's proposal. Thank you. >> Thank you council M. Further discussion hearing none in accordance with rule six of our council rules. I'll be the one to request a roll call vote on this item.
The clerk will now please call the role. >> Council Brooks, >> no. >> Council Craig Cormier, >> yes. >> Council Delaw, >> yes. >> Council Hard, >> yes. >> Councilor Heath, >> yes. >> Council Heg, >> yes. >> Council Kazinsquecus, >> yes.
>> Council Math, >> yes. >> Council Tibo Munoz, >> no. >> President Tyrus, >> yes. Seven, two nays. >> Seven yays, two nays. The motion passes the first appointment. >> Appointments committee. >> What?
>> Item 1164. >> What order? >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Yeah. What was the vote again? >> 72. >> There's 10 of us here. >> 10 votes. >> Oh, me. Eight. >> Sorry. Eight. Sorry.
>> 82. Thank you. Motion passes the first printing. Thank you, council. >> Appointments committee. >> Item 11641, a measure confirming the mayor's appointment of James FA to the position of Williams Rockwell Educational Gift Fund Trustee for a term
expiring August 21, 2028. Council Gazinskus. >> Thank you, Mr. President. The appointments committee voted unanimously to recommend this reappoint and I move to confirm the mayor's appointment. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Kazinska,
second by councelor Hegeland to confirm the mayor's appointment. Is there discussion? Councelor Kazinskus. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Dr. Faustst has served as a trustee of the Williams Rockwell Fund since its creation in 2015. He has consistently kept students needs at the center of every decision
and his thoughtful insights have strengthened the board's work. He also brings a long history of trusted service to the city of Gardner and Hwood Hospital, having practiced family medicine in the community for decades and contributing significantly to our valuable and essential local health care
system. He has been recognized numerous times throughout his career and retirement for his values of service, stewardship, and community. And his his deep local ties and reputation for integrity reflect his proven leadership and dedication. And candidly, I was the
one from the council to give this because he delivered me at Haywood Hospital as he probably did other people in this room. Um, and so I am very glad to be able to support um this reappoint. Thank you. >> Thank you, council. Does this any
further discussion? >> All those in favor? I. >> All those opposed? No. Motion passes. Item 11645, a measure confirming the appointment of Paul Cormier to the position of planning board member for a term expiring August
21, 2028. Councelor Heath. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, the committee met with the mayor and the appointee and unanimously voted to recommend. Therefore, I move the appointment to be certified. >> Second. Motion made by councelor Heath, second by councelor Hegeland to confirm the
mayor's appointment. Is there discussion? Councelor Heath. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, Mr. Cormier has served on the planning board since 2019 and and during that time, he has shown a deep interest in how gardener grows both on the technical
side of development and in strengthening our community as a whole. He's a longtime gardener resident, a former firefighter, and someone who has been consistently involved in community work. across many capacities. His his experience, dedication and passion for
the city are evident and he brings a thoughtful balance perspective to the planning board. Um I do want to go ahead and note that this is a stipen position. Um but I also would like to acknowledge and thank him for his continued service and commitment to the city.
>> Thank you councelor. Any further discussion? All those in favor? I >> I oppose. No. Motion passes. Items 11651, a measure confirming the appointment, the mayor's appointment of Magnus Paul Colberg to the position of redevelopment authority member for a term expiring
August 21, 2030. Councelor Heath. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Um, so this item 11651 is also attached to the next item 11658 as this is the uh same person. Um,
however, um, the committee met with the mayor and, um, unanimously voted to recommend. Therefore, I move this appointment to be certified. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Heath, second by councelor Heglin to confirm the mayor's appointment. Is there discussion? Councelor Heath.
>> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh Magnus Paul Colberg has served the city for many years across both the gardener redevelopment authority and the industrial development finance authority as a volunteer. Uh Mr. Colberg is not only a longtime volunteer but also the
ex executive director of the Wusa Business Incubator which he works daily with entrepreneurs and businesses to help them establish a strong foundation. His background also includes significant experience with the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities, giving
him a strong understanding of municipal operations and regulatory processes. He has served on the GRA since 2014 and the IDFA since 1987, uh, demonstrating decades of commitment to the gardener's economic development.
As a longtime gardener resident, he brings both professional expertise and a personal passion for seeing the city grow and succeed. Um, these two items reflect the reappoint of the same dedicated volunteer. So, I just want to recognize his work.
>> Thank you, counselor. Any further discussion? All those in favor? I >> I. >> All those in favor? All those against? No. Motion passes. Item 11658, a measure confirming the mayor's appointment of Magnus Paul Colberg to the position of Industrial Development
Finance Authority member for a term expiring August 22, 23rd. Council Heath. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Um, the committee met with the mayor. Therefore, I uh well, we voted and unanimously voted to recommend. Therefore, I move this window to be
certified. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Heath, second by councelor Hegund to confirm mayor's appointment. Is there discussion? All those in favor? I >> I. All those against no. Motion passes. Item 11659,
a measure confirming the mayor's appointment of Timothy Han to the position of industrial development finance authority member for a term expiring August 22, 2030. Council Pazinskus. >> Thank you, Mr. President. The committee voted unanimously to
recommend this reappoint, and I move to confirm the mayor's appointment. >> Second. Motion made by councelor Kazinskus, second by councelor Heglin to confirm the mayor's appointment. Is there discussion? Councelor Kazinskus. >> Mr. Han has 15 years of service on the
IDFA, demonstrating his steady commitment to the city's economic growth. He is a local business owner and offers a valuable real world perspective on how to make and keep the city more businessfriendly and supportive of growth. with significant development expected in the near future. In
gardener, his experience and insight as an IDFA member will continue to foster the strong and effective relationship between the city and the GR as community partners. He's also a member of that and his family business has been Garner for over a hundred years. And with that, I'm
glad to um support his reappoint. Thank you. >> Thank you, councelor. Any further discussion? >> All those in favor? I. All those against no motion passes. Unfinished business and matters for reconsideration. There are none new
business. There is no new business. Councelor comments and remarks. Councelor Mack. >> Thank you. Uh prior to the election, I decided to organize a community food drive for the CAC sponsored by the city council. We may disagree at times, but we all have the common interest to make
a positive impact on the community and are willing to step back as private step up as private citizens, not just as elected officials. This past Saturday, we collaborated with the Gardner Senior Center in AERP to jointly hold a community food drive. The collaboration
allowed us to join with them on the same day of as their annual food drive and to increase the collections to all four grocery stores and gardener, not just one. The response and generosity of the community was more than I ever could have hoped for. The kindness of others never ceases to amaze me. The
contributions were incredible. People's selflessness will help hundreds of families, not only for the holidays, but for months to come. Thank you to my fellow counselors for their support in volunteering their time. to the senior center and the ERP for allowing us to join them in their help. And a special
thank you to Senate Sen senior center director Mike Ellis and his wife Lisa for all their help, especially with the food collection and delivery to the CAC. And I'd be remiss not to mention councelor Heath for his help in coordinating the necessary approval from the stores.
And last but not least, to the managers of Aldi's Price Chopper and Walmart, Walmart and Hanneritz for allowing us to collect outside their businesses. These businesses are always willing to help out and give back to the community throughout their the year and their efforts don't go unnoticed. Thank you to everyone.
>> Thank you, Councelor Mack. Further, councelor comments. Councelor Heath. >> Thank you, uh, President Tyrros. I just want to go ahead and echo um what my fellow counselor said. It was awesome being out there. The one thing that I did notice being out there, and I know a
lot of people, and I know a lot of these people that I've seen that struggle, and I've personally helped, it was awesome seeing them dropping off bags to help out. So, it seemed like the people that didn't have a lot was willing to go ahead and help out others
that didn't have a lot, which was very um heartwarming. So, I just want to say thank you to all those. That's all. >> Thank you, councelor. Further council comments. Council Gazins. >> The memorial lights drive is currently happening until December 15th. So all of
the beautiful lights that we get to see downtown as well as the trees that are lit up. I've always been through the annual drive. It is um run by Square 2. And if anyone's interested in donating to the Memorial Lights drive and go to gardenersquare.com through December 15th
to be sure that our town is beautiful for our city is beautiful for the holidays. Thank you. >> Thank you, counselor. Any further council comments? >> Councelor Heglin. >> I'll just wish everyone a happy and healthy Thanksgiving. >> Thank you, councelor.
I have two comments this evening. Uh first, a sincere thank you to councelor Heglund for his latest and last update on the Waterford Community Center project. On behalf of the council, we truly appreciate your dedicated work as our liaison for the community center project throughout the summer and fall. I agree with your assessment. The
contrast and pace between the tenants and the city's progress is indeed stark. Your points on the need for clear prioritization, administrative drive, I hope, are well taken. It was clear to me during and after our presentation to the seniors at the senior center that they are eagerly awaiting the move to the
much more modern and suited facility. The council recognizes the need to do more and we will be the voice of our constituents that demand it until this project is seen through. Second, I want to address an issue that we recently uh encountered uh that's unfortunate but
presents us an opportunity for investment and improvement. This past week, we found out that the audio of our city council standing committee meetings uh important forms of discussion, decision-m were not captured. While the technical cause was identified, this incident to me
highlighted something broader. Its invitation to examine how things have traditionally been done within our city. Sometimes the way things have been done always works. Other times it means that we might be missing opportunities to do something more efficiently or maybe even better. This isn't about placing blame.
It's about embracing the concept of continuous improvement. My commitment and the commitment of this council is to ask thoughtful questions, explore existing processes, and to seek out those hidden opportunities for improvement. We recognize that true progress often comes from a willingness
to respectfully challenge the familiar. This situation has shown us that there's an opportunity to do things differently, more efficiently, and with a better result for our constituents. That we shouldn't just be looking for the fix when those problems present themselves. We should be analyzing the root cause and where appropriately making smart
investments that pay off in the long run. We are actively committed to seeking out these opportunities for improvement across all city operations, always with the goal of serving you, the public, more efficiently, more effectively. This is how we build a stronger and more
resilient car group. And as an example of this way of thinking, councelor Heglin requested and I agreed with that we'll be requesting to use a portion of councelor Hegeland's unused salary for the purchase of dedicated video equipment for the council chamber. That
is all I had this evening. Thank you. And with that, I'll be entertaining a motion to adjurnn after the closing prayer. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Kazinska, second by councelor Heath to adjurnn. All in favor I I all against no motion
stands. >> Heavenly Father who ceased over all as we adjourn, we thank thee for the opportunity of joint deliberation and act with us during the course of this meeting. Bless Lord all who gathered here and the people whose represent
our common welfare until we meet. Amen. We stand a journ.