Good evening everyone. Welcome to the March 30th, 2026 5:30 early edition select board meeting. We'll uh go ahead and uh get started. >> We um >> Oh, is it still echoing? >> Are we not doing the pledge?
>> Yeah. No, that was that was an oversight. Okay, let's start out with the >> pledge then 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. >> All right. So, uh, we called this meeting ahead of the, uh, our joining the joint session with, um, the charter committee just to knock out we had three articles left to review and vote on,
>> um, for the warrant. >> Um, let's start with article 13. >> We're in trouble if I'm the one doing technology, by the way. >> Okay. >> You just unmuted me. >> Okay. I don't know why it's still doing
>> to make this all >> technical difficulties. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Um here we have uh Madam Chair and members of the select board. Here we have uh the $100,000 which gives uh there was a gives her a broader
description of uh of use for the funds. uh and uh as a result uh you can see from down below it's there have been several mechanical infrastructural issues uh and it funds a feasibility study to look at the redevelopment options for
the for the building. Uh one of the great things that the assistant town administrator did is in researching as a result of conversation from the board uh the select board is really looking at the previous uh feasibility studies that
were completed and as a result uh we feel that from the most recent one which was back in I believe in 21 uh that uh we could just bring the same um company in here and uh look at uh uh
the edits. I I think really just building upon what was what was identified in that and just making some some correct corre corrective moves going forward. >> So that's that's where that uh is for
article 13. >> It's in your in your text. >> You have any questions? Uh, I mean, no, we we already saw the wording. So, I think that I don't have any on that particular article.
>> I'm okay. >> So, 26, >> right? Uh, let's do them all at once. >> Okay. >> Move on to article 26. Okay, this is a uh uh was been uh been proposed uh because of the limited
resources within the town. uh many things that we are looking at because of our uh our financial uh constraints as we move forward into u upcoming fiscal years is to look at uh
the resources that we have available. And uh uh this is one of the proposals that was put forward with repairs and uh remov removal of snow and and also sanding uh for private ways.
And the reason we didn't vote on this last time is um >> Matthew Nortouse recused himself and Gary also recused himself and so we were lacking a quorum. >> Um I think there's some people here who are here because of this and I just want to make clear that we're not here to
vote on whether um this happens or not. We're here to vote on whether the town um can decide on whether this happens or not. So, just to clear that formality. Well, we're not doing public input this evening, unfortunately, because we only have >> about 20 more minutes before our next
meeting is scheduled. >> So, we just had a few questions. We would like to get answers. >> I understand, but we're not having public input this evening. I have office hours tomorrow. >> We don't want input. We want We don't
want input. We want to ask some questions. Madam Chair, if I can make a suggestion of I'd love to be able to uh coordinate a a a meeting first thing tomorrow to be able to uh with with a DPW director,
especially if it deals with some financial capacities uh to and to try and help out with any of those answers. Happy to do that. first thing tomorrow. >> Um, >> we could meet up we could meet uh upstairs in the conference room on the
third floor of room 301 and uh happy to answer any any any questions that I that we can answer. >> Okay. Has town council provided opinion on this? >> Uh, town council is well aware. Yes. >> Because the sounds. >> Can we get that information?
>> Sure. >> Sure. >> Okay. something we're looking for. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> And what time tomorrow do you have any sense of that? >> Um, please um 11:00 is the earliest I have. >> Okay. A lot of us work. Um
>> Okay. So, um, can we do it at 4:00? >> Yes. Um, do you know that the DPW director will be available at that time? >> I will see that he is. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Of course. Thank you for your for your
patience and uh and uh cooperation with with that. Jim maybe get uh her information just in case something changes like the with the DPW director if he's >> okay >> that's either before or after or you can email him maybe >> your information.
>> Yes. >> Well, I just give it to you now. >> Okay. >> 32. >> Did anybody have any questions about 26? No. Okay. Madam Chair, if I may, on the agenda, it says public
input. >> That's for the charter committee meeting at 600. We're having a joint meeting with the charter committee. We're actually joining their meeting at 6, which is why time is of the essence. >> We can't make them wait for their own meeting. >> Address that such
on the >> Yes, sir. It says joint meeting with charter committee. >> And then it says public input under D. >> I'm good. Thank you very very much. >> Down there. >> I I understand the confusion, but it's it Yeah, it's for the charter committee.
>> That's their agenda. >> Yeah. >> Is there going to be an opportunity for public comment beyond the meeting tomorrow >> at town meeting? >> That's okay. And it's and I'm holding office hours I think Thursday this week. And we always have public input at all
our select board meetings except for this one. >> We we did at the last one where we also discussed this. Um but uh >> question who do we take it up with if an opponent to the article would like to make a presentation at town meeting as
we did in 2012. So >> that will be a that's a logistical question about town meeting and so we'll take we can discuss that tomorrow. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Yeah. Go through the moderator >> 32. >> So Karen 32 is now 31.
>> Okay. >> Because 32 um 31 is struck because it's the King Street article that needs to wait. >> Okay. >> It's it's not ours to >> um >> 242, right? >> Yeah. two. >> We don't have to ask Drew
>> and has to be >> um and I'm not sure do we have um town council? >> Yes. >> Yes, he's here. >> All right. Uh we have town council available uh to uh for drafted um
that with the petitioner had the citizens petition that was that was submitted and uh this is in a uh has been some a some amendments to this that we will still get the the essence of what the the petitioner wanted in the article but uh put in a in a in a manner
which town council approves of. Okay. >> And we have town council if there are any questions from the select board. >> Thanks for being here, Tom. >> Um I spoke with Tom earlier and um we
discussed the fact that this article is bringing um state statute into town bylaw. But other than that, this is no for PRCE. doesn't um extend reporting requirements.
>> It just formalizes what the petitioner had thought was missing from the bylaws. >> Hello. >> Yep. >> Yep. Hi, Tom. >> How'd I do? >> How' I do?
>> Uh so I don't know because the Littleton meeting where I pick up the audio for this was muted and it just became unmuted. Sorry about that. >> Sorry to >> I was brilliant. I was brilliant. Um but I can't remember exactly what I said.
>> There was something back later. >> No. Um what I was saying was that you and I had talked earlier and that um what this does is bring some requirements from the state um statutes into the town bylaw, but it
doesn't um extend them. >> Agreed. Yes. It's it's we're just providing the statutory requirement in the bylaw, but we're actually meeting the statutory requirement anyways and have been since its adoption. So, it's a
little bit of belt and suspenders, but it's it's not a correction. Um, and there was a question that I received from a resident about um the manner in which the information would be reported. >> And I assumed that was just going to be in
>> the town meeting report, not >> requiring some sort of oral presentation. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> I think that's sufficient. Yeah. >> The town meeting report or in the budget? >> Sorry. Budget. Yeah. Budget report. Oh, yep.
>> Different time frames. >> Yes. >> Right. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Any questions? >> You good? >> Good. >> All right. So, we'll move forward
with the ones we can all vote on. So that's 13 and 30. >> One. >> We don't usually vote citizens petitions or are we changing it to not a citizen? >> Well, it's not a citizens petition then. >> So it needs to change its title then. >> Yeah. >> Just make sure the title gets changed.
It's no longer a citizen. >> Understood. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Question. >> We're not doing questions. Okay. Can >> just to be clear. >> Yeah. >> So, the citizens petition will remain
under article 31, but what we've amended is article 26. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Not 26. >> Not 26. No. >> 25. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Robin, what am I thinking?
>> So, we need to revote 25 volume down on this computer. That's what's costing. >> Yeah. So, we're doing >> something muted audio, but the actual computer audio >> you talk to >> the new 30 one
states out. >> Okay. >> Okay. So the folded item is what was added in 25. The director must reports of the respective >> correct. >> Okay.
>> That's what changed since our last meeting. Okay. >> All right. So we need to revote 25. We need to vote 13. And then we need to have a separate vote for 26. >> And we shouldn't allow FinCon to know that 25 is changed so that they can
revote it if they So >> yeah, they're aware, but I'll remind them that they need to revote. Okay. Did you have All right. Uh Gary, if we could get a motion. >> So we
13 and 25. >> So >> So we're just finalizing insertion of the articles. Is that correct? >> A little bit. >> Um >> you have a motion up there. So is this move that the select board vote to
finalize the insertion of the following articles onto the warrant for the May 5th, 2026 annual town meeting subject to approval as to form by town council. >> We've decided
>> article 13 and now article >> what's the second article? >> 25 seconds. >> Moved by Gary, seconded by Matthew. All those in favor? I >> I >> and then we'll have a separate vote on 26. >> Are we going to move to recommend
recommend those articles then two? >> I'm okay with waiting on that >> on 13 and 25. >> Well, you could go ahead with that. >> Has Fincom given a recommendation yet on those articles? >> No. >> Do we have to recommend on town floor? >> Yeah, I think so.
>> Or not. So, do you want to I mean 25 is fairly >> Yeah, but don't we typically wait it for don't we typically wait for um first? >> Uh not necessarily. No, we can recommend it. >> Well,
I don't know. It depends on I guess how financial the article is. >> I'm I'm okay with waiting. >> Yeah. >> Okay. We can also recommend it anytime between now and town meeting. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> So it's not.
>> All right. And then there's 26. >> This one I cannot. >> That one you can't do >> or I >> Nope. >> Uh let's see. Mark, do you mind doing the motion? >> What do you want to insert or
>> uh what's the what language are you using using car or you're making it up? It's just repairs to private move the insertion. >> Well, you can you can still read it. You just recuse yourself. >> Yeah, I'll do that. >> Okay.
>> You read it and I'll move it. >> Yeah. I won't be able to vote on it. Move that select board vote to finalize the insertion of the following article onto the warrant for the May 5th, 2026 annual town meeting subject to approval as to form by town council. This is
remaining as article 26. Correct. >> Yes. >> Second. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Okay. So moved by >> everybody. >> Everybody >> I moved it. >> Moved by Mark, seconded by Chuck.
>> Um all those in favor. I >> abain. >> And we're noting that Gary. >> Gary and Matthew have both abstained. You >> want to state the reason so people don't think you >> I'm abstaining because I'm I have a private road. I'm on a private road. So I'm accusing myself.
>> Matthew was Matthew as well. We both have are live on private road on a private road that the town plows. So, I'm not voting or debating on this topic. >> Okay. Uh let's see. Now, we've got the minutes from March 2nd executive session.
This is executive. I didn't have any changes. Anybody else? >> No questions or concerns. All >> looks fine. >> Okay. >> And I assume we are going to um continue to keep these private. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> All right. So, what was the date?
>> March 2nd. >> March 2nd. >> Yeah. The March 2nd meeting. >> Move that select board vote to approve the minutes from a March 2nd executive session. >> Second. >> Moved by Gary, seconded by Matthew. All those in favor? I
>> And then don't we need to move to keep them? >> I think we'll make a motion if we do want to once we decide to release them. That's we'll make a motion. Otherwise, they remain remain um >> Okay. >> private.
>> Okay. >> All right. Uh that's it. We'll stay in session until the charter committee moves in. >> Okay. >> But uh this concludes the select board's business. >> Okay. We can talk independently if we want.
>> We can. Yeah. So >> we will >> we're uh we'll reconvene. >> Yeah. We're going to recess and we'll be back once the charter committee is uh here >> at 6 p.m. So it's like weigh in.
>> I guess I'm starting. Huh? No. Okay. Check out. >> Yeah. Okay. All right. Good night. Good evening. Good night. Yeah. Good night, everybody. Good evening, everybody. Beautiful day today. Um, tonight we're having a joint meeting with the select board to talk about charter work that's
been done so far. Um, they have a copy of the most recent draft of the charter as well as a couple of deliberation documents. They're in the packet for everybody, too. um which Charlotte with her magic put together um amazing
synopsis of a lot of things we've discussed over the last year. It has been a year now. Hard to believe over a year really. Um the only things I I'm we don't have a presentation. We're just going to go into discussions and so on. I have some questions in advance. I mean my only comments are like I always say
is just for um to give credit to this team. There's nine people on the team. Tim Goddard's out right now for on medical reasons, but nine people. We've been meeting twice a month and attendance has been phenomenal, which is for a group this big is not usual. So, I mean, kudos to everybody here for for
being so committed to this. Uh, we've learned a lot. We've gone through a lot. There's some things we feel very committed to. There's some things that we are, you know, good idea, but kind of things. Um, we can go through those tonight. The only other thing I would say going in is what we've said from the
beginning of this. It's not done till it's done. It's not final till it's final. So for all of us, I think we still have an open for most on most topics, there's still an open mind. If there's some new information that comes to light or somebody has a new experience or something happens and people just say, you know, I'd like to
reconsider how we are on something, then then we go after those and we we open those back up again. Um, so that whole process continues tonight. So, we want to hear very much. Obviously, the input from from you all. We're very involved
and um you know, good, bad, and indifferent, we're we're all open to it. It's not personal to us. This is just this is the work that we've done and this is where we are so far. So, we want to have the discussion. Anybody else want to add to that? My team? >> No. >> Thanks. So,
>> thanks for having us. We appreciate it. Um let's dig in. >> Um okay. Again, I don't have a presentation. I thought we would just go through questions as you have them. I mean, if somebody wants to start, otherwise I have the ones from Matthew if you want to go through those first or if you have another way you want to do it. I'll defer back to you, Pier, on
that for you. >> Um, I think maybe by section. >> Okay, we can do it that way. Yeah, that makes sense. >> So that everybody can ask their questions on the same thing at once. >> You're going right to the charter itself. >> Mhm. >> Okay. >> All right. So
article one is kind of standard stuff. Anybody have any long thoughts talk there? Oh, all right. And definitions. You good on that one? >> Okay. Legislative branch town meeting. Uh >> the only discussion here the only
probably the thing that we we said was um we're going after the concept of having saying we're having two meetings two annual meetings basically because we always have a fall meeting and the main difference there I think is in the number of um signatures required then to
get a voter petition on the on the ballot one of the main differences other than that just to get >> we always have to fall meetings we just put it in here >> through the through the chair regards to that do do you get input from town the town clerk? >> Mhm.
>> On that. So that >> was not on that one. Not on that one. Huh. >> Is a fiscally the the town meetings require the same amount of work. I'm assuming things like that. Tommy use a town meeting for setup. And so really
the >> Sorry my voice. >> Oh my goodness. Yeah. Sorry. >> It doesn't change anything as far as setup is concerned. Yeah. >> Um, basically we we don't uh close out the meeting. We're going to adjourn till
a later date. You have to set the date that night. >> Okay. >> In May. So you're setting interesting. >> Okay. >> Didn't tell us that part. >> That's interesting, too. Okay. It didn't come up with the consultants and the
other charters don't mention that. They just say they're having to. But okay, we we'll get into that soon. We we >> I I think Diane means if it's tell me it's extended over two nights, right? No. >> So when she Tim was tell is the one that said it to me that in the in everything
he's read, you can't you don't you're journing to a later date and the date has to be set. >> I that's definitely not consistent with what we were told, but we'll check some more. We'll come talk to you. And also, as you know, I I tried to get hold of you last week to go through this whole
thing and you went on vacation. So, we'll get we'll get to you on all these things, but but that's good. >> And we have time to do the research on that as well. >> Sure. >> Oh, yeah. We have time to do everything. Yeah. >> I'm curious why the time frame of the spring town meeting is is a week and the fall town meeting is six weeks.
>> Just because we all, you know, we all we already have it in the bylaws. This is when we do springtown meeting, but the fall does fluctuate more. So, we just left it more flexible. That was all >> just based on what's what's needed. But if somebody feels strongly about it one way or the other, let us know. >> I was just curious really.
>> Yeah. Just make a note of that. >> Okay. >> Um I had two things on the um there was a push to potentially change town meeting to the weekend. So if the spring town meeting is on a Saturday, that means the election would be the week
after that. It's just I I It's just the wording is just a little >> okay >> question. It took a little bit of reading to figure that out. >> Well, the meeting of the of the time of the meeting or of the vote after >> the vote. >> So that comes later, right? When we talk
about the voting >> um and my other comment on section two was section 2.10. Um the last line talks about >> Okay. What is it? 2-10. >> 210. um if any concise explanations of each
article including the fiscal impact of any financial articles. Um I'm not sure exactly what that's supposed to mean because we don't really talk about I mean a lot of financial articles have no fiscal real fiscal impacts or we supposed to say this has no we just went
through all these revolving funds. They have no fiscal impact but they're financial articles, right? I'm not sure what we're hoping for or if this is too broad or what the wording should be. If it's committing us to more work than we're really need to do or >> I think you could put fiscal impact if
any. >> You know, we have of any but also if if there's a fiscal impact. >> Okay. >> I think that's one of the things we do anyway. But I think like Yeah. If we're going to raise taxes, we should put it
in the warrant. Yeah, the report. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, I think it's a good idea. >> Don't you think? >> I'm just wondering about the I mean, we went through like of the 30 some articles like 25 of them >> Yeah. heavy financial articles just transfers or whatever.
>> Yes. And they have no real fiscal impact. So, is someone supposed to repair prepare a report to say this is a financial article but has no impact? Right. >> I think so. If applicable. How's that? If applicable. >> Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Going back to 29,
um the requirement in section B for the number of voters. >> Mhm. 100 voters for a special town meeting strikes me as a little low for a town of 5,000 voters.
>> That's No, this is I'm sorry. No, this is um that's for request. That's like a citizens petition, right? >> Yeah. >> You think 100 is low? Yeah, >> I think that's just MGL >> to call a special town meeting. >> No, no, to get an article on >> to get an article on on a special town meeting. Partly the way we do it anyway.
So, >> okay. Okay. Okay. Select board. So I was curious 33A whether that no member shall simultaneously hold any other elected town office is >> that's a new
>> is is that new okay >> because we have had people do that in the past >> and the same for the question for the chair of the for 33B no select board member may serve as a chair of of another section >> that's your policy now we understand as we put that in >> it's almost the policy but I think in
the bylaw like the unless it was changed like the TA search committee it said the chair of the select board had to be the chair of that committee I so I don't think it's consistent. >> Yeah, that's I had that question. What if it's a select board created working group? >> Well, it wouldn't be elect we not chair
our own. >> It would it's elected though, right? >> No, it just says any any appointed appointed members of other multiple member town bodies. So, it could be appointed or elected. Well, no, it can't be elected. It could be it has to be appointed.
>> Yeah, that's how I read it. So it so we can't be a chair of an appointed committee or working group. >> Yeah, that's that's been our best practice anyway, >> right? I'm just so I'm asking like so that was that's a new thing but but we can debate that >> but Karen makes a good point like in
this the TA search committee the board a member should probably be a chair of that in my opinion. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Um Okay. >> So it's not a hard and fast rule. >> Yeah. But it will be >> well unless we take it out. >> Unless we take it out.
>> There's It says town bodies. I take that to mean standing committees. If you have a search committee, that's a temporary thing. I don't see that as a
problem. >> So ad hoc doesn't count. >> Yes. Right. >> Of you want to say subcommittees. I mean, we could be the chair of a subcommittee created by the select board. >> I mean, I don't know. >> Or use Allen's work in other standing
multiple member town bodies. >> So, do it. >> Is this a detail we want to get into right now? I was just cur because I know >> I don't know. >> Yeah. >> We don't want you to rewrite it. >> There is a definition in the beginning of what it refers to. So, we could also revisit that. Multiple member body is
any town body consisting of two or more persons whether styled as a board commission committee subcommittee or otherwise and whether appointed, elected or otherwise constituted. So in in places where those terms might otherwise add confusion, we've attempted to
clarify them and we can maybe then revisit that in accordance with 33. Um but if there are any um term terms throughout and you're like does this mean this or that then the terms are up front. Yeah. Could be an exclusion. >> Yeah.
>> Exclusions would be >> Yeah. How do you >> selection committees for >> Yeah. Yes. That's that's real specific for charter. >> It feels like it's maybe too too restrictive and cons and too strict. >> Just leave it out of the chart. >> Well, it is our best practice and I I I
memorializing it would be great, but it feels like we would need to get all legal and all the language of what as chair like which boards we couldn't get couldn't be chair of. So I don't know what this I don't know what the solution is. >> We can work we can I I mean I think this comes to forward then we we can look at
this over the next several months and decide if that's something >> we can find a way to craft it. >> Yep. >> Okay. All right. That's that's a good point to bring that up. This is the kind of stuff that we wanted to find out. It's like so what you know >> this means you I couldn't be a chair like on Littleton even electric light
who we have no authority over. >> Correct. >> You can't be on the board too. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. You can't be elected, which we had that before. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> But if you're on Yeah. >> Mhm. >> Okay. >> Which for obvious reasons, right? >> Yeah.
>> No, I mean, I I understand the, you know, in 1800 there was 150 population and you were the sheriff. You were the before you were the board chair. >> You know, you were on every committee. But we've probably reached a level now where >> make a lot of sense.
>> Finances are larger and there's more all those things to us, right? So for 34 C which is be responsible for the formulation and promulgation of policy directives. Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize any
member to be uh come involved in day-to-day administration. Is that new language? >> Yeah, I'm well I don't know that there's language like this anywhere now, but this is a lot of this is boilerplate of course that we got. Most of this isn't stuff that we sat down and wrote this from scratch. Almost all this started as
boiler plate. We went through and we changed a lot. But but things like that that get that when you see that kind of terminology, we probably didn't write it. >> Okay. I'm I'm I'm I'm very much in favor of that. I just wanted to call that out. >> Okay. >> I had a question on that same section where it says all town agencies serving
under it. I don't know what those agencies are. We saying basically any one that's not elected is serving under this. I don't know what un I don't know what those agencies are. It might. >> Yeah. I mean, everybody that reports to the tag.
>> Oh, I see. As opposed to somebody that's an elected Well, it wouldn't get involved in the dayto-day of an elected committee. >> No, no, it's >> No, it's the first sentence. >> The first sentence. >> We applying promaggation of policy directives and guidelines to be followed by all town agencies serving under >> Yeah.
>> This under it meaning under the select board. >> Under the select board. >> So, that means >> But that when you're responsible for the town, I mean, >> but >> but not light and water. >> Not >> right. Well, not light, >> right? >> That's where I'm I just don't know what
under what agencies are under us and which agencies are not. Unless we're or how we're dividing that up. That's that was just my question. I don't >> Yeah. No, it's okay. I mean, this is again this we've gone through this. Every time we go through it, it's like, you know, whether you call wakaole or
something else, you you get you get all this stuff and you say, "Oh, now that's clear." And then all of a sudden, I didn't read really read that one. So, this is this is all good. It's why we're doing this. Um so town agency is defined as any board, commission, committee, department, division or office of town government.
So basically it should be any agent any um >> any department >> any town agency that yeah reporting to the select board or that the select board has authority over something like that.
>> Yeah. So that we are specific about the boards that we do not have authority over the school committee. >> It's anything that's reporting up through the town administrator manager or whatever. Right. >> Okay. >> So >> there's other places where those get called out. You'll see it. We probably seem to go through there other places
where we specifically say part of it. >> Okay. >> Betsy at one point we put together an or version of that. May be worth updating it. It's kind of a visual, easy to look at. >> That's true. Yeah. Thank you. >> Yeah.
>> In that same section, we currently do yearly audits, correct? >> Yep. >> Yep. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. This is just codifying it. My next question isn't until section five. So, >> okay. Anybody else have anything else to look for? >> My questions.
>> Good work. >> Oh, did you um So, section five. Oh, we're not there yet. Sorry. >> That's okay. So I I a general comment on the elected things. >> Some of them say how the terms are defined, some of them do not. You know, like some say that there's threeear
terms. They're staggered. Some of them just say there's three years term. >> Can we just pull them all out into one? >> I thought we already did. So we didn't have >> I think there's I think I flagged one, but >> it's sometime after section five.
>> Just look at all the Yeah. the terms of office so that we can just define it somewhere in common. >> It's defined for the school committee. Well, but they don't all >> 59 planning board doesn't have a three doesn't have a term. >> Yeah.
>> But planning board isn't that addressed. >> The attempt was in 51C to identify and gather them all there. >> Yeah. It's possible that there's something missing that we need to clarify and certainly listen to you as to whether or not you see other items that you think are confusing and
missing. >> It does say 51C is intended to gather all those terms in one place. >> It does say that. >> So, but we meant to also take them out of every place else. So, if there's if you if we see it somewhere else, let us know and we can get them out of >> Okay. So, that should be the exception.
Yeah. Okay. >> So, for 51 um D for a vacancy. Um it says in the submittal, notice of said vacancy shall be published for a minimum of 21 days prior to the meeting at which point the vac at which the vacancy shall be
filled. Um, what if the vacancy creates a quorum issue and then there's no business being held because of the empty seat for 3 weeks? Are are we
comfortable with that? Is that addressed maybe somewhere else and I missed it? >> No, we didn't talk. We didn't go to that. Not that I remember any place. >> Let's just flag that so we can that's something we're going to want to bring up. Um, and one correction, 51B, the last item is it ref it says it
should be filled in 51C and that should be 51D. >> Yeah, thank you for that. >> Yeah. And then, >> oh no, that's different. Never mind >> for 54B. 54 B. Okay.
>> In conjunction with the board of water commissioners, the board of light commissioners shall appoint or remove the head of the Littleton Electric Light and Water Department. >> 51B. >> Oh, excuse me. 54B. Um,
is that construed as board by board by by the total number of people between the two boards carrying a majority that's one that we sort of wrestle with, right? When we've got two boards voting on, you know, like making a joint appointment,
>> but they're one. But >> is the planning board, for example, voting on one and the select board voting on the other? Not in this one, but just is it board by board or is it the totality of the two boards becomes one board and >> in terms of here because of water
commissioners and light commissioners >> well I mean because they're both the same right now it's like you know >> right but >> so are there 10 votes or are there >> two votes basically >> two votes of five
>> to me it's like when they when they have a meeting they they meet they meet well here Joe you talk to it you want to talk to it I mean because when you meet you basically have one meeting, right? And you have one board at that. How do you vote on things now? >> Well, we have one meeting, but we have a >> light like meeting and then you do a water meeting >> in the water pot.
>> Okay. So, if they're voting on the the general manager, >> it would just be the the five people. Maybe maybe we should consider pushing that off to the board of light and board
of water commission and ask how they would like it addressed >> and then get their feedback. >> Yeah. >> It doesn't Yeah. I mean in reality it doesn't say this number of votes and so on. It just says they shall appoint >> right
>> the two together and in both and the and obviously the water has a corlary wording as the light one does in terms of in conjunction with the light department. Mhm. So to some extent you guys figure it out. I mean do we need to specify the voting in someone here or
just you're responsible. >> Sounds to me like a massive lawsuit. >> I mean truly. >> But every every time we have a a vote with another board and it's a joint vote, we're all confused about how things should go. Like it's it's not specified. And I think I don't care
which way it goes, but we should say this is how it goes. >> Yeah. So explain that to me. So tonight if we were going to vote on something, >> right? I don't know. How would you do it? Would you have us, the select board, all five of us vote as a as a board? >> Oh, I or is this a one big board of a joint
meeting? >> One big board of 14 people. >> Yeah, that's what I would say. But >> it's a little different. >> I don't know. >> I would say there's >> there's an authority that comes with certain boards. Like our board has an authority. If that's the the board's the authority, then the other board
theoretically is the recommending Right. And then we are making the decision. So in that case, yes. When we're doing things like the budget, >> you know, >> but but we just appointed someone to the planning board. >> Exactly. >> Right. Was that a >> that was us?
>> But they voted. >> It was a joint. It was a joint. >> Is that how it's written though? >> Yeah. That's exactly here too. >> And and in an instance where there's a difference in numbers for instance, I mean we outnumber you guys right now.
insane. >> Let's hold the vote now. Um, >> you're now three more. >> Um, but yeah, it's like if you count everybody together, then you naturally in many cases you'll you'll definitely be leaning one way or the other. And if
or one board votes one way and another board votes another way as a block, >> how do you resolve that? We've talked about this because um >> we know when we're voting on a budget and it hasn't happened, thank goodness, we have a um a seven member finance
committee and a five member select board. We're charged with our priorities that we create early in the year and a lot of those things politically are driven differently than some of the fiscal parts. So in theory, we could be outvoted on a on finance. I've always
questioned, well, that we're the elected board. So it it's a it's tricky for me to to get behind the the a two board voting on everything. So I don't know how we would >> and the appointments we've done different ways. I mean, I think when we appointed someone to light and water,
the light and water commissioners voted and then we voted to accept their recommendation. So, and when we just did the planning board, we voted as a nine-member board >> for an appointment >> for the appointment. And I don't know which way is right. I just wish we'd standardize on one way or another. >> And can it be standardized? Yes.
>> I know when I was back on on your board, too, that's exactly what would happen on the vacancy. We if it was nine people, it was just nine people voted. It wasn't >> it wasn't one board voted, then you approved it. It was just everyone was voted on it.
Um, specific to light and water, how long are your appointments? I mean, how long are your um, >> three years? Three years. >> Your three year. Okay. >> It say it says in the charter. >> I just wanted to make sure because we're charge we can charge the water if light was five.
>> It actually and light and water would be it wouldn't line up anymore. >> It doesn't actually say for the light and water how long the term is. It just says five members. I think 51C says that >> all >> that that the terms for these following boards are three years.
>> May maybe it's not C, but it's in there. >> No, except it >> but light could actually >> Oh, it says everyone except housing authority >> if they have that authority. >> That's true. >> I mean, is this something that the Colin Center would give you input on on how how boards should
>> how other towns do it? Probably make it go however you want, but >> I'd be curious. I don't think we're going to resolve that tonight. >> No, don't. >> We can also town council probably has it. >> Yeah, that's true, too. >> Actual say on exactly how this >> That's the best thing about this. You have this document now. It's going to go
to you. It's going to go to town council. Get ironed out before it goes to the people. So, >> yeah. >> I I have a If we've beaten that one, I have a question on 51F. It says elected town officers and head of elected multi-member bodies or their
representatives blah blah blah um shall be required to meet with the town manager at reasonable times. That's something new. I'm I'm wondering what we're suggesting here because we don't necessarily have boards required to meet with the
>> right >> the boards as opposed to department heads. >> It's just as of to affect coordination cooperation. So if they're asked, they're expected to say yes, not no I don't I don't want to talk to you or I don't have to talk to you. That's basically what that's saying. >> So >> you hope that doesn't happen, but it could. So
>> So I kind of view the like I always considered like board should be talking to boards and departments should be talking to departments, not and now we're like kind of crossing the streams here, right? >> So that's where I'm just not >> Well, except here it's not the board. This is why it says
um the heads of the department, the heads. Oh, it says heads of elected multimember head but not the whole board. >> So if it was the whole board then I think I agree a board should be talking to a board. >> So we're saying the chair of a board. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. If the town manager says I'd like
to talk to you, >> chair of the planning board, chair, you know, board of health, >> right? >> We're charging the town manager typically from the select board to make sure you're meeting with your town department heads and your committee. So if we're going to do that, then we need this this actually makes sense to have
the authority. written into a charter that says if the town manager requests a meeting we've seen it I say this because I have seen it before I was on the select board like no I'm not meeting with you that's that's not okay if you're you know if
you're an elected body separate from the town administrator or manager >> okay >> so I I think we can look at the wording if what was that 51F Yeah, >> Tom moderator. >> It's going to be an interesting town meeting.
>> Well, you know, it was interesting because we had a lot of discussions early on about, gee, do we really need a deputy town mount moderator? It's like, no, we don't need one of those. Wouldn't it be nice to have somebody in training just in case? >> As it turns out. >> All right. So, should we talk about town
clerk? >> Sure. >> Um, so this is one of the ones I one of the two things I think I felt most strongly about. Um, and reading through your deliberations on elected versus appointed. And given the climate that we're living
in, I feel like the town clerk has a unique duty to maintain democracy in this town. And I'm very concerned about making that an appointed board for philosophical, political, and kind of
abstract reasons. Um, I would be fine with putting into the the charter that the select board has the power to appoint the the assistant town clerk, which as mentioned in your document, that has happened for ever. And it's
clear that it's working. Um, that we find people who are have expertise and I'm very sensitive to the argument that someone could run who's completely unqualified and become town clerk and the whole thing crashes and burns. But so >> I'm really I really feel strongly about
the the sort of independence of our elections and >> sure but this is a this is a select board discussion that should be based off of they're giving a recommendation. This this whole thing is a recommendation. Those specifically were very charged you know debates you guys
had together a lot of these things. So we have to take that and what you just said is going to have to come up in another meeting when we're deciding >> what to do. But they but I think we could they could go back and and redo this draft with with town clerk as an elected.
>> But then you're taking away their recommendation. >> I'm looking at a little they they're giving a recommendation. We're taking that recommendation deciding whether to yes, no, or change it. >> Right. I'm saying change this, >> right? I know you I'm not saying I don't
want to say change your change your vote. >> No, but but I'll tell you the way the way we've been taking and I'm speaking for the board. Guys, always correct me if I'm saying something that you don't agree with, but we wouldn't take it as change it because we know that this is our document to give to you, but we do want input from people. So, if somebody
feels strongly about something and and but but I don't want to say, well, I don't like that. I say, okay, so why? You know, we want to hear why because then if there's because we always said from the beginning, you know, we we don't want to get to the end and say, oh, well, if we known that and nobody >> So, if we know we tell me what's your meeting, you evaded this.
>> So, we we really we really want to hear this. This was a tough one. and all those things you said and then and then you get down to the practicality of it's like well it's never really an election but I understand somebody that's elected is in a different position and and so on but they you know then they have state law behind them so we understand all
that stuff so but I do want to hear so if people feel strong and then your your position is is >> you were 63 on that correct you were 63 63 >> our board might be 32 I I don't know so it's it's a controversial >> I'm curious what the rest of this life
board thinks about this whether whether it's yes, no, or indifferent. So that so that because this is one of either. So >> I'm sorry. >> Right. >> Well, that's what I'm saying. Like this is one of the few things that I think was there was there was real disagreement on your board >> which is why it wasn't it's highlighted
and marked out but it's still here. >> But that's why I'm interested in what the rest of this board says because clearly we have an influence over what what where they go. So yeah, >> I I I agree with a lot of your comments, Matthew, that that I think the town clerk um for the
for the being above the democracy, supporting the democracy in the town should probably stay as an elected position. Having said that, I think there needs to be a lot more work around how the town clerk fits into the rest of
the town hall organization than currently exists, right? The town clerk has to follow the, you know, employee bylaws and all of this. Like we basically need to have the town clerk be more of a almost an elected contract employee, right? Which we don't have
right now. I mean, if you remember, we went back to the budget. We had to approve something special because the town clerk doesn't follow the normal gradings and doesn't get longevity and, you know, all of these other things that the town clerk by being an elected
position doesn't follow the rest of um >> but is the town HR regulations and we need to figure out how to bring them in and into those regulations. But could that be because of state law and not because of the town bylaws? >> Yeah.
>> Like because I know there's a lot of state law that covers the powers and constraints of a of a town clerk. >> I mean, I don't know. >> I I don't I don't know the answer either, but I think we need to bring the town clerk more into the HR system, >> right?
>> Yeah. I my opinion on it, you know, the autonomy of that position is critical. I think at different points probably in a community. I'm trying to picture I I know some of the communities that obviously have an appointed and I don't know what the reasoning is behind that. I don't know why they decided to go the
appointed way >> because you can find expertise because you can find expertise you know >> um we haven't run into that problem. These are usually long tenur positions. Um thank goodness but um I like the autonomy >> boy than than an elected position.
>> Yeah. From a select board point of view, I like to be able, you know, it's it makes me uncomfortable um and it's actually I shouldn't do it to text a department head something or email or text separately privately some opinionated thing. I have no problem
texting her. I So I it just to me it makes you know because she's another elected official, you know, we can do that. So um I I do like the autonomy of the position. I I'm not saying that there's a future where this might change. That's what a charter is about,
right? Eventually it might migrate, but you guys had a 63 vote is is a pretty strong vote. I I consider, you know, six of you I'd like to hear a little bit. I mean, I've watched it, so I I don't but I think I
was leaning more to the minority in that decision and for that for my reasons and your much reason. >> Interesting. I think we've got a I'll be honest, I think we've got some confirmation bias going on here because we all I think are very happy with the town clerk services
that we've had. Um I have know other people who have lived in other towns who have had, you know, people elected who don't do their jobs and are terrible and unless you can recall them, you can't do anything about it.
>> Um or, you know, the town clerk decides not to be a town clerk or can't be a town clerk anymore and then you've got another election and another election and another election. You know, everything works until it doesn't. If we're on our third town clerk, let's pretend we went through town clerks as
quickly as we went through town administrators for a minute. >> Ouch. >> We kind of been wishing that we could find somebody qualified who wanted the job and would be able to stay in the job. >> Yeah. So that's that's the other side of
it. I haven't decided where I'd land on it, but that's that's that's the part of it that makes sense to me. >> Is res residency requirement part of it? Either way, it is >> it is correct. >> Okay. >> So I would also point out that there was, you know, during my tenure on the board, there was at least one case where
the town clerk spoke out um sort of in defense of the town employees as the one elected person who could do it. Yep. against uh you know the select board, right? And I think that was an important moment. >> Yep. >> Um and that is you know
>> a sort of autonomy that no one else in this building has >> right >> against tyrannical politicians. >> I hate them >> and be quiet Gary. >> If I can just dject what you said there
even 20 years ago when we had the time what you just said was the same thing we went through too. is that you know it was almost like a check and balance. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> The one position that we >> and we decided that wasn't going to be
elected back then was going to be the town clerk and make sure that it stayed that way. And even back then we knew back then that the town administrator needed more authority, but we didn't bring it to town meeting because we knew a lot of things wouldn't pass.
So to to me, so it just it's interesting to me because that what you just said about the town clerk coming and bringing a point up against the select board or the town ministry or whatever. I hadn't thought of that. I'm always thinking about when we hear about this a lot is
um somebody's asking the town clerk to do something that's you know maybe it's gray area or it's just curing the laws. You well it's supposed to be 14 days but it's 12 days just go ahead and do it anyway. I mean, and there basically you've got you've got the state behind you, right? The town clerk can say, "No, that's illegal. I'm not doing that." But
in this ca, what you the me what you brought up is not the case where you'd have somebody else behind you to say, "No." So, >> except except the res literally the residents of the town. >> Yeah, I know. But but somebody So that's that's to me that's that's a kind of a new data point. So that's good. Okay. Go ahead. Um yeah, I speak for myself, but
I think also as some of the deliber deliberation showed like um you know 63 across the committee but even like within my own head >> 63 or 72 and I think you know we we sort of took some of these straw polls to sort of say
okay where generally you landing this side or this side but I think even again just speaking for myself that um it's not sort of a absolutely 100% one way or absolutely 100% the other way, but when you're looking at these different dynamics,
which ones are weighted a little more than the others? And I think that's where some of this feedback is really helpful because um it is a sort of it's a little gray in the middle there, right? And I I do think that there's opportunity to kind of move one way or the other.
>> We have to vote yes or no. We we can't say, >> "Well, I'm 60% there." Yeah, exactly. >> Where I think some of us probably were. But I I I think Karen made an excellent point about we have not had a bad experience with the town clerk and >> this is supposed to be a document for the future. So I'm with I'm with you.
I'm like I'm 63 in the other direction, but >> I understand the problems with it. >> Ron, >> so Jim's here as part of the select board. He has something to say. So I want to just bring it to your attention. >> Thank you. Um, I don't necessarily agree, Matthew, with what you said that
the, you know, I I don't doubt that it didn't that it that that that it happened with town clerk speaking stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick stick sticking up for town employees that's the manager's job the administrator's job and that's whether it's to the select board whether
it's to town meeting or where it is and that's and that's part of the equation is you want to have stability and you want to have strength in that position in going forward So, um, that's the role of of a of a of
a of a good town manager, of a good town administrator. And, uh, and the the town is very very fortunate, and I will say this, and I've said it to her many times. I mean, we're very fortunate to have to have to have Diane. She is she's phenomenal in every sense of the word. I
tremendous respect for her. Um but uh you know please don't um um it is the role of of of the town manager to to defend to defend their employees to anybody and everybody residents select
board elected boards appointed boards doesn't matter it's my opinion >> public input now okay all right George >> George is 682 great But um I've been around politics
probably about 62 years and I can tell you that we should never infringe on the people's rights whether we have uh matters in a
community or town, city, what have you there that we believe that that serves best is we elect representatives to positions and so forth and I think there are positions here in the town that we
have that we select people to these positions and I feel that uh a clerk position uh certainly because she has uh he has someone that he's working very close
with and that's distinct the secretary of the state. When you start appointing people in positions, then there's a lot of influences to put this person in because of this reason or that reason and so
forth and so on. And when we talk about a clerk, a clerk has a key position in the town to take care a whole lot of stuff that we don't actually get to be a part of and see
every day. But the town and the city that I've been in, I've seen nothing but fine clerks doing the job and taking care of the citizens in the town of the city. And I
think that the clerk since I've been here since 97, I found the clerks to have done a great job in taking care the needs of the people here in the town of Milton and more especially when it comes to the
town meeting and also to the elections. So my thing is that I'm going to uh speak strongly about is that the positions that we have in this charter that uh
elected positions I think it should be hands off the appointed position. Yeah, we might end up uh cutting some of the positions or getting rid of some of the committees of board or whatever. But when it comes
to what I consider infringing on the people, right, that come that uh charter was established long before we came to this county
and it has worked. If it hadn't, it would have been changed by now. So, if it's working and it's not broken, >> thank you.
>> We have good people in the position that are doing the job. That is what we when I said we, the citizen of this town looks to have as representatives
representing us. And I certainly would hope that when this does come before the town meeting that you don't pack it all in on one night at the town meeting. I think that you need to make sure what
the old charter is saying and what the new recommendation is is saying that you need to give a clear understanding as to why this was changed so that the
people will understand it. We're talking about a crucial document. >> Yep. that's going to mean the rest of our lives in this town as to how this town operates. So, we need to make sure we put the time in so that the people
understands what is being done. >> Yep. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So, um on the town clerk position, >> I wonder if it might be worth investigating. I don't know what chart what um Collins has told you about the
ratio of um elected versus appointed, but I want also wonder what the term length should be because if you made it like a one-year term, they basically become more like an employee will, right? Where you could get rid of them much easier than going through a recall election, right? If if you had a if you
elected a bad town clerk, you're stuck with them for three years or you get 2,000 signatures to get rid of Well, yeah, we're going to get to the recall thing, but >> versus something that would be more >> run for that. >> Well, the town clerk's already you got to run to all the elections.
>> I don't know. >> I mean, the town moderator was a one-year position until very recently. So, >> I think elective positions are hard enough to fill without making them unattractive, >> but this one's a paid elective position, so it's more attractive than ours, >> kind of, but not if you're looking to like have it, you know, if this is what
you want to do with your life. You know, I can ask Holland or but find out if other other towns do that. That's an interesting approach. But yeah, >> I'm I'm really just I'm I'm just the Littleton guy. That's what I care about is the Littleton piece. And I until there's a problem, there isn't a
problem. I know you guys have had to look out 5 10 years, not the current individual in the position. But I look at we haven't had issues with the town clerk's office, which would lead me to thinking that an elected person
shouldn't be in there. Um, and now you're right, the whatifs can come into play. And if we somebody put their name in the hat um when when Diane retires and how many years? In a couple years. Two years. Um,
>> two years. >> Somebody put a name in the hat. is just a horrible town clerk, you know, and gets elected and then we're going to we have to deal with that situation. Um, but that's still a big what if to me. I
I you know, I think we're blessed to have a great assistant council. We put a lot of effort into that position as well. And >> that's so I I just again we did the same thing. You think when was the last time we had a contested election? It's not really it's really appointment anyway.
No, in two years we could get a Tom Clair could come >> you know run and just be horrible and then we have our hands are tied managers hands are tied and we're in a we're in a tough situation but >> so it's going to we'll have to this is going to be a tough debate on >> these these are the hard ones right
there's not a yes there's not a right wrong answer it's a >> I know I know it's a 63 vote >> but that one to you >> thanks you can come back and say I told you All right. Where do you want to go next?
>> Word of health. >> Uh what? >> We can do >> what section is that? >> 58. >> Okay. >> I I feel the same way about this one. I I really feel strongly this should be elected. I think that it's a regulatory body. There's a lot of pos there's a lot
of potential for corruption and um you know long rolling if you have someone who is approving development in town who's appointed by the uh administrator of the town. I don't like it. >> I think the board of health should be
appointed and not elected. Um because I think you need to have certain you there needs to be certain expertise on the board of health, public health experience, doctor, nurse, that type of thing that you don't necessarily get through an election process. >> Except that we have it now
>> um by luck. We used to have the regulation that someone had to be um a public health professional and then we had to get rid of it because >> no one >> no one ran that had that. So, I think the board of health, you can make a legitimate claim that it needs or should
have someone with that experience and there's no way of guaranteeing that through an election. >> Yeah, I have an opinion. It's but I'm this this is going to be a lot tougher one for me to to research and look at a lot of the information that you guys dealt with. What was your vote on this?
Do you remember? I think it might have been it was unanimous but it was one I think health but it was unanimous again we're back to the you know about yes or no but a lot of us were 6040 kind of thought >> and just to add and it mentions it briefly in the notes but at one point we
did um all strongly support a hybrid model or not strongly support we we' uh proposed a hybrid model and >> it's um >> I think we migrated away from sorry yes so um that would be some members are
elected and some members are appointed and we sort of moved away from that at one point saying well that is just a deferral of decision making but have >> during that debate it was proposed as a potential option to try to balance some of those pros and cons. Um and so
acknowledging you know the transition of um you know within the charter acknowledging some of the you know growth issues within town that it might make sense to have that. Um so just as you were considering the kind of various different options just wanted to bring that to your attention that that was
something that was considered. Yeah. >> Yeah. I I I saw this um more from a a point of okay the elected side what if you got five nurses that got elected. >> That doesn't really doesn't really help the people putting the temperature stick
you know fornos to see what you know being an oversight of that part. There's no expertise there. So, the hybrid model, I can see where that probably spun up in your heads a little bit because we'd be able to, okay, we've got four nurses or four doctors on the comm.
Let's let's find and appoint go out and find someone that we can appoint that's, you know, understands, you know, septics or understands food, you know, food industry, the health of that. Um, that's the only part. This one's going to be
This one's tough. I I'm I'm split right down the middle. Um we you know I I really don't know. I'm going to have to think about this a lot more and maybe talk to a few more people. But I I mean you guys you guys gave your your opinion
that does weigh heavily with me on on where you are with it. But I just I can't get that piece out of my head, the what if. And I I said I wouldn't do it with one thing. I'm not going to do it with with this one either. >> But remember, they're overseeing the department. They're not the ones going out and putting this. >> No, I know. But to have that that
knowledge, I mean, yeah, it's great during a an epidemic to have all that, you know, physician type knowledge, but certain circumstances where that would not be the case at all. And that's using that as an example. But >> I come back to we have a lot of I mean,
for every board that we have that's currently elected, we could find someone a board that's very similar that's also currently appointed, right? Like >> that's true. The conservation commission has no requirements that you have, you know, uh, clean clean water expertise,
but that's what they're doing. >> Even better, the planning board. >> Well, the planning board's elected. ZBA is appointed. >> So why so why is it okay for the planning board not to have requirements and be elected and but it isn't okay for the board of health not to have requirements and be elected in your mind? Those are exactly the same thing.
>> But the planning board is all they're doing is follow their what their job is is to follow our regulations, right? They're more lawyerly than planning me, right? Their job is to make sure that whatever's in front of them follows the zoning regulations. >> They can issue special permits that like
go outside the bounds of that within, >> right? But I mean, you could argue that all the board of health does is follow the regulations for septic and, >> you know, and for public health. I I don't I don't understand the distinction. I don't understand what the board of health is doing that's
different from what the planning board is doing that you feel like the planning board should be elected, but it's okay for the board of health to be appointed. I think they both are regulatory boards that have significant oversight, they have significant impact on the development in the town, and I'm I'm
very concerned about aggregating a lot of power around the town administrator. Honestly, no offense, >> but we're not >> the town manager. No, we if we're saying that appointed by the well, the select board, not the town manager, but that's too much power in the hands of the select board. More we need more checks.
But what's the power of this? Like we're appointing qualified individuals that we could actually have resumes put in front of us. >> Sure. But we also could have like we could appoint our buddies who are approving all the developments that we want and >> it would have to be five of our buddies or three of the five
>> and that's never happened in this town. No, I mean I'm serious. Like like like look, it's all sort of speculative, but I would I'm just pushing towards more accountability and and a slightly more distributed
power structure than than coalesing it all on the select board. I I find >> it's accountability that I'm tripping over here because to me one of the one of the problems with a board or commission or whatever have you that is in charge of a town department that is
elected so only answers to a vague sort of notion, right? But nobody directly but yet they're still in charge of a department but they have no fiscal responsibility. None.
And that's a problem for me like just fundamentally. >> So, so Matthew, I share your concern to a certain extent of all the power um being concentrated in the select board. And if we're concerned about that, I say we um change the appointing to make it
more like final for these different boards, you know. >> So, it's distributed. >> It's distributed appointments. If if you're concerned about concentrating too much power in the five of us, then let's distribute the appointments for these appointed boards.
>> Rob, yeah, I'd just like to clarify that when he was here a few times, board of health chair uh Kevin Davis went out of his way to to say how board of health has the ability to create their own laws. So, I heard some dialogue there
that I felt lacked that element. And I want to make that real clear that I have no reason to go to research what he presented to us. It sounded like it was authoritative and on that basis that's a very different organization my
standpoint than the conservation commission that is appointed and follows wetland protection act. But that's existing law separate from board of health statements stating that they can create law which is a whole different animal. So I just wanted to
>> they can extend that out. >> They can extend state policies, >> right? >> I I don't want to I'm not an expert. I just want to make point bring up if he was here I think he would have raised his hand and said please understand the difference than what I heard.
>> One of the other conversations and and you know this from going through our deliberations and so on too is that you know a lot of these things that they're they're never contested elections. You know, planning board does tend to have more contest. They had more contested elections. If a election's not contested,
you know, there's a name on a ballot and you check it because there's only one. You know nothing about that person. In most cases, at least if there's an election, if there's contested then you hope that there's some dialogue and if you're interested that there's some information out there. But that to me that's that's also scary that you know
when we we have elections but there's they're not contested then you really don't know what are their ideas. What are they bringing? Why do they want to do this? If they're appointed, they have to come, you know, presumably come and you ask some of those questions in front of them. >> You at least get a resume.
>> I mean, YouTube is littered with communities that have that exact situation and you're like, "Wow, is that dysfunctional?" Just listening to people that are, you know, sitting on boards that probably aren't qualified or they're not their intentions are
nefarious. It it causes a really hostile hangup for the rest of the committee and the board. So, >> these are the t ones. There's no question. >> That's all you had. >> Okay.
Um one >> um I had some the housing authority one is just outrageously confusing. I also have some comments on that one. >> Um like the executive EO executive office of
housing has appoint someone for a three-year term but we have like 5year stagger terms. So what happens after the three years they appointed for two I just don't know how any of this works. It just makes >> so for that one the elected ones are 5 years there's a tenant appointment which is three years and there's a select
board appointment or there's a governor's appointment which is forever. And that's like a I think state law. >> Yeah. Just the five-year term is state law. Yeah. >> And the appointment for the tenant is
three years. Is that state law as well? >> I don't know. >> I think it is. We We looked that stuff up because we want to make everything the same, but that the five-year one. >> It's completely unclear how any of those terms
Yeah. >> Um, so the three elected positions at 5 years is not clear, right? >> No, it says each of the members shall serve a term of 5 years. >> Yes. >> So arranged that one commissioner shall expire each year. That's what >> So that that is you're right. That is
confusing. >> So the other thing that I heard was that the EOHLC is not going to allow the select board to appoint their seat. They like the select board may appoint the tenant seat if there's no tenant that wants it
to sit it, but the state will not very unlikely according to the executive director that we have been speaking to. The state is very unlikely to give up their right to appoint to the to a housing authority. So are you referring to the park where
it says if it's been vacant for 120 days then it flips to the select board and you're saying that even if it even if it's 120 days they'll still want to keep the appointment. >> That was that was the the information I got from the executive >> and we had other information from Collins but Diane what do you want to
say if I may. Um, so the two positions that are vague, the one that the governor appoints, it's only supposed to be for 5 years. I have been in contact with the governor's office for the last
5 years trying to get them to correct it. They We've sent emails. We've made phone calls. We've done letters. And we keep being told, "Yep, you'll get a new letter of an appointment. you get whatever to correct it and they don't
follow through. So thus the reason that Gina was still in the position that he >> and Colin confirmed confirmed that this is common for small for smaller towns just this is just what happens. Okay. >> In the second one the tenant elected position
um that position became vacated because of a death. They followed all the proper positions sending it out asking for people to put in their name and we had
someone coming in at the last minute. So we're back to square one again and in contacting the EOT they said if within 6 months time of
that last notification we could appoint a joint appointment between housing authority and the and this >> for the teny but not for the not for the state appoint okay that's what I thought
And if I could, the purpose for that language that's here is basically Taran to you address your point previously stated about concerns about quorum when we have these vacancies for extended periods of time. There seems to need to
be some action that perhaps we can push through charter if it's accepted by AG's office to give you the authority to then act if needed. Yeah, this is a higher authority though. This is you can't change that authority.
>> So, so to address Mark's point, I think 510B should say each of the elected members shall serve a term for 5 years. Okay. And that would clear that up. And then the you know EOHLC member shall
serve a term of 5 years and the tenant board member shall serve a term term of 3 years. I >> I assume the tenant also has to stay a tenant, right? If they leave, >> if they move to somewhere else and then someone else there's a new election.
Yeah. Or a new appointment. >> A new appointment. So, >> it's just a different requirement that doesn't say they have to stay in Littleton. >> Not Yeah, then they have I think they have to be a tenant in that housing authority, >> but it doesn't say it says that the tenant member is appointed by the select
board. So, not elected. >> Okay. >> And we can confirm again. I mean, Collins was the one that g told us to put in that wording about if they don't fill it then >> then the select board should appoint somebody with a vacancy. But we'll check it again and obviously all K counsel have to check it too.
>> Thank you. Yeah, that's that's great. And thank you. >> Is that something that you can go to like our state representative or something like that and say, "Can you get us an answer? Can you get us a letter? Do they help with stuff like that?" >> You can try. >> You can try, >> but if it's, you know, the fact that you
hear that it's all so many towns, it's not it's not helpful. But it just seems well frustrating to say the least, right? >> Well, we we we succeeded once and then he went back to the governor and got reappointed. >> Yeah. >> Okay.
>> Um I had a question about 62J about the chief procurement officer. Mhm. >> Um it says that the town manager should serve as the chief procurement officer, but what if there's a different town employee who is actually the one who's
qualified to be the chief procurement? >> In other words, has the has the uh what is the criteria the the state, >> right? You have to you have to go through the IG's office and again pass those three separate tiers. But it also
says that you can that the town manager can point someone that if you have like you have here an MCPO the town manager will be signing everything okay that MCPO makes sure that the procurement is done properly
>> so that's my question but the signature of the town manager is ultimately what this means >> the signature on every bit every bid and >> okay >> um jumping back to 61A um it says that we'll appoint the town
manager for a term of 3 years, but I think we need more flexibility than that. >> I was going to I said up to >> Yeah. >> Where are you? >> 61A. >> Oh, wait. >> If I may, Madam Chair, >> um
the uh you talk about education and experience. >> Yep. I've got this flag. >> Specify education, the level of education. Do you want he or she to have a master's degree, >> which I would suggest?
>> I was going in the opposite direction actually. >> No kidding. >> Yeah. So, um what I had flagged there was that it says it will be fitted the TM will be fitted by education, training and experience. But so many um jobs anymore are you know you
can wave certain number years of experience with a you know with a degree or you can wave the degree with certain numbers of experience but with the end there I feel like we have less flexibility to decide you know what the market and what our requirements >> this needs to be as flexible as
possible. >> Yeah. >> And it's not specifying what that has to be. It's just saying that those are the things that have >> they just have to be educated. >> I mean, I think I've been on a lot of the the hiring committees for different things and I I think just the the
selection committee itself when you're looking at these resumes, it's obvious once they all come in and you see 27 people with master's degrees and one with an associates. Yeah. >> So it kind of migrates itself, you know,
to that person's obviously >> probably not going to move forward if that's, you know, what the the selection >> unless there's something very special about them otherwise, >> right? Which, you know, which, you know, >> yeah, maybe held a holding a position like that for the last 10 years. But I I
do like the flexibility to be able to >> to do that. But I I I do believe that that's something that >> yeah, >> you're really gonna if the board's going to concentrate on the degree and we want it posted that way, post it that way. Um, master's degree required or
>> I wouldn't put that in the No, that's what I'm saying. >> I wouldn't put that in the charter. >> I like that flexibility in the announcement for the job. >> But this says all of these things have to be in public or business administration and anymore there's lots of candidates who are coming from private industry. We do have an enormous
amount of attorneys, believe it or not, that apply for that that position. >> You're saying that by specifying public and business administration too specific for being in the charge, right? It's not as >> relevant education >> or just strike public or business
administration by education, training, and experience to perform the duties of the office. >> Would be my suggestion. >> Jim, I think Jim had basket weaving or something. It does. >> Yeah. >> Um and then for for B, subsection B,
there um it says the TM will not hold another public office elected or appointed or engage in any business or occupation during the town manager's term. Um unless fully disclosed and approved by the select board in advance and in writing. And I suppose the last part is
is where we have flexibility. But my comment was not even where they live. >> You know, they can't serve where they live. >> I think that's the I think that's the intent. >> Yeah. >> Without being without letting you know. >> Yeah. >> Is it a conflict? Is it at all?
>> I mean, the demands of the demands of the job compared to the demands of your job in in a different community, they're going to they're going to clash. >> Yeah. >> They're going to overlap. you're just not going to have enough hours in the day, days in the week, weeks in the month to get to get done what you need
to. Something's going to suffer whether the elected position >> or his or her appointed position that will be working for you. >> Okay. >> Um I I had a question about 64 the Oh, I'm sorry. >> 62
>> under 62. Um I think we should consider under I think it's I think it would be under E. Um recommendations for appointment shall be based on merit and fitness alone. Um and I think we should add a disclosure requirement for relationships to
candidates or prior relationships or and that's more of a select board thing for us to talk about later. But >> yeah, >> I do think we need a proactive disclosure requirement, >> a formal relationships or for former or
current relationship. >> Yep. >> That's good. >> Okay. The other thing that's going to that we did I think agreed the last meeting it's not in here um is that and I guess it's it's practice now anyway but that the way this will work is that the um the town manager will forward all
the applicants for any open position >> with their recommendation but then it's still up to the select board to look at them and decide and make the appointment. >> Yeah, that's good. Um, I have a couple on 62B. You're missing an Oxford comma
after supervised direct comma. >> Okay. >> And be responsible. >> That's a whether you like it that way or not before and but I agree. >> See what we put up. See what we put up with. >> Um,
sounds like us. >> Don't look at me. and and and on 62D I'm a little the town manager appointing all the department heads um um when they're in with consultation of with the boards I
think is not strong enough I because consultation can just basically mean hey I'm going to hire what do you know I I really the way I kind of view this working and I I I've said this many times is like the board should bring a
slate of candidates to the town manager from whom they can choose right for for for the department head. So it's not just a strict consultation. It's and if and it can be rejected by the the
slate can be reject just like any other vacancy. The slate could be rejected by the town manager and they're back doing it again. Um, but I think that's the should be more of the hiring process. So, it's more of a mutual mutual decision, not just a hey, I'm going to
hire Joe, right? And then I think the >> but can we just let's just talk about that a little bit though because I mean a couple of things. One is I mean you know if obviously if you get the right person the town manager that's that's what's going to happen. But the other thing is there could be candidates that the town manager knows that maybe the
the board knows. Of course, I guess they should get recommended to the board and the board should still bring them through. Um there could be people that maybe the board doesn't like and the town manager does and that's part of the process, right? It's possible. Um but we struggled with which is why consult with is still in yellow highlight in your thing because we
struggled with that too. And then how detailed do you get because you might you know because some boards may not want to be that involved. I mean that's the other part of it, right? Sometimes you get boards are really active and really want to do all this stuff and other ones kind of like yeah whatever you know. So how detailed do you want to get?
That's that's Go ahead Charlotte. >> Um just uh mining the minutes here a little bit. Um I think there was at one point we floated some language like incorporate meaningful input or you know solicit meaningful input or something
that does speak to a more substantive. I think you we words smmith this for a while I think but it sounds like maybe we need to put put some of that back in that was the intention um that it wasn't just a kind of hey what do you think oh well >> and we didn't find yeah we just kept
looking for that magic wording somebody else's charter where else we never quite found the thing that seemed without being too prescriptive >> but also get the thing for so many of these things I mean I don't think you're wrong and I think you know we can still work on that some more >> there's so many of these things that you
know if if the right things aren't being done at a right at a certain level, especially things like this in terms of >> Well, I'm interested to know this is a it doesn't define it, but it gives us a little bit of flexibility. And I I I'm just curious to know at any given select
board that's up here, a policy from that select board can a hiring policy could add to this. Do you know what I mean? I I don't know if this gives us right now if we found say we found a hiccup in this the word consult
right would we be able to say we add okay this also includes meaningful you know discussion or meaningful or bring in a member of uh the committee the chair you know or things like that we might be able to add to I'm curious if a
charter allows for a little bit of that from >> if we wanted to if we yeah if we could word it in such a way that it more of a select board or policy that HR policy we could do that would be better. >> I was surprised that this was addressed at all in the charter to be honest. I
just I mean to me you bring in an executive and the executive builds their team and you're that's why you hired the executive. >> Yeah. >> Um so I'm I'm curious as to how many um if this was included because it's it's typical or or it's what
>> Yeah. I mean this is this is pretty >> because you get complaint you get enough complaints from the commission or the committee to the town manager that he's going to say okay you're right there's a problem >> I would say there's both there's this and then there there's cases where the the town manager just just appoints people >> but then why do you have a board I mean
want I mean again it comes back to the you know but you should want their input if you if you're if he's doing or he or she is doing the job right you would want to get the input from all those players >> if we want if we want the input and we're not getting it he's out >> right But if we don't want the input, I don't want the charter telling me that
slowing us down and saying you, you know, every uh department head has hire has to come through us. >> So I I don't think it was well and just again looking through some of the minutes, it was saying that >> um it was ensuring and kind of codifying
that the town manager wouldn't be making completely unilateral decisions without soliciting the feedback and the input. ultimately balancing that with the fact the town min manager would have that ultimate authority to make the appointment. Um, but I think we heard
from a number of boards and committees that they felt like very concerned that they're they wouldn't even have an opportunity to participate in that process. So, it's a little bit ofense perhaps redundancy, intentional redundancy a little bit because we're
saying if one follows >> the appropriate appointment procedures as laid out in the HR policies, you would put together a selection committee, right? You would go through that those motions anyway. Um, but this was really to say you won't just have somebody behind the scenes just making
appointments without any involvement of the board. I I think Betsy, you know, Betsy said some boards aren't involved. This is a personality thing as much as a policy thing. If you
have a strong town manager who really wants to appoint people that they trust and the board is uninterested, then that's how it's going to go. And if the board is very strong and forceful and really wants to be involved, I suspect that's how it's going to go. So no
matter how we word this, I think that the personalities on the ground are going to dominate that dynamic. I I I I get like you could I get you could make it a little stronger. >> You put words in there weighing recommendations >> or in concert with or something like that, but >> tricky. Yeah,
>> let's >> All right. I've got it flagged. >> No, we're going to definitely >> If the person's not doing the job the way they're supposed to be doing it, you got another problem, >> right? Well, then they'd be removed, right? Then that's >> if they're hiring people without getting any input from anybody else, they can hire then >> there you go. >> Got another problem.
>> Yep, we do. >> Madam Chair, George 672. Uh I think if you empower the town administrator manager to hire uh department heads, I think there's a flow
that should be followed. First of all, the position should already been staffed by HR. So when you submit this advertisement, you know exactly what the criteria is for the applicant that's going to apply for the job. And when
that comes in, I think that uh it's at a point that uh the select board should look over these applications because I think five heads are better than one and getting a sense as to the
applicants here that we feel that we rank them accordingly. If you get 15, you said we're going to take uh the top six and send it to the town administrator. We saw the count
staff them 1 2 3 4 5 6 and you give him the opportunity. I said come before the board and ask about the candidates that you interview.
so that he would have some input as to what was done here with his interview. And then after he had that, then he can digest that, go back and make a decision as to who he think would be the best
candidate for that position. That's my take on that. And I think that the more mobs you have, the better candidate you'll probably come up with. Thank you.
>> Point out there's been a lot of discussion about the hiring process. There's been very little discussion about dismissal process. >> Evaluation process. >> In the evaluation process, right? >> In the charter itself, there's not a whole lot of discussion about it. Correct. No,
>> but in here I mean >> it's the same >> 62D is the same process for each >> consult. Yeah, >> it's kept open. I'm sure >> to be flexible. But >> I mean the accountability of the town manager to do do things right, hire good
people, surround themselves with people that they trust and are responsible is important to the functioning of the town. the select board being able to remove that talent manager for making poor decisions because the culture the the
work is not being done is not so I think that authority remains >> sorry I was >> talking about the the administrator's authority to remove >> to remove so a department head >> that belongs to a commission right >> specifically >> okay but going forward
>> the the the commission is no longer hiring that person >> right >> okay so the I mean the the the idea is here that the boards are working. We talked before about boards working with boards. The board you the select board say I'm not involved the dayto-day stuff, right? That's what you're saying. We make policy. So why wouldn't that
apply to the other boards in town as well? >> No. Absolutely. >> And so that's reports to the town manager. They report to them. The town manager is doing the reviews >> and and it's going to be responsible for dismissing. But again, we have HR processes, right? And again, just like
the hiring, if they're not involving the people and getting the input and doing, you've got another problem that can't be legislated. And you can you can legislate everything, but those kind of things, you can't. >> So, if if Jim's hiring a position, he could he could say, uh, I'm going to
form a subcommittee just to look through resumes. And he may he would include, if he wanted to, be smart to include a professional that knows all about this to be on that little committee. And then they would go through resumes and float the resumes to Jim and decision. >> Kind of a process today, isn't it?
>> I mean, >> it is. >> Okay. >> But it's still that position could still go out and hire somebody >> the way this is written. >> Mhm. >> Because they they've worked with them in the past. They know they work really well and they want to get them in here and work. there would still so we we
debated a little bit like to what extent the HR policies and procedures should be embedded in the charter and kind of the advice was don't keep that um so >> it it's a sort of correlary to this that you have a very strong town HR policy
and procedures that would account for developing whether it's a selection committee um you know having a transparent uh period of advertising blah blah blah like And because Littleton has a very strong set of those um >> but we haven't done it for the
department heads. Some managers just can't go out and find somebody on the street and say, "Oh, we're going to hire them." >> Right. We haven't done the department. >> Our HR policies have to be followed. It says right in here >> and it says that in here too. >> Yeah. But the charter, I think if before we just jump forward with something like
this, we're going to have to reook at some of those pieces of the HR policy to make sure that it aligns with department. That's going to be a lot of that because >> Yeah. Um and and Saul's point a bit like if you
know if the the department head if the commission is giving the department head instructions on their goals or whatever and the department head's not doing them, what's how what's the commission supposed to do? >> Go to the town of ministry. >> And the town of administrator says, "No,
I want them to do this." And then we have, you know, what's the role of both of them in this situation? >> Right. Because in theory, the town administrator isn't setting the goals for that department. They're doing the day-to-day operation. And we have we're back to
>> So it's like the board does policy and the manager is the day-to-day. >> Right. Right. So the board shouldn't be saying go do this thing. They should be saying you should aspire to do this thing. >> We gave you this policy to implement and you're not implementing the policy. But >> and it's the manager's problem for not
properly managing that director in my opinion. >> Which gets us back to we have to intercede >> with the time. >> I mean, but that would happen somewhere along the chain anyway, right? Like at least this way the lines of communication are clear.
>> Well, yes, but the commission has no no authority except to come to us >> or well to go to the town manager, >> right? >> Well, they theoretically they've already been Yeah. Okay. >> Yeah. I mean, >> it's it's a long complicated road to get there. So, >> I just don't Well, I don't think it's
any No, it's not that long and complicated. You basically are talking to the town manager instead of talking to the director and the town manager should be managing that person every day. That's his job. >> The chair of a commission can come to the chair of the select board who has the authority with the town manager say, "Hey, I've noticed some serious problems
with X. The town manager is not following through." >> I mean, there's a chain of comm. So there's a lot there's a lot >> I feel like >> the director shouldn't be stuck in the middle of that. The director should be getting their their job is do this. This is your job do it and then these people up here the boards are are working that stuff.
>> I but that's I mean that was the thing how do you again legislate the policies right so that the select board policies are in alignment with these other boards. I mean that's that's the >> and I that's what I haven't done. I haven't taken this and looked at the had have the HR policy next to me so I can
kind of just see how it >> because it would put me at ease to some degree some of this >> appreciate that anyway cuz that's a step that needs to happen. I mean besides the HR policies I mean all the bylaws we have I mean how many things here are now >> out of sync that's one another one of the steps. So Charlotte you have something else you want to say? Yeah,
and I think this also comes to sort of where the language is maybe clear and where it can be made more clear because we had a little bit of this debate. I think it was even just our last meeting and then added something along the lines of um the select board's role to bring the operation of all town agencies into
harmony and that was sort of specifically related and that's in um 34 uh section 34 C um but that was under the guidance of the Colin Center as well not to >> that would not be incorporated in the
version you have that was after that version came out >> uh I think it oh well It says something similar and I think in the other version, but you don't want to create um a kind of get out of jail free card where the select board comes in and and sort of says well actually we're in charge. You want the town manager to
have the authority over their department heads. But you also want to make it clear that the select board does have the um mandate to ensure that in a situation like that that the policy of this board is in alignment with the
policies of the town and to try to bring those back without saying that they're sort of some judge and jury. You know, you there's a little tiny word in there. That's why you make >> loaded. Yeah. Had a lot of debate attached to
it. But I mean then how I mean basically you know you're you're all on the same team even though you're you know you got different roles but how >> I mean the the select board has the authority over the town manager who who is she he or she is. I mean you the tal the select one is going to be hiring
you know through uh through the process they're going to identify the person that is a a strong communicator support system that not only communicates with with the select board but also um has the relationship with different different boards and committees whether
it be the uh uh school department whether it be the planning board whether it be parks and wreck and and any any any manager worth their salt is absolutely going to engage in a, you know, in a colleial relationship with chairs and and different committees
across the board. And if there are issues with a particular um staffing for employee that staffs that specific board or committee, it's up to the to the chairperson to knock on the town manager's door and say, "You
know what? you know the you know few things have gone by the goalie here a few times so we're having a you know there's an area of concern and there has to be a collaborative effort if there's no collaborative effort there's a bigger problem and then that's where the select board comes in
um I mean I've done this for I've been in this business for three decades so I've seen it all and we could sit here and do whatifs all night long but we have to look at you know the the makeup of Littleton uh
and what what you want to do here uh what and learn from and you've learned from your past and and and move forward and and and you want to establish and hold hold the bar high for the for your town managers.
I I think we can address this in the HR policy or select board policy because I I just kind of wrote, you know, the policy in a case termination will inform the chair of the board of conduct performance issues that the >> you know just so it's not like hey I
just fired your director today you know right >> it's so we can create that into our own policy of he will inform the board or the the chair board in maybe an executive session if it has to be or whatever of the conduct or performance
issues that have been noted. I think we can address it through policy. >> Okay. Get to the point of you know better than I do. You get to the point of firing somebody none of this should be a surprise to anybody, right? You should have been having conversations all the way all the way along, >> right? But I you know, you talk about a border committee that meets once a month, maybe twice a month. There's, you
know, how many members don't know what's going on day to day and that's the reality of it. So getting him in the loop. >> I had a question on 62F. I just wasn't sure what fixed the compensation of all town employees means. I mean because
we've kind of had that that through the HR system already. I'm not sure what the town managers doing different than the the gr the grid and steps. >> Some of the boiler plate that we got all the towns seem to have something like this in there. So
>> 62F >> consistent with the personnel system >> the compensation of all town employees consistent with the personnel system >> and with the limits established by the overall budget. I'm just not sure what that fix the compensation of all town
employees consist of personalities. to immun within the framework of a personnel system is how I view it. >> I I just want to emphasize what you said. We see that consistently in many and I think all it does is basically say the town manager can't deviate from
what's otherwise appropriated and recommended within the various >> outside the compensation. >> Correct. And so we're just trying to formalize consistent with many other charters language that constrains. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> I think
>> Okay. I just maybe I would just >> I read it a few times and with your comments because it sounds >> you can't bring somebody in off the grid or >> maybe just means specify consistent with the policy which that that actually makes a lot of sense. And on uh H it
says negotiate subject approval of sector board all contracts with town employees. Um currently I don't know if that's necessarily how we do it. Right. We've decided whether we're involved in contract negotiations >> for the fire police chief. I think
that's true. >> Well the unions were >> this isn't speaking to unions is it? >> Well contracts >> but it says subject to the approval of the select board. all contracts with town employees over wages and other terms. >> So that so why is that is that a change?
>> So so when we were negotiating the police and fire contracts, we opted not to be involved in the negotiation. This takes us out of the negotiation. We don't have a choice of opting in. Right. And I'm not I don't know if that's what
we want or not. >> Yeah. This one's near and dear to me because you you do get to a point I've seen it with several contracts now where it becomes a personality because the town administrator or manager has to become the bad guy. You don't want the psycho board to be the bad guy on these
rights. So they become the bad guy and we it it can stall and and freeze. Joe, you've probably seen it too where the contracts will just get stuck because of these person these personalities of people and that's when you want to be able to introduce potentially the select
board individuals on the select board to help work through it you know put employees at ease. somehow I think inserting being able to the select board being able to insert themselves and not all select boards are going to have people that have been involved in contracts and >> well that's the other piece of it is you
you know >> so you want to stay away from it but it gives but how do we put it in here where the select board may may deem necessary to have a member on the contract >> so we've opted out of the contract negotiations there's nothing in the select board duties that say we can be
involved in contract negotiations so >> you can't >> not necessarily because it says It's subject to the approval of the select board. If we won't approve unless we're involved in some meaningful way, then then it's not getting approved. >> You think so gives us the flexibility to >> Okay.
>> assistant. I wouldn't have read it that way. Sure. Right. >> And and this might I mean this is another nit but he's the town manager is not negotiating all contracts. Right. Cuz the library director >> knows why I'm raising my hand.
>> The library director, the superintendent and uh the water >> manager. Yeah. Light and water all are >> Yeah. >> Those salaries all come independent of those boards. So you got >> standard trustees that we can fire but
it doesn't say we contract >> unless otherwise excluded in this >> remove all or >> otherwise excluded. >> There you go. >> We definitely will consult. >> I was also curious why you chose four out of five for removal or suspension.
>> I think it was to set a high bar. So it's not a barely mated and it's also not one person can veto. >> So I will tell you that it's it's in almost all contracts with individuals the police chief, fire chief. >> Oh, is it? >> Now it doesn't have to be but
I think we've always negotiated four out of five because you don't want >> you remove the buddy buddy thing, right? >> Y >> I don't want to be on the charter. Just a note mostly for us, but 62Q
I think gives jurisdiction would give jurisdiction to look like. >> Yeah, that's still yellow. I've got some input back from town council on that which I still don't really understand. We have to I have to we just this needs work. This needs work is the bottom line and we know that. >> All right.
>> The orchard is what came to mind for that one. I wasn't thinking about that but okay, let me put the note on that. But >> just rentalally in any building, right? Well, it just Yeah, just I mean we just look at you know some of the things we have now um the the parks and so on in
town and and so on, right? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I would also I had to note on Q the second sentence it says the town is responsible for maintenance or repair of all buildings excluding schools but we're also not responsible for Littleton Electric.
>> I know that again that this just all needs wording. Yeah. Yeah. And so we know that why I apologize for that. Thank you. >> Apologize really >> if you'd seen that. There are notes in here too in print out. So some of those things are in the comments and the notes
are >> a ton of work you do. >> So where 74? >> So yeah 74. >> You go ahead. I was going to ask, do you need to specify under 74 that it's subject to the same 21-day notice and
14-day public then as all the other vacancies? >> Well, the other vacancy was for elected positions. >> Okay. So, okay. >> And this is Fincom for specifically. >> Yeah. >> That other that 24 day all that stuff that was elected positions. And is it in
here because there's so many different people who appoint to this board? Like isn't this true of every appointed board though? >> Probably. >> Okay. >> Um I'm not >> Let me just think now let me just think about because you're probably right, but let me just think about it for a second. >> Okay.
>> Well, this is a little bit different because the other ones you would get together, you'd say, well, the board and the select board would get together and decide. But here we're saying because they're appointed FinCom, whoever appointed them would get then get to choose the next one. >> Is there a reason that it was may
instead of Shall? >> No. >> That's an attorney talking right there. >> That's good catch. I'm good until recall petitions. >> Yeah, me I recall as well. >> Okay. Yeah, recall. So, this is also
>> Oh, on 82 um it talks about the the lessons the uh town manager shall submit to the finance committee select board proposals for the fiscal and proposed capital plan for the
next 10 years. Um at our we just at our last select board meeting we just voted a new fiscal management policy and we created a capital planning committee. So is I don't know how that interact >> we'll have to look just make sure it
lines up >> and that is very common in other towns. We did see that in a lot of charts of capital planning committee. >> We have we we said we were creating one. >> Yeah. >> Um and just before we hit the recall, I had a question on 94 the allocation of
funds. Any action involved in the creation, restructure or consolidation of the department that requires an appropriation of funds shall be subject. This basically means if you're asking for more money, not if not if we're just moving money around. Correct. It's just >> well consolidation of the department,
restructuring of the department that requires an appropriation. I see what you're saying. Yeah. Yeah. >> It's if you're asking more. It's just Yeah. >> Or it's for somehow you you're changing it from one. >> We should just >> what was used for before and now you're moving it to something else. But yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So, but this is also yellow. This is all
new stuff too that we really haven't worked through yet. This is this is the just the start. We haven't >> Yeah. Don't be afraid to put in here every now and then. See financial policies at the time. We yeah >> put in a lot of work into the >> Yeah, I know.
>> Um >> and I I think to that point, didn't we mention that one of the responsibilities of Vincome was that they have to maintain the fiscal policy? >> I think that >> it's a committee. It's a committee with several school committee select board.
>> Yeah, I want to say that it was in this. >> No, because it's not them alone. It's not with the select. There's a financial >> I feel like it was in this somewhere. >> It was I think in an earlier version we talked a lot about all that stuff and we took it out. >> Um
>> right cuz the policy says that that committee will meet yearly minimum. >> Of course they will. >> We do now. We actually >> But there have been a lot of years where we haven't actually
>> that's the problem. >> You know what happens if you don't? >> Okay. Kind of quick, please. >> Let's get in Russia now. George Sand 62. Great.
Go back to uh Texas 47 why shell is not used there may sir >> with the may mean that you don't have to fill it if you don't want to shell a must mean you have to and there should be it should be
>> a time to fill That should be in there. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> One other comment going back to the the Bencom composition. The town moderator's appointment was at one of the committee
meetings is completely opaque at this point and should be at an open meeting or something. >> So that is also from our last meeting. It's in the notes. And so what's going to get changed is that the town man in fin the town moderator appointment has
to be done at either a board select meeting or a fincom meeting. So it's in minutes like you said. So it's public record. So like you're absolutely right. Yeah. And I'm glad you brought a couple other people brought that up. I think that's a good that's a good a good ad for all
this. >> Can we talk about recalls now? >> Uh yes. So again, this is what we have in here. We have not worked through this yet. Um, so we got boilerplate originally from Collins, which was
didn't reflect at all what happened here. And then Diane pointed out to us that in 2016, Littleton passed specific legislation had a special act done through the state to make it 25%. Which is way out of line with what everybody else is doing. And it's
obviously, I shouldn't say obviously, feels hard to recall. Never did it. I didn't want to be recalled. >> Somebody didn't. I have to go back and look at 2016 to see what was going on.
But um >> God, if I knew that, I'd be >> But but so we we're interested in your input on that. But um yeah, clearly that's that's a big discussion for >> mine was just >> next town meeting. >> Yeah. If someone if if you succeed in
recalling someone and the election occurs on a regularly scheduled election, >> is that person on the ballot for reelection and as a recall candidate or are there two ballots or one? >> I don't know. >> Because they could like win the win the seat and and also lose their seat
because of the recall. >> Well, I mean, if if it if it if it doesn't happen when there's a regular election, then the process is the bot the ballot. Recall yes or no. And if it's if it if it passes yes, then you look at the candidates below and then you vote. If it's no, then it doesn't matter what people voted.
>> So on this, I didn't even think about that. Come. Go ahead, Rob. >> So we haven't worked through this one. In many charters, >> there's a provision that says nobody can be recalled for a period of 6 months. And I just give that as one example of
what other charters do to try to make sense of not having these. Well, and this one says that, but I'm saying if the recall happens 90 days before the next election. >> So, so my point we've not gone through this. We're reading other charters trying to consider what it is that we
need to do with this language. So, we're aware that there are challenges with regard to the sequencing as to how recall election should take place in addition to what I have already heard of the aspect of the volume of votes necessary, petitions necessary, etc.
But I I think it's kind of implied here though that it says >> um if they have more than if they have less than six months remaining in the term, you're probably not going to recall them. You just have the election. >> Oh, okay. That's true. Right. Yeah. Right. Okay. >> So, that won't that wouldn't happen.
Thank you. >> Yeah. >> How do new candidates file? >> What's that? >> How do new candidates file? >> File for what? >> So, it says >> there are processes. >> You can put your name on and then new candidate. Is it the same as if you were running for a normal term that they have to collect signature? I mean, it's just
there's no definition of how a new candidate >> Oh, you mean on a recall election? Yeah. >> Oh, how does someone get on the ballot that isn't for the person being recalled? >> Yeah, it says cuz it says the name of >> Yes, Diane's here. >> Yeah, she can talk, but can you sign my language again?
>> Before that's answered, how many registered voters are in Littleton? 7,700. >> That would be the most we've ever had at an election trying to recall. >> Yeah. >> Oh, numbers are just >> possible to recall. >> Possible to recall somebody that
>> I thought the 50 voters at the beginning is too low. I thought the 25% was >> I just wanted to >> Oh, no. Yeah, the numbers are just >> go ahead. >> And add I think for town elections like the the normal the last town election the number of voters was like a thousand
something. Right. That's a fairly that's a fairly common we this was something that probably end up on our in next year then just to change that recall because that we'll we'll come up with some better towns. >> But I think you passed a special act. So it's not you can't just say I'm going to change it. So that's why the charter can
change it. >> My the charter >> I defer I am but I think yeah charter can change it but otherwise you're going to have to go through this question. I know. Yeah. Huh. >> I know. Sorry. Dark days. Dark days. >> What?
>> There's a couple 48 hour checks and balances we talk about. Keep that in mind. What's that? >> There's a couple 48 hour turnarounds in there, too, that I don't think are going to be feasible. >> Okay. >> That should only be day measured in days and so the hours. Yeah. Yeah. >> Cuz days are Yeah. days are least
measured business days. >> All right. So, but the feedback we get is that you also think the 25% is probably >> not legitimate. >> Should be 75. >> 25% of the voters that put the
individual in office. >> Do you have any idea how how many you think it should be? 10% probably a pretty high number. >> I mean, that's I was elected by less than 10% of the registered voters my first term. So, I think that would be
not a bad number. >> Okay, we'll talk more. >> Yeah, >> that makes 10 to 15 I think is the standard. >> All right. Are there other things I mean all the other um >> oh the other let me just a couple things
I wanted to just in terms of um things that that that we're still working out um the recall was one the other one is still going to have a some discussion I don't know how long it will go on um the possibility of the town
accountant reporting to the town manager so some towns do this for a separation of duties or separation of powers. So >> select board, >> correct? >> I'm sorry. Did I say it wrong? >> Yes. >> Yes. So the town crew report to the select board rather than so you get the separate you you might
you get some separation of powers but now you've also got the select board back in the dayto-day, right? >> So and um you also now have the account manager responsible for the budget or and now but the town accountant now works for the select board and so
there's pluses and minuses to doing this. So any just off-the- cuff feedback would be helpful I guess before we start this conversation. We we have not discussed this at all other than saying we need to discuss this >> jump >> the account as opposed to the treasurer or the >> well it could be I mean the if you
remember the state report actually said well little size enough now they should have a CFO and if that's the case CFO report well so that's kind of a different discussion right it's a different level person they're going to be you know more independent and and so you can see that well we don't have that so then you bring that down and say and
some towns again this is like a 50/50 some towns do it this way some towns do it the other way Um, >> yeah. I mean, if you had a town manager, you'd probably want a CFO, I think. >> Well, but we don't >> go to that model. >> Well, one not necessarily. >> We kind of have that with >> before.
>> You're right. We did before. We had an assistant town administrator. >> No, we had both. >> We had >> with um >> Alicia Benjam Alicia Benjamin. She was effectively the CFO, right? >> Was she contract? >> She did have a contract.
>> She was an employee. Well, contracted employee. She was not like is that what you mean? >> She was contracted like the chief. >> Yes. >> So I mean there are some you know again in terms of this folks everything through one office and being concerned about that. So this
breaks some of that up but then there's there's some downsides to it too. So and again there's not a overarching this is way done. And it's not just if you have a town manager that it's this way. It's not that at all. It's all over the place. In a lot of cases the in multiple cases at least it should say the town
manager one of their roles is or is the chief financial person not CFO but that they have a different director of finance or something that's one of their roles. So >> so but making the town accountant report to the board isn't really that different
than us having the police and fire chief. I mean they're still going to be dayto-day reporting. They' just be more our employee rather than I'm >> I guess the only difference is the account would be on the grid. It wouldn't be a contract to this point of off the grid. Correct. No,
>> no, they that they would be they would be on the grid and that and having the town account. Yeah. >> Having the town accountant report to the to the select board as part of the checks and balances. That doesn't mean because he or she would report to you that you're back into the daily
operations. It's just there as a safety net to make sure that procurement is done correctly. They're confirming that there is enough money for the purchase order to be signed by the CFO and and the town manager because that individual
signs off on it. Um and uh they would ultimately uh be your eyes and ears on of the financial stability with within the community. So I think you're saying we wouldn't be any more involved in the
town of county dayto day than we're currently involved in the police chief's dayto day or the police department's current dayto day. >> Right. Once more, please. >> Sorry. We we wouldn't just because we would that the town accountant reports to the select board. That doesn't mean that we're involved in their day-to-day
anymore than we're right now we're involved in the Littleton Police Department's day-to-day because the chief reports to us. >> Like >> correct. We're not we're not going to be mcking with >> Right. I mean, it's a it's a specialty it's a it's in some respects it's a specialty position that has got years of
education experience behind it that um is and that's why uh you know you you you would have that individual as the checks and balances. It doesn't make sense for the town accountant and the CFO and the treasurer to report to the
to the town manager. It it doesn't it doesn't make sense. If they report to you, you're writing their review, >> right? >> Correct. You're firing >> firing all of that. >> Yep. >> Um Okay. >> Why don't we just make an elected
position? No, I'm just had a treasure, right? That worked out great, didn't it? >> No, of you want to go finance positions, you're recommending the accountant, not the treasurer or the chief procurement officer. Specifically, the accountant.
Correct. Okay. >> That that's a standard in the industry that I have that I have seen >> throughout my career >> because the accountant is the most responsible for spending or >> no just the accountant confirms that money is there because there could be
collusion between >> okay >> a CFO and a town manager >> but you have that town of town there as >> as the check and balance >> as your eyes and ears. Correct. >> Okay. So, as an aside, it also said we
report the veterans agent. Is that typical that we're going to continue to do that or that becomes more of a normal employee? >> Yeah. Is that a stat? I think that's a state was that not a state statute that >> I I I No, I mean uh it's the the the
state statute I'm aware of the VSO is the requirement, but then depending on the population size, then it's a matter of uh whether the individual is part-time or full-time or whatever. But my experience has been that uh the VSO
is is hired and over and reviewed and if if poss if necessary terminated through the town manager. >> Okay. >> Because this actually says work doing the >> Yeah, it does. And I don't I don't know why that didn't get addressed.
>> So, it's not a contract employee in both cases. >> Okay. just I guess it's just the way it is today for some reason. >> I want to thank you for the work you've done. >> Oh my god. >> Like I you know I sort of started this
whole thing I think with a sort of off-hand comment in a board meeting four or five days. >> That's why that's how we're getting rid of him. >> But you know and I don't think I recognize the scope of this and it's it's you've been very it's been very
impressive to watch you generate this stuff. I'm very very happy that I can look at this and be pretty confident that some intelligence went into it. So, thank you all. >> Yeah. And your outreach to the public has been fascinating. More than more
than I would have even expected of you guys. You've done enormous amount of work in that regard. >> It's been good. I think everybody we needed it. I mean, everybody needed it and um and we got a lot of good good things from it, too. It was all going
It's it's I think most of us are probably ready for it to be done, but but it's it's it's been good. I mean, it's been fascinating actually, hasn't it, Rob? >> So, I'll be a fly in the ointment. Um I trust that you're aware those who we're
proposing to flip from elected to appointed are not in agreement with what we're doing. So you should expect and plan from a standpoint of interacting with them and hearing from them directly because in many ways we responded them
saying these are our thoughts that will be moving to the select board and I think just want to make sure you're fully aware plan some time because they will my opinion want time directly with you not with us to plead their case.
>> Sure. >> We've already heard from them. >> Okay. We assume we'll be hearing more for sure. It's going to be a dialogue, right? There's going to be we're going to have another round of public outreach. >> A whole another round of going through the documents say, you know, are the checks and balances there and are they,
you know, are they we don't want to disenfranchise anybody. I mean, that's obviously not the intention for any of this. We all understand that. It's just a practicality of where we are today and where we're going to be in five years in this town and some of these things and and >> are we getting people to step up for positions and all that kind of stuff. I
think one of the things that we said to you was that take your time. You know, don't rush this. And I think we'll be taking the same advice, right? We're going to make sure that >> So, you don't want to rush this for May meeting, then
closed. >> Okay. I think >> so. Just >> Yeah, please. >> Sort of branching on that. I I do have other issues with the with where it's going at the moment and what the draft is, but >> we know it's good, >> right? I think most of them. Y
>> um but I think speaking of Maytown meeting and I don't know how you do this logistically or with our format but I would really encourage you to figure out some way to present this topic at Maytown meeting because I think if you come in the fall
with a finished draft it's going to land like it might you that's the that is the audience that's the people who are going to vote on it. You got to figure out some way to put it in front of them now before the May time meeting or sorry before the fall town
meeting when you want it to be voted on because they're not going to come to the public sessions. They're not if if they don't know about it, if they're not aware of it. It's going to come as a blind side in the fall and we've seen that over and over again. Doesn't go
well. I mean, if this draft by Tom meeting could be solidified a little, it's still a draft, but it wouldn't be us looking, but I'm just trying to find out a way to get part of this in front of the public. >> I That's what I was just doing. I don't
I don't see how we're ready to do that. I can see us >> Hold on. >> I totally agree with you. I'm just trying to figure out how we can balance putting something out there that's not ready, >> right? and that we'll get just as much backlash and have 10 times as much work,
right? Or, you know, >> maybe this is maybe it's more of anformational session of like we're working on this. This is what a charter is. This is what we're looking into. This, you know, keep your eye out for public input sessions. They're going to be listed here and there. You know, I don't I'm not sure we're going to be
ready to be >> Why can't they do getting into it? >> Why can't Charlotte do a presentation like they did at one of the sessions over there? like take five minutes at the beginning town meeting like they did for Shaker Lane last year saying we're going to vote on Shaker Lane. This is where we're heading, right?
>> Yeah. I was going to suggest that model for the school because that would seem to work really >> well. Except for that we could theoretically, not that we would >> tear this whole thing up and and not bring it to town meeting at which point. >> So we wasted five minutes of time to be in a town meeting.
>> No one will remember. >> Whatever happened to that charter? if you wanted a >> yeah presentation or even a less um sort of you know maybe more risk averse version I mean you know we have some
educational materials we could sort of do a a primer a little pamphlet you know if you didn't want to have a presentation or just handouts I mean I think we can build up to having that and then try to strike that balance between saying you know this is not the
decisions that have been made but rather this is the process that is happening types of decisions that are being discussed the direction the leanings and I I think in some ways we might then we want that
to spark interest right because then we want to get those discussions rolling and to get the awareness um prior to fulltown meetings so get it all out >> well the people that are going to be there in May are going to be there in November right >> something to hand to them or something
you told me to save the poster Yes. >> Yeah. But whether it's a presentation, handouts, I think we're got a good sort of system together with some public outreach materials. >> So that's it's all at the pleasure of the monitor moderator. So we'll have to
figure all that out. >> Yeah. Thanks. What is so now that it's as it moves from the recommendations made by the charter committee into your hands, what's the timeline for those discussions and decisions coming out? I
know you're not going to be ready for town meeting to have a finished document, but I'm assuming you're going to start. >> Okay. First of all, this isn't being handed over to them yet. This is still an interim because we still have sections that we haven't worked on and we're updating things. So, you know, this is this is just a this is how far we are now. Let's talk about it, but
it's not a handover at this point. Just to clarify that. >> Yeah. Through the chair. I think if we got this on to get this on in November, we it have to be September 15th that this would have we'd have to be completely have all our stuff in order to agree on everything. So if we don't
agree on remove it, what are we going to push forward? >> Council review, >> town council review. So >> public input session. >> I'm not I personally don't want to be pushed by time. If it doesn't happen in November, which I think it will, but if it doesn't, it's not there's not the end
of the world here. We'll this gets presented. We've got more time to look do these sessions, let people see it, hand out the pamphlets again in November or then do a presentation in November. This is coming. >> Yeah. >> Town meeting. So, but I Yeah, I would love to see some of this happen in
November if possible. >> Yeah. >> And then it goes to state the state. >> That's the other piece, >> right? I think only sits in. Oh yeah. So it you know it has pass fall town meeting or past town meeting. Oh that's this is the other reason for do it in
the fall because then the state has to do their thing. What Colin says is they tend to do these things in January and February. >> So even if we did it in May it probably wouldn't happen till January February is what they kind of indicated. That's good. >> Okay. Then after that then it comes back for a townwide vote in addition to
ballot. So it's just a process. >> So that would be then the following day. >> Yeah. I guess that's my concern in part is summer becomes hard to get people to engage in anything let alone complicated
discussions during board meetings and information sessions and whatnot. So if you have to have it wrapped up by early September I fear we may not have the robust discussions you need unless people are aware of it in May and know to keep
track of it. This is a something we just want to keep this moving forward to some degree that this is a lot of work. I think there's a lot of good in here that I think the town will operate better for, you know,
the next decade, if you will, or longer. So, I think getting it right is more important than time. I'll stay with it. You just pushed it out almost another year, but that may be the case if that, you know, but in that time, people are seeing it's coming. they get the draft
at that point. This is what you're going to be voting on. >> So, we should be we should know whether we're ready to present something at town meeting in May with a hope of going forward in November and start >> start more public sessions or more things for the select board in over the
early summer and start in the early summer and go forward from there. >> We can always put something on a warrant in September and not go in November if that's >> I think that gets the people anyways. You're talking about going with town manager. What does that mean? You know, it means these people that now report to independent boards will report to the
town manager. I mean, that's the big change. I mean, there's a lot of nuance, a lot. So, for most people, it's that and then some of the currently elected boards will be appointed. And some of that's because you know, state says you have way we have way more than most towns do >> and and the change in ter you know, all
the stuff we all talked about, you know, madam chair. >> Yes, sir. >> Holding my hand up here for quite a while. Uh this charter committee is going to make recommendation based on the charter
to the select board. Is that correct? Is that correct? Next step. >> Right. And then the select board is going to digest it and either make changes or approve the articles that is
in the chart >> and take it to town council. >> Yeah, we're just going to keep the rec. >> I know you want to take it to town council. That >> was still to be as far as I'm concerned. And when this goes before uh the town
meeting, it's going to be the people right to either accept what you put on or vote it down. >> Yeah. >> Or amen. >> Well, no.
>> I said or amen. God forbid. >> I don't think so. >> That could easily happen. >> I know. Can we strike that par >> sections that are completely changed in the town meeting? >> We should review that. >> Yeah, >> we should discuss that. >> That's a discussion to have with town council. I think it's got to be treated
>> like like amending a zoning exactly zoning article is just fraud peril because so much goes into it >> and one thing affects another and another just it's a spiderweb in there. So >> So it's a good it's a good point, George. We have to find that out. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. We do minutes next time. Alan, you want to make your famous uh >> Okay, I'm move to adjourn. >> All in favor? >> I
>> I move to adjourn. >> No, we have stuff to do. >> Oh, we do. >> What? >> We have minutes, don't we? Or do we're doing minutes next time. All right. Thanks, guys.