6:30 I call this meeting of the Manchester by the sea for selectment to order here. Brian here John yes hands here. Oh, sorry.
We'll wait for another year. Um, we have a forum calling our will be joining us after the on the post session. Okay. Um, we are moving directly into
executive session and I move that the select board enter into executive session pursuant to general laws chapter 38 section 2183. Discuss strategy with regard to collective bargaining or litigation if an open meeting may have a detrimental
effect or litigating body. Is there a second? Yes. A second. Discussion. All Jeff. Yes. Brian, Kathy, yes. John,
yes. sessions. I move to help health enter executive session to the EL chapter 3A section 21 A3 to discuss strategy with respect to collective bargaining or litigation
opening may have a detrimental effect on the bargaining or litigating position of the public body and the GSO. Declares concession. Have a second, please.
Accept it. Joe. All in favor? Yes. Yes. And and folks just just announce whether you're going to return to open session.
Sorry, I should have said that it is our intention to return to session. and the board of health as well. Yes. Yeah. All right. So, hold on. Give me bear with me for one second here. Let me uh
put the reading on the Next item on our agenda is a memorandum of understanding between the life board and the board of health and that is the memorandum that was signed by JS and
Phillas on uh July 19th. And I understand there were issues and some of them separate issues. One is the procedure.
It was my understanding that any modifications the view would be presented in writing to the other party whoever is proposing it. There would be
agreements on the wording. Each group would then vote become an attendance. Okay. What spe what specifically in the memorandum? I'm just talking procedure first. No, I we would deny that there is no
change that well state disagree with you. So we need to know which lines those are. I think we're confounding the job description.
We're just violated theou and that was the question. Theou was not followed in relation to how something was done that included the board of health. Okay.
What specifically in the language do you object to? What wasn't followed in? I don't understand. What wasn't followed was the agreement that changes would be in writing and
what I'm think we understand that a position was posted. for not understanding what perceived violation that
the agent will report. That's a change. It also says you're talking general administrative oversight is provided by the county administrator. That's procedure number three. It also uh regarding the appendix A, all
the duties and responsibilities specified in the MGL chapter 111. Um the job description involves um things that directly interfere with that and create divided loyalties and
potential conflicts of interest. Let's try and uh go like step by step. Right now uh what's being discussed is whether the development of the job description violates
theou and I understand Dr. You're saying that elements of the job description violate state law, but let's put a pin. We'll come back to that. Well, well, the the the appendix of the
mo is actually included in theou. So that's specification of the uh MGL chapter 111 duties and responsibilities. So it is part of theou. The appendix is reference but has not been provided.
I'm sorry. Can I make a suggestion? I mean, as you know, this is sort of a new topic for me, but I I wonder if there's a bit of a disconnect between what perhaps administration sees as this position's
role um and maybe what the select board and what the what the board of health see as this role. Because my understanding from reading the job description, you know, I can see how the board of health would look at it and go, well, it's inserting a new layer of reporting
authority between the town administrator and the and the health agent, but I don't know if that's actually what's intended. And so Tony, maybe because I've I've seen something from Michelle Maloney that suggests that it's it's much more of a a coordination of of
resources and administrative effort, you know, across different departments as opposed to in intended to provide direct policy direction um to the health agent. Well, if you look at point six of the
MOU, it says any initiatives that involve the board of health staff will be reviewed and approved by the board of health as an initial step. That certainly was not followed uh when this position was all of a sudden advertised
and you know, we can get into the job description later. That's fine. But um I I just think that communication I think I think Yeah. I mean I think that's what what what I think there would be useful to have some sort of discussion about you know at the first
instance whether administration's view is that this is actually a board of health position and how they see it interacting with with the board of health and then I think there can be that deeper discussion of whether it really does in fact impinge upon um the board of health statutory
responsibilities to um enforce chapter 111. So, I don't know, Tony, if you wanted to talk a little bit about what the what the how you're perceiving the position. I know you're sort of new to it, too. Yes. So I I for me,
you know, I did see I I understand in from talking with Greg and Michelle Maloney, uh what the you know, the approach was, the intent was and I think you laid that out correctly. Um
what I what I've been looking at is the actual job description itself. And the the the part that stands out to me that I think the board of health would be uh supportive of is the language in the
second paragraph that says while the position works closely with the three departments and the position includes still being ahead of one of the three. It does not assume operational control over statutory or regulatory responsibilities managed by other
independent boards or entities. I read that as a as a um a clear effort by the town to not interfere with the board of health's
authority but to make it clear that that is not the intent of this creation of this position. So if that case board of health had an issue
they felt needed to be dealt with directly by you that prevent the board of health from going directly to you. In other words, let's just say and god
forbid his co hit and the board of health needed to make it clear that masks were required. I cannot see somebody else discussing that with you in terms of the severity
of the issue and that person trying to explain to you why it was so critical. That to me would be the responsibility of the health agent. I also have and I've said this before I said it
to Greg said it to Ian very difficult for me to see somebody be able to grasp some of the issues that the board of health deals with
in a way that they feel comfortable and we feel comfortable presenting it having them present to you and I personally been on the board for a while and come from a health background
and I have a hard time eventually I get it but it takes takes me a while. So the notion I guess it's also an issue for me to have somebody else talking to
somebody in your position for me. I don't like that. I mean I I'm not opposed to this notion of having an administrator not have to deal with
48 different people. But I also have been in situations where this has happened and I've been tired of planning it. And I've said before that it works really well when there's some mutable
uh future or ideals that the group can share. And I don't see how somebody, for example, if it's somebody from parks and recreation can in any way, shape or form
have the ability to understand the depth of response. So I agree with what you just said and uh and understand that concern. I did not get the impression. you guys can let me know but I didn't get the impression
that that was the intention of this decation position. If if you look at the if you look at the second paragraph that you mentioned um just the first sentence of the second paragraph says we'll serve in a high lead level leadership role focus on administrative oversight which is fine
resource planning and long-term strategy. So that potentially is a problem. Um then under key responsibilities the first bullet the strategic direction directly kind of can interfere with with a department and then on the second to
the last third to the last bullet guide efforts related to grant applications and policy development. Um that certainly interferes with what priorities and what what other um activities the board is focusing on.
So um it's not just it doesn't leave the amount of independence that the board should have and is supposed to have and it does have the potential to interfere. Um pure administr administrative
oversight is one thing but this is certainly not reflective of that. Yeah and I I can understand the impression that that gives. Well, that's already by the impression, but I Yeah, but I don't think that's the intention. And so I think that that can
be cleared up. I don't think there's a disagreement. I think I think the intention on the on that guide efforts related to not, you know, not really talk that when I talked to Michelle, the
interpretation of that wasn't to interfere with policy development. it was to help guide efforts related to it. So in other words, if that's like uh communication to the public, rolling out coordinating amongst um you know, if
it's policy that affects parks and wreck or council on aging, rolling that out amongst the amongst the the groups. So previously has expressed the issue of interpretation. The way it is the way it is written, it
is not clear in that regard. And if you intended it such, it should have been communicated to us better. And um the fact that this job description came to us without even the select board discussing this with us and rather than
sitting down with us and saying, "Hey, we have this idea. Should we toss this around and come around with some job description um that that doesn't interfere with any of the three boards that are potentially included? That didn't happen.
We weren't involved. The the administration of the town hall is the responsibility of town administrator. The select board has no hand in his choosing how to organize it. We may
offer our advice, but we approve the budget. And if you go back to recording where we were talking about the budget, you can see we had a very spirited discussion on adding headcount. Okay? And I voted no. So I'm just going to say the this was not driven by the select
board and it's 100% right. The town administrator's decision. So you did that. If if if the if the town administrator was making some sort of organizational change about the health agent
that according to theou would trigger a conversation amongst the select board and the board of health. I I I believe that the intention here was not to affect the health agents role or to interfere with the board of
health's role. And so could you could it could there still be communication? Sure. But I don't think the I don't think that falls under the I just share our our experience. Um we were told
uh when we first heard of this job that it was concept only that no details were put into it and we're going to park tang case we need and we asked him for details three separate meetings he
question he never gave us any details we said he said it's all about communication I said fine put it in writing and clarify and answer our questions we never got it. Okay, we got ignored. So, um that didn't sit too
well. And I found it, um ironic in the hypocrisy of having a program to include communication by excluding everybody you want to communicate with. Now, I I will I will repeat what I said
at the budget. The only time I was having any discussion on this at all, I said I I personally did not want any restructuring or additional headcount added until the new town administrator had an opportunity to come in here,
assess his own team, and tell us what he thought he needed to run the town successfully. That was my position then. It is still my position. I don't I don't hear what the job description says right now. Unfortunately, though, I think there were interviews that took place. Okay. Um, but I still stand by that
statement. We have HR administrator. He's got the position to I understand that just I didn't know maybe my question would be a lot of confusion as somebody takes this but you
just remove the board of health. Yes. from this and just had this person oversee parks and wreck and the council of aging and maybe over time as you're I mean I don't know this is something that's further discussed and I I I actually really just don't see the connection of having the board of health
with parks and rep and the council of aging. I really have to see kind of how that would all come together. It really doesn't make any sense. Would there be a potential of just having that person oversee administratively or whatever for the other two? I mean the policy, the strategy, the development makes sense to
some degree with council on danger and parks and wreck. But is there a way that we can just remove the board of health right now from that role? Not saying that it might not be something down the road that can be discussed and work with the select board and not like I don't know. I'm too new. I'd have to think
about it, but I just I just think like if it's something you've already I I just don't see why that's just a question. Yeah. I I I would say that's a potential. Um on the other side of that is uh I
don't I think I understand or could better understand by communicating with the board of health the concerns as to what this job or this position would do and how it would interfere with your
authority and the things that you're uh responsible for. And I believe that the intention of the creation of this job is to not interfere with that. If the job description is unclear, I think I'm open
to adjusting the description so that it is clearly states it doesn't interfere with your authority and your role. um as an alternative option, not necessarily jumping to pulling the coordination with
the uh health department al together. Why do it's been I mean what would be the downside of having it removed from group that it has absolutely no that anybody can see
any meaningful alliance with well I think that there there obviously was some vision here prior to me that there was an opportunity of better coordination amongst these three departments and that there was a benefit
to the community. Now, I haven't fully evaluated that myself. I'm on day five. Um, but again, it the other side of that is if this position doesn't interfere with your
authority at all, there shouldn't be a concern about that. has been extra money and extra time for role that doesn't include our department and perhaps this is outlandish but
beside perhaps that money could have been better spent towards hiring somebody maybe to do some of the inspections so that Wendy I could use her time to better okay let us not argue the budget
Here our light is already passed and let us also I I would like to get the select board out of this. We have no role. So, why don't you land next week? Yeah. um
during that board meeting because I know that the whole board has strong opinions about um the role that this as I really think that that
so so I can I understand so at the last meeting that um that the previous town administrator was at, he plainly told the board that he would need to consult with the select
board about removing the board of health from that job description. Yet you were right here saying that you have nothing to do with what I said was the only time we discussed it was during the budget process. I was surprised by the addition of some
I didn't want to have to be collecting here. But the job description itself and removing or who's included into it had nothing to do with you and continues to have nothing to do with you. So it's entirely Tony's decision.
Well, we did not see this job description until a couple weeks ago. This is also consistent with the governance that uh we spent a lot of money on trying to uh to the operation
oversight which was to eliminate direct reports to the uh consolidate consolidate consolid he came into our he would sit in our meeting meeting and he clearly said that it was not his decision it was the select
board's decision well I would phrase it this way I think you know it's it's the town administrators that should be allowed to decide how he wants to structure a scheme I think the select board has some sort of a role to play on
final approval of direct reports so for example in the past when he has hired we have we have to approve direct Correct. So this is and department. Yes. Yes. But not structure.
So the question is for new position that is a direct report and did our approval of the budget constitute the approval necessary for that process? Um that's the only time I remember
talking but yeah it's an organizational change but the fact is the headcount is such correct the way that this this is one of the three one of the three is so one of the three require yes
but if the select board but if the select board votes for this budgetary item to be approved indirectly they are voting for the organizational change because if they disagree with the organizational change, they wouldn't approve that budget item. So,
well, as I order one, we did and four to one, they did, right? Yeah. And and I I think though the um the execution of it obviously could only happen, you know, when the new fiscal year took effect because that was the
budget that was approved at 10, right? But where did the But what was approved was a budget. Okay. Now, you don't have to use the language, but in fairness to all of those involved, there was a hiring process
that apparently was conducted. So, somebody's hired for position. Now, yes, somewhere along those lines, the communication to at least our board, I don't know, to the other two uh was
more than insufficient. And um we still have to iron out the the issues in the job description or be entirely taken out of this job. We're not going to do that tonight. So we're not going to do that tonight when we go to bed.
But I'm happy to I'm happy to attend a tour meeting to talk more about Thursday. Thursday. Um well there were three certainly and and
the fourth part was kind of an error. The sanitary code was part of the discussion. Okay. discussion. So in a disorganized fashion, we appear to have touched all [Music] here.
Okay. can see from if there's anyone from the public that wants to comment, just unmute and state your name and address. Hearing none. Okay. Jeff, yes. Brian, yes.
John, yes. Yes. Yes, Martin. Yes. Have a good night all. Good night, folks. Thank you all. Thank you. Good night, everyone. Thank you.
Good night. left take me.