Thank you. Well, good evening everyone. Uh this is the personnel board meeting for the town of uh Westport. Today is Wednesday, April 15, 2026. The time is 7:05 p.m. Um this is a remote
call. Um and I'll call the meeting to uh to order. Uh first I'll give our um required uh preface here. Uh, under Mass General Laws chapter 30A section 20F, this meeting is being recorded. On March
28th, 2025, Governor Healey signed into law a bill which extends the temporary provisions pertaining to the open meeting law to June 30th, 2027. Specifically, this further extension allows public bodies to continue holding meetings remotely without a quorum of
the public body physically present at a meeting location and to provide adequate alternative access to remote meetings. The language does not make any substantive changes to the open meeting law other than extending, excuse me, the expiration date
of the temporary provisions regarding remote meetings from March 31, 2025 to June 30, 2027. Uh so we have a relatively short uh agenda this evening. Um I was going to
introduce our newest um member um Lisa Costa who is not joined us yet this evening but uh in a future meeting hopefully she'll be able to uh attend. So, she has just been um uh added to the
group. Uh we have with us tonight, I'll I'll go through the names um since we are remote. We have with us uh Gary Carrero, uh Nancy Hollesworth, uh myself, the chair, Cindy Brown, and uh Chris Vitali, who is the town
administrator, is on the call, uh as well as our recording uh secretary. So two items only on the agenda for tonight. Um one uh we will deal with first uh assess and confirm the job classification for
the director of senior services based on a uh new updated job description and I had sent out the job description to you. I'm going to let Chris take it from here. He's been very involved in this process and Chris, why don't you tell us
what's going on here? Certainly. Um, so as you may or may not know, our director of senior services uh did submit in her letter saying that she is retiring at the end of the summer, so the end of August. And so, um, you know,
knowing that this will be a position that we are going to be posting for pretty soon, um, we wanted to take a look at the job description and make sure that prior to being posted that it was updated. So, um, when you look at the old description, the last time it
was updated was over 10 years ago, um, because that's how long Bev's been here with the town. So, with that, um, a lot can change in 10 years. And so, I think for us, we wanted to make sure that we put eyes on it and it reflected what our
expectations of the role are um, going into the future. And so I know even prior to my arrival with the town, um there was some conversations that had already started saying that there was a need to look at the job description and uh there was some conversations among
members of the council on aging that really, you know, kickstarted this process and kickstarted the discussion. And so um you know when I had started uh I was able to pick up the baton and continue that work in reviewing the job
description and what had been done to date. Um I put forward a draft job description uh to the board at their last meeting and uh right now the board is in the process of finalizing the
language. So, they didn't vote to approve the job description, however, um you know, because they did obviously want to get some additional uh input and feedback just on what was put together. So, um it's not finalized. However, um I
don't believe the language is going to substantively change uh between now and the next board meeting. So, you know, the feedback that we're looking for is more or less, you know, is there anything that we missed? Is there any wording that needs to be improved, corrected? But in terms of how it would
um how the job would be classified, I don't anticipate um I I'll say the meat and potatoes of the job to to change. So with that, uh the board had uh sent a draft copy of the job description back to the Council
on Aging uh and obviously wanted to get the personnel board's input as well. So, you know, while this is a contract position and the job description is something that is reviewed and approved by the select board, um the personnel
board still has a voice in this to uh make a recommendation on how the position should be graded on our classification and compensation scale. So, um, you know, because the job
description changed so much, um, you know, I I felt it was important to look back, look at the town's, uh, approved class and comp plan and just go through the exercise of regrading it. So, uh, this evening, I know in the draft that
was sent out, there was a placeholder that was put there. Um however um my recommendation and again I'm certainly able to open up to questions um but based on the job factor analysis that's
been approved by the town my recommendation would be that we um uh post it as a grade 10 position. >> So currently you you it had been listed as as a grade 11 when they did our comp
study. Is that correct? Based on the old job description and the and the former in the role of the former dire or the retiring director. >> Yeah. So, um obviously wasn't in the room at the time of the conversations. However,
>> just looking at you know how um you know the analysis was and the breakdown was scored. You know, it was really graded based off the individual and the years of experience of the person in the role and not necessarily in alignment with
what is asked within the job description and within the actual job requirements and what um you know what at a minimum we'd be looking for in the next director. So um we felt this would be a good time obviously you know I felt this would be
a good time to you know again look at this and make sure that it's graded you know how we see the position going forward. >> So um and I'm happy to I guess open up to questions and talk about the description itself. I'm just going to
interrupt you one second. Uh just for purposes of the minutes. Um Carrie has joined us um at um 710. So Carrie Kuna has joined the call. So uh Gary, you have a question. Go ahead.
>> Yeah. Um so what is the uh is there any certifications, Chris, for this? Uh no, no certifications require. So there, so it requires mass driver's license or just government issued driver's license and a it does
have the preferred qualification in there um as well. However, it's not it's not a required certification as part of the grading. I you know I did um my factor included that uh extra 10 points you know because we do require the the
license um you know for traveling purposes um >> so yes that is in there. >> So the grade as a grade 11 um what is the range on the on that grade >> for points
>> for for salary >> for salary. >> Okay. Yeah. Let me pull that up. Give me one second here. >> And was it an 11 before? Because that that's what was on the uh job description. >> It was an 11. Um, and you know, just I
guess looking at the history and looking at the documentation, um, my educated guess on that is that at the time that it was graded, it was graded to the individual, not necessarily the position.
So I think uh if we are readvertising it, you know, making sure that it's rated >> right >> again as close to the scale and and the intent of the the class and comp plan as possible. >> Um give me one second. My apologies.
>> Well, I think it's a while you're doing that. I think it's a good job description. Um it's it's very well written and it cover it covers a lot. I remember um Cindy and Garrett, we had her come a few years ago to the board and she was very impressive. She obviously had deep experience. So this
would be these would be big boots to fill. >> Absolutely. >> Um so and I see in the job description there's a few key things that really lend weight to a job of this level which is budgetary responsibility, personnel management, um you know as well as the
site itself and the maintenance. So it's very comprehensive. Um, so I'm curious to know Chris like yeah what the exact what salary range is for a 10. >> So I am just pulling up right now based on the wage study. So at the time uh that the wage study was approved here
about a year and a half ago the grade 11 which it was was at 84 to 1176 range and a grade 10 was 80 to 112. Now, I will note that the range themselves um you know there has been a cola increase
year-over-year. So that grade 10 is likely where the grade 11 was at the time that the class and comp plan approved. And what uh what level did they put in for the budget for fiscal year 27?
They have sufficient funds, right? they'll have sufficient funds for this. >> Yes. So, we do have funding in place again um above the minimum on the range. Um Okay. >> So, it does provide the town a little bit of flexibility. Um and obviously
when it comes to uh looking at the individuals who are potentially applying, you know, I think we would definitely um you know, work with them if they had the experience again, you know, towards the middle or higher end of that range.
You know, obviously we want to be as competitive as possible. Um you know, but that's the band that the 10 is. It's about I think the low end and the high end are about four grand difference. >> Yeah, I think to NY's point um you know
we you know we looked at I think it was a while back that she did come in BIV and uh you know you try to capture all this information that they're these job descriptions are so old and the jobs have morphed to something that you know these job descriptions don't even
reflect in in certain cases. So you know um I I've read it. I think it's appropriate. um you know and I think it's it's well written. Uh my only concern was the uh the um certifications, but it seems like it's covered. >> And the experience you're looking for,
Chris, is like 3 to five years. So it's possible you'll get someone who's kind of on the junior end of management who would qualify technically. So the low end of the salary range would be applied to someone say meeting the minimum, someone who exceeds it and gets all your preferred, you know, they can be towards
the the top end like deep experience like Bev had, I suppose. Um, okay. And it was uh it was graded with the new classification system. >> That's correct. So, and just I think to um to your point, you know, I think when we
look at, you know, advertising this position and making it something that can attract multiple different types of candidates, you know, this could potentially be an opportunity where you see uh perhaps an assistant director, right, in another community, you know, want to make the jump to a director
position. So I think that three to five years um you know is a sweet spot. Um and and certainly if someone comes in um either already serving in a role or maybe you know serving in a council on aging for an extended period then it
gives us opportunity to negotiate >> right this will set up a you know a good opportunity for an overachiever rather than an underperformer. I mean, so if someone comes in that knocks it out of the park and is able to broadly develop
new programs or do things that might push this up to a different type of category, then we have some room for that. So, I think this is an appropriate level, putting it at a at a grade 10 and see how that experience level might um
fit into that band. Uh, and take it from there. As you know, both Gary and Nancy said, I mean, Bev does have difficult shoes to fill. She's a very dynamic person. Uh, you know, she she goes out and gets grants like crazy and, you
know, more than half of their budget comes from grants. And she's out there every day looking for them. And so, we just can only hope that we will find someone as um that has as much energy as she had uh has to um to fulfill all of those
things. So, um, yeah, that would be great. Um, any other questions regarding that position? Uh, motion, Gary? >> Yeah, I'd make a motion to approve.
>> Approve the level uh the classification of a level 10. >> Yes. >> Okay. Uh, second. >> Yeah, I would second that. >> Okay, great. Any other discussion? Okay. Uh, since this is a remote
meeting, I will take a roll call vote. Uh, Gary, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> Um, Carrie, have you there you are, Carrie? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> And, uh, Cindy, yes. So, uh, four uh in
favor, one absent. Okay. Thank you. Um, moving on to the next topic, which is um far more interesting. If you've had the opportunity to um review article 25 on the uh town warrant, uh once again, I'm
going to let Chris really explain um how this came about and what the implications are of a favorable vote uh on this article. And then what they're looking for is a uh recommendation from
the personnel board in favor or not in favor depending on how the vote goes um to support this article. So um Chris, I'll let you um go from here. >> Sure. Um and I guess just by a little bit of background, uh I served in two
other Massachusetts communities before coming to Westport. So, uh, starting here in this community, uh, the personnel board was a new one for me. Um, both Dartmouth and Lester, um, you know, had dissolved their personnel
boards over the years. Um, and more of the administrative function was done with either the professional staff um, or the select board. And so, you know, one of the things, you know, coming in and obviously, um, you know, in my conversations with the board and my own
observations, um, you know, there's been a priority to really, um, put capacity into the human resources function as a whole. um both from a administrative you know and capacity perspective but also policies and looking at you know what's
the practice what's working where our are areas of improvement and one of the things I guess uh very early on was um our current personnel bylaws so that was something that um had come up in a couple different conversations in a
couple of different instances and so you know really looking at um you know what are the current practices within the organization within the town um that's how this you know proposed
amendment came to be uh in terms of this recommendation to the board. So this article uh that was sent out proposes a series of updates. Um one is to clarify roles and you know some of that touches on you know the
function of the personnel board uh as it currently stands. Uh some of it is um looking at the overall administrative functions and how to find efficiencies there. And as I said before, the other piece of this is really just aligning it
to, you know, what are the current practices and what are the current expectations that staff um uh you know are looking for when it comes to um the involvement of the board, the involvement of my office in certain
personnel related matters. Um so just I guess going through um at a very high level and then we can obviously talk about the specifics of the article language. Um but what this article would do is it would um
move the administrative function of the personnel board to the select board and it would give them the authorization to delegate that function to my office. Um so obviously the select board is not uh
at town hall every day. Um, and similar to the other day-to-day operations of the town, this would be another function that uh would be administered out of my office with the support of my staff. Um, you know, the second thing would be it would really, you know, and as it
currently stands, the personnel board is not only an administrative board, but it also serves an advisory capacity and it makes recommendations. So under the proposed um uh bylaw amendment, it would keep that advisory capacity in place.
So, um, you know, similar to how it works now, if there was a policy or there was a job update or there was a classification, you know, question where the town either needed or just wanted the recommendation, you know, could
really tap into this board to be able to provide that on a case-byase basis. Um, you know, and I kind of, as I said at the very beginning of our call tonight is, um, you all have a unique set of
experience and background that's an asset to the town. So, um, that would be retained where we could call on you hopefully to provide us support. Um yeah the other things um would be to
um when it comes to the administration of it again just in support of migrating over to administrative functions um it would change for example grievance procedures. So with that that would move
over uh again and add me into that process uh as a uh intermediary step. Um, so after department heads, but before uh a concern or complaint went to the select board. Um, you know, I think
that came about because, you know, one of the things uh that's in with our general bylaws now is, you know, one of the hats I wear is the director of human resources. But as it stands now, there's nothing,
you know, for, you know, our non-UN personnel where I'm a step in that process. if staff have questions or concerns. And so I've had staff come to me and say, "Am I supposed to be coming to you for this? Am I supposed to be going to someone else?" So, you know, I
find if that's the natural step where people want to come and talk to me, you know, it as the, you know, as that director of human resources, um, as I said before, it it these changes more or less align with what has been the practice within town hall
within the staff. Um, you know, and the other change or I guess series of changes are again giving the board the ability to make policies outside of this bylaw. Um, so from an administrative perspective,
um, it helps us uh be more proactive with changes and not necessarily on the town meeting schedule. Um the last couple changes are um you know one of the concerns that's been brought up or it's been an issue in the
past is um new positions and obviously if there's a need within the town but it's not something that is outlined within the personnel bylaw as a position it lets the town funding is available to
make the hire um until it gets ratified at town meetings. So, you know, I think um you know, one of the situations that I've been a part of, the conversations I've been a part of is um you know, there's been discussion with the board
about um you know, potentially new position or assistance in as an example, communications. Well, coming on board, it's uh unfortunately just with how the timing worked on certain things,
I a fully fleshed out job description with board discussions, meaningful conversations, you know, I I would not have felt comfortable putting something before town meeting, you know, rather than having in both this case and future
cases, rather than having to wait another calendar year, you know, to put that forward to town meeting. You know, if the town is in a position, it's having its conversations, you know, it can make those moves within the fiscal year. Um, so again, it just
adds uh additional flexibility. Um, I believe that covers uh I think the the big highlights. Obviously, um there's language um you know, within the amendment that I'm
happy to go over. Um, I know the the red line was sent or at least the amendment draft was sent out. Um, but happy to open up to questions from there. I I I will just interject here one one thing and and one of the last points
that Chris brought up I think is probably one of the more compelling ones you know wearing a little bit personnel board and a little bit of finance committee hat and that is sometimes you know you can have a position that's actually funded but it hasn't been yet
approved uh through the either job description or the uh addition being added to the roster of approved positions within the personnel bylaw. It becomes a very
clunky process. Um I get queries all the time. As a matter of fact, I had one today um from uh from a department head that was um had the funding for a position that really was going to change a little bit and perhaps the title was
going to change. not so much what the person was doing, but maybe a little bit. And and gee, did we have time to get that before town meeting, uh, which is in 3 weeks. Uh, can we get something put on the town meeting warrant to have
that addressed so I don't have to wait another whole year, uh, before we do this? And it was like, you know, there isn't enough time. So, it's this lead time issue to have new positions created
or to have existing PO positions um adjusted significantly enough that it would warrant a different classification within the uh with within the bylaw. So, um, as as I've said on on on record, I
think this is a, um, a process that is, uh, overdue, that it's time that we do get to, um, you know, modernday centralization of, uh, of administrative tasks. Uh, there's so many uh, laws out
there now that, you know, protect uh, workers, and we certainly want to make sure that uh, we stay on top of them. uh and we're not at town hall every day. We're not there understanding perhaps some of the um dynamics of what's going
on with uh within the employee class of those that come under our purview. And then it's this whole question of well which employees really do come under the purview of personnel board versus union versus non-union contract no contract. you know, for whatever reason, the
police and fire chief come under the personnel board, but other positions don't. Uh, you know, the the head of IT does not, but police and fire chief do. I mean, so it's kind of this crazy little web of various positions that
over time have um segregated into different little silos of um of responsibility or oversight. And I think this will clear up a lot of that. It will make it easier for the employee to understand. It will make it uh a lot
more efficient for the um for the not only for the department heads to understand but even for the town's people to understand that everyone is being treated equally and fairly and it's not different oversight uh groups that are
seeing that. I don't think we've had any problems with what we've had, but we certainly could be a lot more efficient about it and making things work a lot better. Uh, you know, our our pennies are stretched as they are, and if we can have any more better efficiency in
anything, that's always a plus. So, um, that's kind of where I where I stand on it. But, I certainly want want to hear from the rest of you to your thoughts on this, >> Gary. >> Yeah, I agree. I think, you know, this is it's really an antiquated system. If
you if I bet you if you pulled multiple communities in in the state, um they're running without personnel boards. I mean, obviously they have HR departments and we really don't have a quote unquote HR department. Um I know Chris is kind of like trying to build build a little
bit of that um in his in his role here. But um yeah, it's antiquated. It it's really antiquated. And um you know, uh as you mentioned, Cindy, you made up you know, some good points. uh you know FSLA um all the rules that go along now with
with um even collective bargaining um uh everything you know soup to nuts this this board can't you know meeting once a month or once when there's a whenever there's like an issue like we're doing tonight or or topic that needs to come up it's really not efficient you know um
I think that going forward I know like I said I think Chris is trying to develop something internally so that we have a and and maybe you know down the road there's some shared services with the schools. Uh, and we can go that route too. Um, because I, you know, the schools are are the biggest piece of
this. And, um, I see I could see that happening later on down the road. >> Right. Right. >> I also agree with the fact, Chris, that you should be the the the point of um, escalation of employees want to bring grievances forward. I think it's right
and appropriate that they go to you um, as a town administrator rather than to us. like to Cindy's point, we're not involved in the day-to-day workings and don't have the great understanding of their working conditions and such. So, I think that's appropriate. My my only question is like the the right of appeal after your decision, it says that if
they wish to appeal that decision, it goes to then the select board. So, my question is why wouldn't it come to this board perhaps? So how it's worded within the proposal um you know I I suppose as of now I
report to the select board um on other administrative matters and so I it would operate in the same function that if there was a concern with the decision I made whether it was here really any other town matter you know the avenue
for any resident is always the select board you know they're really the final stop um you know I would say for these positions too that are appointed by the select board. So, you know, having their voice in that um you know, it it's how you know most
communities I think structure it, but that's just how it was worded. >> So, it's escalated to your then direct uh sort of line of reporting up the chain. That makes sense. So, then it means I suppose that our our role is is purely an advisory capacity. we don't
have any sort of direct appeal for the employees to go straight to us. I I think that's probably right. Um because it should be sort of an internal inquiry. I see us as kind of like an adjunct um you know an occasional sort of almost like consultants. So um I I think this makes sense from my
perspective these proposals. Uh Chris, under what circumstances could you see um and and if it may be hard to think of one right now, when this was discussed at the select board meeting uh
last week, it talked about that advisory role that there would be some items that perhaps would be taken to the personnel board for for some type of advisement. what what types of issues do you could you see that that would ever come up?
>> So, I think the big one uh not to give too much of a preview what I plan to talk about with the board uh for long-term planning, but you know, one of the things I'd really like to jump into is the town policies. Um, for example,
um employee handbook. you know, when people come on, >> you know, what are they signing off on when it comes to, >> you know, best practice? You know, obviously, um, using the town systems, um, you know, communicating with other
employees, looking at, um, you know, harassment, you know, our harassment policy or anti-harassment policy. >> None of that exists right now, right? None of that exists, right? So, uh, some of it exists. Um, some of
it when we look at our policies, I would say it's housed in a lot of different locations. And I think, um, it needs it needs a little TLC, right? I think, you know, some of these policies and one of the things that I'd like to do, not just
HR related policies, but just as a whole is I I think there should be a little bit of a schedule where eyes are put on it every couple years. And just if nothing else to say that, you know, the the date that you see in the bottom right hand corner that says the approval
date, you know, doesn't show like 15 years cuz I just think that that gives, you know, a certain message, right? I think if there's periodic eyes on it, if nothing else, just to say, "Yep, it looks good and nothing's changed," I like to do that um with those policies.
And I think, you know, if this is something that, you know, this board would be willing to help with, um I think that there's a lot of uh improvement that can be done there. But that's just one example right on the top of my head. But >> you know I think there's um
>> as it's written there's a lot of flexibility there right and I think whether it's through my office or the select board I think the flexibility is there to you know bring on this group and convene you know as issues arise. So
>> Right. Right. Uh Carrie do you have any uh any questions any comments? Um, I'm I've been in support of this for some time. Um, but I'm only 90% in support of this change.
I agree with everything that's been said except for changing it to an advisory only board. when it comes to certain things. I I know that we don't really deal with a lot of
things, but we provide a fairness that I think can be Let's see. I'm sorry, I wrote this down. Um, bare HR practices. Um it just putting it in the hands. We know we know in this
town that there are agendas and it prevents people from it's not really nepotism but getting as an example would be the um engineer. We couldn't really classify it because it had a lot more duties than a normal
engineer would. Um, and I think that probably brought this around because if we were not involved in that, we'd probably have an engineer right now with very many different skills and
it just could lead to violations. Um, discrimination laws, equal pay acts, title 7, even even civil right acts. And I don't know, right now I trust our select board. I love them, but five years from now, who knows who's going to
be sitting there, what the agendas are going to be. I just think it's too much too fast. >> Yeah. Okay. I I appreciate your your uh your opinion on that and your comment on
that. Um I think you know to some degree I mean you you have to understand that the the employee base that we oversee we as a personnel board currently is relatively you know small. It's
selective but it is still relatively small. It is um you know it it involves for the most part part-time people that would not be under um uh under the umbrella of a uh union contract and some
and department heads uh by and large but we do not get involved in the actual hiring of any of these people. You know they that is not part of our purview. We we we don't get involved in who was selected why they're selected uh any of
that. we look at the classification of it. Uh we look at the job description of it. Um and we don't get to choose who it is. So that part has never been part of our um part of our domain. Um anyway, so
>> I don't mean the person, but more the pay. If you had three employees doing the same job, we kind of >> holds the town accountable. They all have to be paid the same, etc. without that with one person it's it opens the door to
>> yeah I mean we've we've had protracted discussions about you know job descriptions of of administrative people and as to and in and bringing up the point that that Chris brought up earlier about having a job description tailored
to a person rather than the job. We went through that in a very like I said a very protracted manner a couple of years ago. uh and wanted to make very sure that the job description fit the position and not trying to write it to
give the person um a a higher salary because she had skills that perhaps weren't necessarily going to be used, but she was highly skilled and I get that and we went through a lot of that and you know and I can understand how that that's going to
happen. I don't know that it would have been different either way, but I appreciate your comment. I I I tr I truly do. I know where it's coming from. So, um I can I can get that. Yes, Chris, go ahead. >> Yeah, just um when it comes to the job
description and and the pay, you know, there is a new law out that requires us to post the salary range for positions, you know. So, and I would say, you know, just um even the discussion tonight where we talked about the uh director of
senior services position is I you know, I think that's one of the reasons why um you know, Westport invested in this plan and why um you know, we're utilizing that is so that we can have equity in terms of pay internally and also be
competitive with um you know, other communities that are hiring people. So I think when it comes to the development of the job and where does it fit on the scale um you know that's something where you know I will say and I think you know
to Gary's point that he made earlier is you know the town hasn't um you know really had that HR capacity that it's built out but it's trying to and and from my piece of it I'm going to try to
um you know I I think my hope is as we go forward, um, you know, again, regardless of whether or not this article passes, I'm still going to be working to try and put policies in place, uh, because that's the feedback that I've received from
staff. Um, and when it comes to just how certain HR functions are being done, you know, having there be a real workflow to something like this is I think if this experience has shown me anything, this one experience is that
um, you know, I want to make sure people are brought in and they understand the process and they feel comfortable with the process. So, um, yeah, that's really my two cents on that. Well, I'm sure that even your experience when you were hired into the position,
it was probably somewhat surprising that there was, you know, there was nothing. I mean, it's like, well, you can talk to the town treasurer about insurance and you can talk to somebody else about this and
there's no real handbook here and oh yeah, well, uh, you know, Keith will set you up on the computer, but there wasn't any any one central, you know, pamphlet, book, whatever, handbook as you described, telling you these are all the
people that you should uh know and this is how this process works And you know, you got some of it from Nicole from uh you know, about paychecks or you know, submitting bills and you know, you had all different directions to go to and
there's no one centralized person or department that you could have gone to. I mean, the schools do have an HR uh person and they do have an HR department and they have that pretty well streamlined. And to Gary's point, you know, it would be great if we could uh,
you know, learn from some of that and piggyback on on on some of their uh their the the process that they use, but we, you know, we're well beyond this. I mean, we should we should be well beyond uh having to guess, well, who should I
who should I talk to about X, Y, or Z? because there's so many different people involved that may not necessarily be um you know the the first person that you think of. It may not be the logical person that
you think of. So, uh, anyway, um, okay. Uh, any other comments or questions regarding, uh, so I'm going to be looking for a, um, uh, a motion as to whether we are
going to recommend the passage of, uh, of of this, um, uh, of this particular article. Um it will be posted um not directly on the warrant but there will be a handout at
town meeting indicating the recommendation of the various boards involved. Uh and um they are looking for recommendation from the personnel board as to what our thoughts uh what our feelings are about the passage of this
um particular article. So, I'm going to entertain a motion one way or the other. >> Right. If they just they only >> Oh, hello Gary. You there? >> Yeah. Motion. I make a motion to
recommend. >> Okay. So, there's a motion on the floor to recommend uh the passage of uh article 25. Uh do I have a second? >> Yes, I'll second that. >> Okay. So, uh, we have a second from
Nancy. Um, any other additional discussion? Okay. Well, I will take a, uh, roll call vote. And I, and I'm sure that I guess I will interject one more discussion point regardless of whether it passes or not, as Chris said, but I mean, even if it
does pass, this will be a little bit of a of a process that we'll go through, you know, getting from point A to point B on this. So, um, we'll, you know, we'll we'll just take it at that. Um, all right. So, I'm going to do a roll
call, uh, vote on this. So, Gary, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> Uh, Carrie, >> as is no. I'm sorry. >> That's okay. Uh, Cindy, yes. So, the motion does carry. Uh, three in favor,
one no, and one absent. Um, okay. Um, all right. I guess that's it. The only other item, um, unless there are any other items that, um, I've got approval of I have two other items left on the agenda. Approval of
minutes and any other topics not reasonably anticipated. I don't have anything else to add. Chris, did you have anything that you needed to bring up with us? I don't I didn't think so, but >> um no, just that uh I will uh be
discussing with the board at their next meeting um about the motions. The board is also going to be making its recommendations uh at the next meeting to be included on that supplemental handout that you were mentioning. Um, so
what I'll plan to do is put under the article, this article, >> okay, >> the recommendation that was taken here this evening, >> and certainly if there's anything for the meeting on the 5th that you want to submit in terms of the discussion, the
points talked about here, I can make sure that it's included in the packet for the meeting. >> Okay. Um, all right. That's um that's good. Okay. So, the only other item I have uh is the minutes from uh boy, the
the last time we met um July 23rd. So, that tells you a lot right there, Chris. >> It's been Yeah, >> July 23rd. Um I'm I'm going to make uh a motion that we approve the uh I did go
through them, the minutes of July 23rd. Gary, you give me a second. Second. >> Sure. Thank you. Um, I'll do a roll call vote. Uh, Gary, >> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes.
>> Uh, Carrie, >> yes. >> Cindy, yes. So, uh, the minutes were approved. Four in favor, one absent. Um, okay. And we don't have any other topics that have come up. Um
and uh we'll see what happens on the 5th of uh 5th of May. >> Motion to >> motion to adjurnn. Is there a second for that? All right. Gary's got the second on that. All right. Do one one last roll call and then we will sign off. Uh Gary,
>> yes. >> Nancy, >> yes. >> Gary, >> yes. >> And Cindy, yes. So, a unanimous vote for a journal of four. Four in favor, one uh absent. And thank you very much for your
uh participation. And we'll see what the outcome is on the 5th of May. Thank you so much.