Yikes: Another executive session on the Town Manager contract

Posted this to the listserv earlier today.

The Selectboard is holding a special meeting on Monday, October 24 to discuss the Town Manager Contract. This is the third executive session on this topic. The others, according to published agendas, were on October 18 and September 26.

In addition, an executive session was on the agenda for September 28. Topic: Employment of a Public Employee. The Selectboard directly hires one employee – the Town Manager.

Anyone know what is the issue with TM Contract?

The agenda for the October 24 meeting, with Zoom info, is here.

* * *

6 Replies to “Yikes: Another executive session on the Town Manager contract”

  1. I guess I do not understand why the TM’s contract includes a BONUS for
    “good performance.” I believe the TM is paid well enough as it is. I do not know what the the logic was behind this bonus deal. I do believe it is NOT necessary.
    I also think it is foolish to allow the TM to be the ONLY person to have the authority to hire the new police chief. Would it not be logical to vet the newly hired police chief with more input from the SB or voters in town?
    Where does the new chief live? Why am I paying $28,000 for his commuting vehicle?
    Lot’s of unanswered quetsions.

  2. Cuanto mas pequeno es el pueblo, mas grande es el diablo

    The smaller the Town, the larger the Devil.

    What we have is a failure by the SB to hire this TM. Not only did he lie on his initial employment application regarding his education, but the SB provided a 5 year contract with no linkage to the Town personnel policies. If there was a linkage, he could be terminated if the alleged bullying and management issues are correct. But the SB engaged an attorney for the Town and agreed to a 5 YEAR contract without any connection to the personnel policies. Nice job SB. Then coupled with that we had Claudette Brochu publicly endorse their decision to hire Roderick Vivian Francis and to stand behind that decision. Meanwhile she knew she planned to sell her home and move to a rental in WRJ. We’ve witnessed an exodus of SB members who’ve saddled us with their decisions. Ashley (moved to Lebanon) = cost overruns on the public service building. Pepper (moved to Hanover) brought on Roger Arnold to knock our Linda Cook (oh people didn’t know of the back room effort?) Brochu (now in WRJ) ran for SB to block Pam Smith knowing that she would be selling her home and then doubled down by endorsing Francis for TM. Racussin (moved to Hanover) pushed the $3 million geothermal while she planned her move from Mechanic Street and spoke about Covid Capitalists (kind of ironic as she sold her home at the height of the market before interest rates doubled).

    Money doesn’t retain employees. Bonuses for a poor performing TM is not appropriate (nor is the 5 year contract). People leave not because of money but because of a toxic workplace.

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/toxic-workplaces-are-bad-for-mental-and-physical-health-surgeon-general-says-11666230714

    We need a fresh SB – not a Chair that attacks and insults a long time and valued member of the community. Nor a member who “seconds the motion” or one who flip flops to ensure re-election and absolutely not a SB member that plans to move from town after impacting long term policies and hiring.

  3. Oh forget to mention the open moontlighting (aka second job) by our TM, Roderick Vivian Francis with his GF, Brandy Saxton of Placesense to various Vermont towns.

    https://www.valleyreporter.com/index.php/news/local-news/15890-warren-planning-commission-conducting-public-outreach

    One wonders if the Work From Home (WFH) that our TM is pursuing allows him to hold other jobs while “working” for Norwich. But by all means consider a bonus for the employee that is openly seen doing yard work and running errands while “working from home” in Windsor VT

  4. Why has the public not seen the contract between the town manager and the town? Most especially, to me, is the question of whether the contract contains “cause” terms and conditions, because without them, the TM is unanswerable to the Select Board. Although the statute authorizing the TM form of government says that the TM serves at the pleasure of the select board and can be terminated for cause, the VT Supreme Court has said that since “cause” is not defined in the poorly drafted statute, it must be clearly determined and defined in the contract between a town and a town manager. I’m guessing, since I’m not privy to the contract, that no such language was included in the contract, resulting in another town manager able to thumb his nose at the public and the Select Board, except that he gets to do it for 5 years.

    The contract should be made completely and widely public. It is not a “personnel matter” it is a public policy matter.

  5. (previous post continued)
    I contacted members of the Select Board several times over the contracts of both Herb Durfee and Rod Francis, requesting that “cause’ terms and conditions be included in the contracts. I asked to see Durfee’s contract, but never received it. He did, however, clearly and directly tell me that he did not have to answer to the SB.

    With all the other shambolic decisions the SB has been making the past few years, I would not be surprised that the latest TM contract does not
    contain “cause” language so that the SB can control the TM. What else would explain the chaos the town is currently experiencing?

  6. In response to on of John Farrell’s good questions, I believe that there are currently at least 5 town employees who receive “commuter” vehicles. Most are already owned by the town. It is well known that Simon Keeling went with an old vehicle(since driven by Anna Ingraham) that needed frequent maintenance because the town had been slow in ordering a new vehicle..since the time of Chief Frank(?)..The police chief and I assume other officers are often “on call” from their homes so it is necessary for them to have a vehicle with the right technical equipment. Will Anna be left with the old clunker?