Without public discussion or explanation, the Norwich Selectboard voted 3-2 to weaken a key provision of Town Manager Brennan Duffy’s contract. The change eliminates the ‘deadline’ for him to move to the Upper Valley, thereby cementing as permanent policy his working remotely two days a week. The vote took place on October 23, although an executive session occurred two weeks prior, in connection with the Town Manager’s annual evaluation.
For some, this decision is a reminder of Mr. Duffy’s hiring as permanent town manager in September 2023, which occurred based on an undisclosed “emergency,” without public notice or open search process, possibly in violation of the Town’s own policies on hiring. The amendment marks the second time in just over a year that the Norwich Selectboard has made a major decision about our town manager position behind closed doors.
Contract Amendment
The original contract prioritized, though did not require, that Mr. Duffy move “his home to the Upper Valley region” from Rutland. The September 2023 agreement included up to $10,000 in relocation assistance, conditioned on Mr. Duffy relocating within 18 months. In addition, the Selectboard “expected” him to work from Tracy Hall five days a week, but reduced that requirement to three days until the earlier of his relocation or 18 months. The 18-month period would have expired in March 2025.
The amendment eliminates the 18-month deadline for both the relocation expenses and a three-day physical presence. As a result, the Selectboard no longer has any leverage regarding Mr. Duffy’s relocation (and he has less incentive to move) to the Upper Valley. The Board also essentially blesses his working remotely two days a week, as the new normal.
Questions
Several questions come to mind. What circumstances changed since September 2023 when all parties agreed to these terms? Why now – five months before the deadline? Why did the Board make this concession without receiving anything in return? Most troubling, if this is such a good idea, why won’t the majority explain their reasoning? Or the two voting against, their opposition? These are questions Norwich residents deserve to have answered. Instead, they are left to speculate about a significant change, as with the “emergency” hiring of Town Manager Duffy.
Executive session discussions don’t prevent the Selectboard from offering a rationale for its decision. Some might argue that personnel matters require discretion. However, this is more than a private personnel matter. It’s a policy matter regarding the fundamental terms of the town manager’s engagement with the community. Specifically, whether he lives in the Upper Valley and whether he is in the office five days a week.
At one time, the Selectboard decided it wanted a town manager integrated in the community he serves, rather than commuting from more than an hour (and a region or two) away. It also believed the Town’s interest required the town manager’s full-time physical presence in Tracy Hall. The Selectboard made those matters a priority in the original contract. Now, they no longer are. Why?
* * *
* * *
Thanks for reading. Comments to this post are welcomed, below or by email. Contact me at norwichobserver[at]gmail.com
The draft meeting minutes for October 23 say:
Item #14: Town Manager Contract Amendment
Layton moved, second by Calloway, to approve Amendment #1 to the Employment Agreement for the Town Manager as amended. Vote: Yes (Layton, Calloway, Arnold) No (Smith, Vincent)
Chris:
Thanks for staying on top of this and keeping the citizens of Norwich informed.
If the open meeting law was violated as it has been in the past perhaps the SB
should be help accountable for their decisions. After reading about the “secret”
decision to increase the TM’s pay ( called executive session) for reasons NOT made public some members of the SB seem to be flaunting their authority.
Regarding the SB reversing its original decision to have the new TM reside in Norwich or close by. It’s ridiculous that he be allowed to live in Rutland almost 50 miles away and work remotely. Perhaps it’s time to seek new SB members that are more accountable.