After some comments made at April 7, 2021 selectmen meeting, I came to conclusion there is an issue at hand; some selectmen may not be aware of or do not understand the procedures process for addressing issues with employees, members of advisory committee, members of board of selectmen. The beginning comment, which led to a group discussion revolved around mask wearing (or not) in town hall.
One would think that after a member of BOS has been on for 6 years, they would know and understand the process. It is all on the internet and most can be found on town website. First place to look is Town Administrator job description, which selectmen voted on. Within that document, it states "responsible for proper operation of all town affairs on day to day basis." T/A is personnel director and "administers the town's personnel policies."
Board of Selectmen procedures state "Role of Town Administrator: the Board appoints an administrator to be its chief administrative, financial, Personnel and procurement officer." ". . . to not hold the staff culpable for action based upon a disagreement with the underling statute, by-law or policy. Recognize and support administrative chain of command by not admonishing the staff, directly or indirectly, and refuse to act on complaints as an individual outside chain of command. Give Administrator full responsibility for discharging his or her disposition of and solution to such complaints."
Select Board procedures:
The Chair, Vice-Chair, Clerk, or any Member appointed as a Liaison from the Board to another entity may be removed from such position with or without cause, by a four-fifths (4/5) vote of the Board. However, such a removal should generally be used in matters in which said Officer has acted inappropriately in a manner which would bring the Town into disrepute or exceeded their authority or upon a request by the Officer to be replaced.
Then there is the MA Open Meeting Law, which has as the first reason a BOS may go into closed session:
To discuss the reputation, character, physical condition or mental health, rather than professional competence, of an individual, or to discuss the discipline or dismissal of, or complaints or charges brought against, a public officer, employee, staff member or individual. The individual to be discussed in such executive session shall be notified in writing by the public body at least 48 hours prior to the proposed executive session; provided, however, that notification may be waived upon written agreement of the parties.
This purpose is designed to protect the rights and reputation of individuals. Nevertheless, where a public body is discussing an employee evaluation, considering applicants for a position, or discussing the qualifications of any individual, these discussions should be held in open session to the extent that the discussion deals with issues other than the reputation, character, health, or any complaints or charges against the individual. An executive session called for this purpose triggers certain rights for the individual who is the subject of the discussion. The individual has the right to be present, though he or she may choose not to attend. The individual who is the subject of the discussion may also choose to have the discussion in an open meeting, and that choice takes precedence over the right of the public body to go into executive session.
Then, there is the item for the comment and following discussion on April 7, 2021. This seems to bring to light that the reason for the comment is not understood or is ignored.
November 2020, MA governor updated / issued a new requirement, advisory, recommendation (depending on which news conference you may have watched or listened to):
The November 6, 2020 updated stated, in part, "all persons are strongly discouraged from using medical-grade masks to meet the requirements of this order.
Exceptions: Where a person is unable to wear a mask or cloth face covering due to a medical or disabling condition, provided that a person who declines to wear a mask or cloth face covering because of a medical or disabling condition shall not be required to produce documentation verifying the condition, except as provided in section 3.
Section 3, places of employment and schools: If a student is unable to wear a mask or cloth face covering because of medical or disabling condition in in-person learning, the school may require documentation. Where an employee or other worker who is required to wear a face covering pursuant to this order or any other applicable rule, employer may request documentation.
In answer to a question from a resident, the TA answered as follows: Hi, "I wanted to get back to you in regards to the details of our current operating procedures with our town offices. We still are currently closed to the public and our desks are more than 6’ apart. Additionally, we have barriers between them and when we leave our desks, we wear face coverings. We have confirmed these practices with the state. As I’ve stated before, Town Hall is closed to the public and any services that are required are set up by appointment where one of our staff (with a mask, face covering) go outside to help our citizens."
Adam.
Anyone who has been in Templeton Town Hall could see there are no physical barriers between desks in town clerk, assessors, town clerk or development services office, town accountant same thing. The only place where there is a barrier (a wall) is in BOS office between T/A office and main BOS space. From all of the above, it should be apparent that if an employee, selectman or others see what they perceive is an issue, first move is to let the town administrator know and let him do his job and if need, he can inform parties concerned on the procedure. From my seat, if you are going to state you serve the town, please know the rules, guidance and the procedures and use and follow them, to avoid possible legal or other action. Following process as well as knowing process seems to continue to be a challenge in Templeton.
