Meeting opened at 9:25 a.m.

In attendance: Selectman Wayne Eigabroadt – Chairman, Selectman David E. Hartman, Selectman Richard A. Cook and Town Administrator Laura Buono

Recorder of the minutes is Mary Whalen

Others present:

Judith Rogers – Town Clerk

Barbara Annis – Planning Board

The TA presented an option for the Selectmen to consider regarding wages and salaries.

The Selectmen discussed additional weekly hours (3) for the Maintenance Technician, and a 6 month evaluation for the custodian; these changes would not be drawn from the merit raise pool.

The Selectmen need final determination if the hours for the Fire Department will need to be increased for 2006. The Finance Director would like to change payment of wages for the Fire Department to twice a year instead of at the end of the year. The Selectmen will speak to the Fire Chief before making any changes. Any additional hours would be reflected in the Fire Department budget and would not affect the merit pool.

The Selectmen asked the TA to research contractual obligations for grounds keeping for all the different facilities, would it be economical to hire one individual. Selectman Cook will forward Parks & Recreations recommendations to the TA.

The Selectmen have considered the TA’s recommendation to implement a cost of living increase across the board and then begin to meet with the Department Heads during the year to determine a process for the next budget season. This is considered by the Selectmen to be the most fair and equitable solution. The wage scale will be adjusted by a determined percentage. Selectman Cook agrees with the cost of living increase proposal.

The creation of a supervisory position at the Transfer Station still needs to be determined along with the cost impact; Selectman Cook feels that this position is needed. Selectman Hartman discussed possibly creating a salary adjustment fund that would fund newly created positions.

The TA will breakdown the total cost of salary/wages, benefits, life insurance, and short-term disability and apply the information to a spread sheet. Short-term disability will be researched for part-time employees.

The TA has been in communication with the Director of Public Works regarding the replacement of the 86 Mack for 2006. The Director of Public Works is working on obtaining prices. The TA informed the Board that the Director of Public Works contacted her regarding a cutting edge that will cost $554.80, if the money is not available this year the vendor is willing to bill in 2006.

The Selectmen discussed funding for the cutting edge. Chairman Eigabroadt is concerned, the Board has impressed upon the staff about living within their individual budgets and the importance of it and how overspending effects the other departments. Chairman Eigabroadt does not agree with the "I’ll spend it anyway because I know they will find the money they always do" is not appropriate. It has been recognized that there have been emergency situations. The TA commented that the Highway Department did receive $9,000.00 from FEMA for snowstorms. In the future, a public hearing could be held reducing the Highway Department expense by the grant amount, with the understanding that the line items that were affected by the storm would be refunded.

The Selectmen discussed a foreman position for the Transfer Station. A wage range was reviewed. The TA will develop a job description and a wage scale ranging from 12. 89 to 16.32 based on information supplied by the Local Government Center Wage/Salary Survey. The Selectman agreed to budget the position for 6 months totaling $856.96 @ $14.62 per hour, the TA will research the need for the position for the Selectmen’s determination.

Judith Rogers asked that Selectmen after the cost of living increase is figured, would the remainder be applied to merit increases? Chairman Eigabroadt explained that the Selectmen will be increasing the cost of living from 1% to 2.75%. The Board will meet with the Department Heads throughout the year to firmly establish a process for merit increase. At this time there are no clear expectations, format, policy or procedure in place regarding merit increases. Rather than initiate a 1% cost of living increase and try to apply the balance to those considered eligible for a merit increase was not feasible, the Selectmen had received requests for a number of employees to receive a merit increase.

Mrs. Rogers commented that Department Heads presented information to substantiate the merit increase, which was what the performance evaluation was suppose to do. Chairman Eigabroadt explained that when a Department Head meets with the Board and requests a merit increase for the whole staff, that is not reality. So the Board realized that a clear process needs to be created so that expectations are known, then starting next year the process can be implemented. The TA mentioned there are Departments that have raised concerns about particular wage scales, which also need to be addressed. There is not enough time to address these concerns before Town Meeting.

Judith Rogers asked why the Board didn’t address the salaries first in the budget process. Chairman Eigabroadt explained that performance evaluations were not all completed, that process needs to be considered; maybe they need to be completed in June.

Chairman Eigabroadt explained that the Board agreed to hold everything to a 3% increase, Chairman Eigabroadt feels that salaries should not be included, the salary line is what it is, if you have ten people that deserve a merit increase then they should receive it, the salary line should be addressed separately from the operating budget.

Selectman Hartman made the motion to establish a cost of living increase of 2.75 % over 2005 salary levels for all Town employees. Selectman Cook seconded the motion. All were in favor. The motion passed.

Requested verbatim:

Judith Rogers asked the Board, does this mean there is no adjustment on the Deputy Town Clerk besides the cost of living increase.

Eigabroadt: Besides the cost of living increase, yes, for now.

Rogers: For now means with a discussion?

Cook: For 2006

Eigabroadt: This is exactly what I was talking about, these are the things we need to address and hammer out with Department Heads, there is no way we are going to have that done for this budget, it’s impossible.

Rogers: Even though I have made a request and have been here discussing it with you for many meetings and many weeks.

Eigabroadt: Yes

Rogers: It’s not something we can discuss to resolve.

Eigabroadt: We can continue discussing it, but I just don’t see a resolution before this budget is complete, because it is not just as simple as changing it, all the preliminary information that we are finding so far, even through the discussions with you is not enough, we need more information, we need more discussion, we want to do this right and we want to do this once.

Cook: I don’t think we can pick a position and re-do it. What we are suggesting….

Rogers: It sounds like you have, it sounds like you have a foreman position, you created a position.

Cook: We haven’t really created, we are creating it, but in fact, it’s there, but it’s not recognized.

Eigabroadt: He’s already doing it; he is doing a foreman’s job.

Rogers: And I have an employee in my office that does what I do almost at my level that’s making the lowest wage in town.

Cook: But her job isn’t changing she’s on the pay scale that was established.

TA: The request that you sent in is for them to put her on a whole different scale. This scale has not been created yet, so all they’ve done is put aside money because they know they want to create that position. You’re looking at the same as other departments who are asking the Board to re-look at the scales in place, that’s what you’re asking. You can’t take the Deputy Town Clerk and just put her on a different job scale because you want to increase the wages.

Rogers: I wanted it upgraded/reclassified.

TA: She’s still the Deputy Town Clerk, the last discussion was the separate items that this town does, that another town does, and what is that worth in the hourly wages. The scale is set for the Deputy Town Clerk, but is that range correct, if its not, then that is what needs to be brought forward, same as this other department. They’re questioning all the scales in conjunction with what’s being done. All that information isn’t together, and what values do you put on that. And that is why Wayne is saying there is no way to have that together for 2006 increases. And it may very well be that these people are under paid based on what’s done here and not done in the other towns that were compared to. But in order for us to all get together and hammer that out you need the time.

Eigabroadt: In other words we recognize what your saying, and that’s a big step forward, and we are going to do something about it, we’re going to get into it and we’re going to work on it, it’s just not going to happen as fast as you want it to. But you brought up a valid point and we are going to address it. There’s no way I feel comfortable saying "yes" it’s going to be done for this one. I don’t see that happening. But we can’t take the initial route you were suggesting which is changing it to an executive secretary because she is a Deputy Town Clerk, that is the position that we have, we can’t change that.

Rogers: And I’m saying put the Deputy and that position at the same pay scale, you have two positions at that pay scale.

Cook: It’s based on what is paid to Deputy Town Clerks around the…..

Rogers: I understand that

Eigabroadt: Judy, if we just go up and we say OK you have this Deputy Town Clerk that is not making enough money, we’re gonna change her scale, and still keep the title Deputy Town Clerk, but we’re going to give her the same scale as an executive secretary, now that’s an arbitrary change. That means now Paul comes in and says "you know what", and this what the Transfer Station is saying, and this the problem that this type of stuff creates, "all of my people are underpaid, every position their scales are wrong. I understand that they are in line with the median pay scales of everybody else in the State of NH that works the same position, but my guys deserve more money; they should be on the same pay scale as the Highway Department heavy equipment operator". Paul may feel that way but it doesn’t make it so. It is still Transfer Station attendant, based on the study of the Wage Study Committee, based on the survey results that are published by N H Municipal Association they are right in line with that position. The only way it can make a difference is what we were talking about the last time with you, services, your position based on the job description, which is why we said look at that, you may require that your Deputy does a lot more than what other Deputies are doing that was used in that survey. That’s the jumping off point that we need to do, we need to look at that aspect of it, and take a good hard look at it. And I agree with you, and that’s what we are going to do. It’s not going to happen for this budget. There’s not enough time with everything else we have to do. It’s just not possible.

Rogers: So are we looking at 6 months or are we looking at 07.

Eigabroadt: We are looking at 07 to be honest with you. I can see the only way that you could legitimize the difference of changing that scale itself is to show factual instances that this person, this position I have as Deputy Town Clerk is fundamentally different than the others we used to find this salary range. That’s the only way, because if it’s the same, it’s the same. White is white, black is black. But if it’s different then we have to take a look at it. So we need to get all that information to show the different towns that they used in the study in that list, this Deputy Clerks job position, this Deputy Clerks job description, which is why I said you should take your Deputy Clerks job description and look at it and make sure its an accurate reflection of what she does up there and what you require of her. Then we have something we can compare with.

TA: And the only, I mean you may have to go to bigger towns to find the services, but then you have to make adjustments if you go to towns with 10 – 15 thousand say, to find the comparable services, again the computerization, then you have to make adjustments the other way based on volume, and population obviously. Because even though here we have the services and computerization there’s a maximum number of people that you can serve. But there has to be a way to put a dollar value on those and I think that your last discussion that you had in here was that "we offer more services" and that’s worth something. That’s why you’re probably going to have to go to a different level of town to compare that part of it. Either way there’s adjustments that you have to say OK what is this worth and is it worth this level of pay.

Rogers: I understand what you’re saying and the reasoning for it; I’m sitting here very discouraged because on my recommendation as Town Clerk, I’m telling you that this position is under paid. And the salaries being left to the last part of the budget planning it is doing a disservice to this position. Forget the request for myself; this position needs to be upgraded. It is the lowest paid. Our temporaries start at $10.00 an hour. We are talking about Departments that go over budget for what ever reason and not being fiscally responsible for years and you have a Department that is responsible for their budget, takes a lot of responsibility and is very conscientious, and I’m telling you this position is under paid and I feel like its not worth anything for me to say that. It’s not enough for me to say, somehow that wage needs to be increased, we have Departments that are already max’d out that haven’t been here their 30 or 20 years of tenure but they’re going to be adjusted for the COLA, which is fine, COLA is not even what the outside world is getting, but it’s an adjustment, and to not receive merit increases this year is like a double…

Eigabroadt: To answer your question in short form, no, it’s not just enough for you to sit there and say it’s under paid, because now we have to go before the townspeople when they ask why did you did you do this, or all the other people that work for Town and say you made no adjustments on mine, why did you do that, and I say because Judy said it’s underpaid. No, we need to make the study, we need to show why we did it, and we can’t just do it because you say it’s under paid. I agree with you, it’s under paid, but I’m not just going to make an arbitrary adjustment to it. I need to be able to back up what we did because there are others out there that want the same thing, I can tell you right, you aren’t going to get it because it is legit the way it is. But how do I now go tell them, because Judy says so, it doesn’t work that way.

Rogers: Last year when the Police Department got their increases, they’re all at the top of their scale, because that’s the agreement they made with the Selectmen.

Eigabroadt: Right

Rogers: That’s the reason they got their increases because they made an agreement with the Selectmen. The Deputy got her increase because the Town Clerk said it needed to be adjusted.

TA: But being placed at the top of a scale is different than going to a totally different scale.

Rogers: Not when we’ve been told it’s a twenty-year scale. The new Police Officer comes in, well that’s the plan, the agreement they made with him, OK that what he’s coming in at. There’s no questions asked, Billy says yes this is what we are going to do and it’s done. And it becomes Billy’s responsibility not for the Board to defend.

TA: Right now what I’m hearing, and again, this is as an outsider, I don’t know personalities other than what I’ve gathered last week, but this is the exact thing you want to avoid, Department pitted against Department. And I’m hearing that, and that’s why, in my opinion you have to go back to the drawing board because if you just pick and choose, there is also another department that brought a position forward that feels the scale is just to low. But, if your going to do it, it really should be all at once, and I realize there was a lot of work put into this and a lot of time to figure these things out but when they were creating the scale for the Deputy Town Clerk was that discussion brought up at that time, that this is to low, this is what two years old?

Cook: Adopted in 2004.

TA: So only a year old, so it’s not like there was….

Eigabroadt: There were two phases of adjustments that were a result of some of the negotiations that had taken place. I think one of them was yours right, one of the phase adjustments or was that someone else.

Rogers: I got one adjustment, yes. It was supposed to be a two-phase adjustment, one phase came in 04 after it was adopted by Town Meeting, phase I went into place after Town Meeting and then phase II was supposed to be …… adjustment that needed to made for 05 because the increase would have been to much for the budget in 04. So there was a phase II for some employees, some employees did get them.

Eigabroadt: Because I thought on the phase II adjustment I only saw one adjustment.

Hartman: I think there were two Wayne, Wendy was one.

TA: That’s why a definite process should be in place, there’s got to be consistency in place, so there’s not the feeling department pitted against department. When the scale was put in there is always the factor of how much can the Town afford, and that’s a huge factor.

Rogers: And that was brought into question with these towns and their per capita income and all these things. And Warner always felt kind of in the middle of being able to afford compared to the other towns. But I can’t be concerned with the other departments, if one department wants to say everyone walks on water you know that’s for you to deal with them.

Eigabroadt: Exactly, you can’t be concerned with it, but we have to.

Rogers: That’s correct; I understand that and that should not be a penalty against my department.

Eigabroadt: It’s not, what I’m telling you, I’m not going to do yours in an arbitrary way, and I’m not going to do theirs in an arbitrary way, we are going to pick the legitimate way of doing it, which is to get the documentation, facts and figures to back it up. We’re not just going to do it because Judy says so or Paul says so or Allan says so. We are going to do it in the proper way, do the research, get the documentation and if that research and documentation shows that that position is paid properly it will stay there, but if that documentation and research shows based what she does that it needs to be higher then the adjustment will be made.

Rogers: I’m not saying that you would do it arbitrarily. What I’m saying is I’m sitting here asking for us to work this out and to not put it on hold so that these other departments can also be looked at. What I’m asking you to do is to work with me so that we can get this adjusted for the next budget season.

Cook: Judy you’re not the only one who has asked us to do that.

Rogers: I understand

Cook: And so if we, my feeling is if we start doing it for one or two departments we have to do everybody, it would be unfair to do it hit or miss or those that request it. I think it’s not fair to the employees then whose department hasn’t requested it. We just can’t pick and choose how we are going to look at this. We’ve got to do everybody in the same manner and to do that at this time of year its just not gonna happen.

Rogers: I understand that

Eigabroadt: But we are going to do it, I do agree with you, I think it’s to low but I need to prove it and back it up.

Rogers: I need to keep my employee

TA: But I think that the other Department Heads are feeling the same way that….

Rogers: Then why aren’t they sitting here

TA: They have sent in requests

Rogers: A few have

TA: Right

Rogers: I understand

Eigabroadt: Judy, I know you’re frustrated and I know you’re upset but there’s only so much time in a day and we are mired.

Rogers: I understand that, that’s why I did it early before your memo came out, before your salary discussion even started, so it could be considered.

Eigabroadt: And we did consider it and this is the plan of action that we’re coming up with. We’ve got to do it all; we just can’t pick and choose.

Rogers: Can I get it in writing, your decision about how you’re going to handle this, can I have it in writing please.

Hartman: I think that’s a fair request.

TA: The minutes

Rogers: The minutes are not totally…………

Hartman: The minutes will be a basis to recollect. Laura I’m sure will be able to put together the process we are going to try to live by.

TA: For next year? That process is not going to be available within 72 hours, but for this part of the minutes we can just ask Mary to make sure they are pretty much verbatim and that gives you the discussion that took place on this, which I would turn around and write out anyway.

Rogers: Is the Board going to be issuing some kind of a statement so that all the Department Heads know that you know Judy’s been in here complaining again.

Eigabroadt: There is a Department Head meeting next Tuesday. We will be talking about it then.

Rogers: Thank you

The Selectmen discussed health insurance stipends. It was agreed to adjust the stipends by 34% of the Town’s annual cost per plan, no adjustment has been made for two years. The TA will create the total cost for stipends (1 family plan, 2 2-person plan).

Barbara Annis met with the Selectmen and commented how well the Planning Board meeting went the prior evening. Mike Tardiff from Central New Hampshire Planning Commission recommended that the Corridor Study be adopted by the Planning Board at a Public Hearing. Mrs. Annis explained to Mr. Tardiff that Smart Growth wanted the Charrette to be adopted and if the Planning Board adopts one and not the other where does the Board stand. Mr. Tardiff explained that the Corridor Study is factual, it is based on aerial photos it shows the property lines and it is based on a true traffic study. The Charette is conceptual. It is hard to adopt something that is conceptual; you can adopt something that is factual. The Planning Board did not see it that way, and it was voted down. Mr. Serell commented at the Planning Board meeting that he knew of nothing in the RSA’s in which the Planning Board could do something like that. Mr. Eubank commented at the Planning Board meeting to have both plans in the Master Plan because Mike Tardiff, Don Gartrell, Lucy St. John and Dominick Savaro recommended it. Dan Eubank will work with Smart Growth to create the verbiage for Planning Board’s approval. The Planning Board did accept the Corridor Study; a letter will be sent from the Planning Board to Department of Transportation explaining that it will become part of the Master Plan. The Corridor Study has been forwarded to the Department of Transportation, which will then be forwarded to the Traffic Department for review. The Corridor Study does state that a traffic light is needed at the Exit 9 area. Possible funding: applying for a grant (1/3 Town – 2/3 State Bobby Barry Grant), another is exaction fees for new development. The Corridor Study recommends widening the road at the exit 9 area also. Mrs. Annis encourages the Board to begin a Capital Reserve Fund for the traffic light.

Mrs. Annis asked the Selectmen if there has been any further thought regarding deeding the right of way of Town property to the Bock property. Selectman Cook recollects the Board would be willing to sell the lot to the highest bidder. The Board felt that if Town land is for sale it had to be for sale to the general public. Mrs. Annis said that process is going against Town Policy. More discussion is needed.

Motion to adjourn 11:35 a.m.

Board of Selectmen

Wayne Eigabroadt – Chairman
David E. Hartman
Richard A. Cook