One raised eyebrow for Linda Cook for putting Chief Robinson in an unfair position by asking him whether he had been pressured by the Town Manager to sign the "Open Letter" advocating for the ABC Dairy site.
She's effectively asking him to take sides between two bosses, the TM on the one hand and the SB majority who voted not to pursue the ABC Dairy site on the other. If, in fact, the town department heads have felt pressured to toe the line, asking one of them point blank to acknowledge that in a private conversation effectively asks an employee you feel is being threatened with potential retaliation to do something that would trigger retaliation without any of the protections of a formal SB inquiry.
There's no question the Selectboard, acting as a whole, has the authority to pursue questions such as were apparently raised by Linda Cook. At 24 VSA Section 1237, Vermont law makes provision for the Selectboard to "cause the affairs of any town office or the conduct of any officer or employee thereof to be examined. They may compel the attendance of witnesses, the production of books, papers, and other evidence." But Linda should have taken up those questions in a Selectboard meeting and only pursued them in the context of a formal Selectboard decision to do so.
A corresponding eyebrow raised for our Town Manager who, after making the point that Cook's questions put a town employee in an unfair position, asserts a grasping view of his own position relative to the SB: "It also undermines the authority and responsibilities of the Town Manager and clearly exceeds the authority of a member of the Selectboard. The Town Manager works for the Selectboard; all other non-elected employees work for the Town Manager."
By statute, "In all matters [a town manager] shall be subject to the direction and supervision and shall hold office at the will of such selectmen, who, by majority vote, may remove him at any time for cause." 24 VSA Sec. 1233
The Town Manager works for the Selectboard to administrate the town's affairs. Non-elected town employees work for the Town and the supervision and conditions of their work are administrated by the Town Manager. It may see like a trivial distinction, but the Town Manager position exists solely to assist the legislative representatives of the town in administrating the town's affairs. If the Selectboard is worried about intimidation of town employees by a town manager, Vermont law clearly gives the Selectboard, acting as a body, the authority to investigate and act upon their findings with or without the assistance of that town manager. They are not the Town Manager's employees, they are the Town's employees and so is the Town Manager, all ultimately accountable to the Selectboard acting as a body.
Another raised eyebrow for our Town Manager in managing the entire woodlot question as he did.
It would surprise me greatly if the TM didn't know of the established practice of distributing firewood to needy households by the Town Service Officer. In fact, I would bet one reason the Norwich Wood Fuel Assistance Program policy was drafted was to bring authority over firewood distribution under the Town Manager in an explicit break with tradition. If so -- and knowing the wood was removed by someone with keys to the woodlot -- why on earth call the cops instead of just asking the folks who have distributed the wood in past years? Thoughtful adults without an axe to grind might simply call the Town Service Officer, confirm the facts, and remind her of the new policy. If that didn't suffice, raising the issue in the next SB meeting as a matter of reminding everyone how the town's policy has changed should have done the trick.
Instead, the entire matter was played to maximum effect.
First a police investigation of a possible theft. With the humble results of that investigation in hand -- and having stirred the pot by prompting public inquiries on the listserv -- the Town Manager nevertheless neglected to inform listserv readers that there had been no theft after all, despite at least two specific requests for more information posted by townspeople well after Chief Robinson's conclusions had been reported to the Town Manager.
Why?
Allowing the matter to fester publicly has likely discredited the firewood assistance program itself by creating an appearance that the wood collected was squandered. Worse, in my mind, it put all this year's firewood recipients in an awful position, knowing they had received firewood assistance but having that distribution treated publicly like a theft.
At best, this smacks of ham-handed bureaucratic insensitivity. At worst, it suggests a deliberate effort by a town employee to publicly discredit an elected town official.
I think we're all sorry this can of worms ever opened.
She's effectively asking him to take sides between two bosses, the TM on the one hand and the SB majority who voted not to pursue the ABC Dairy site on the other. If, in fact, the town department heads have felt pressured to toe the line, asking one of them point blank to acknowledge that in a private conversation effectively asks an employee you feel is being threatened with potential retaliation to do something that would trigger retaliation without any of the protections of a formal SB inquiry.
There's no question the Selectboard, acting as a whole, has the authority to pursue questions such as were apparently raised by Linda Cook. At 24 VSA Section 1237, Vermont law makes provision for the Selectboard to "cause the affairs of any town office or the conduct of any officer or employee thereof to be examined. They may compel the attendance of witnesses, the production of books, papers, and other evidence." But Linda should have taken up those questions in a Selectboard meeting and only pursued them in the context of a formal Selectboard decision to do so.
A corresponding eyebrow raised for our Town Manager who, after making the point that Cook's questions put a town employee in an unfair position, asserts a grasping view of his own position relative to the SB: "It also undermines the authority and responsibilities of the Town Manager and clearly exceeds the authority of a member of the Selectboard. The Town Manager works for the Selectboard; all other non-elected employees work for the Town Manager."
By statute, "In all matters [a town manager] shall be subject to the direction and supervision and shall hold office at the will of such selectmen, who, by majority vote, may remove him at any time for cause." 24 VSA Sec. 1233
The Town Manager works for the Selectboard to administrate the town's affairs. Non-elected town employees work for the Town and the supervision and conditions of their work are administrated by the Town Manager. It may see like a trivial distinction, but the Town Manager position exists solely to assist the legislative representatives of the town in administrating the town's affairs. If the Selectboard is worried about intimidation of town employees by a town manager, Vermont law clearly gives the Selectboard, acting as a body, the authority to investigate and act upon their findings with or without the assistance of that town manager. They are not the Town Manager's employees, they are the Town's employees and so is the Town Manager, all ultimately accountable to the Selectboard acting as a body.
Another raised eyebrow for our Town Manager in managing the entire woodlot question as he did.
It would surprise me greatly if the TM didn't know of the established practice of distributing firewood to needy households by the Town Service Officer. In fact, I would bet one reason the Norwich Wood Fuel Assistance Program policy was drafted was to bring authority over firewood distribution under the Town Manager in an explicit break with tradition. If so -- and knowing the wood was removed by someone with keys to the woodlot -- why on earth call the cops instead of just asking the folks who have distributed the wood in past years? Thoughtful adults without an axe to grind might simply call the Town Service Officer, confirm the facts, and remind her of the new policy. If that didn't suffice, raising the issue in the next SB meeting as a matter of reminding everyone how the town's policy has changed should have done the trick.
Instead, the entire matter was played to maximum effect.
First a police investigation of a possible theft. With the humble results of that investigation in hand -- and having stirred the pot by prompting public inquiries on the listserv -- the Town Manager nevertheless neglected to inform listserv readers that there had been no theft after all, despite at least two specific requests for more information posted by townspeople well after Chief Robinson's conclusions had been reported to the Town Manager.
Why?
Allowing the matter to fester publicly has likely discredited the firewood assistance program itself by creating an appearance that the wood collected was squandered. Worse, in my mind, it put all this year's firewood recipients in an awful position, knowing they had received firewood assistance but having that distribution treated publicly like a theft.
At best, this smacks of ham-handed bureaucratic insensitivity. At worst, it suggests a deliberate effort by a town employee to publicly discredit an elected town official.
I think we're all sorry this can of worms ever opened.
2 comments:
I am pretty sure that this can only be the Watt Alexander who clerked for Judge Parker. If it is, drop me a line. I would love to catch up. Billi brmccullough@hollandhart.com
nice post thanks for update
Post a Comment