TOWN OF OLD LYME
BOARD OF SELECTMEN
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES
Monday 27 July 2015 – 4pm
Meeting Hall, Old Lyme Memorial Town Hall
A Special Meeting of the Old Lyme Board of Selectmen took place at 4pm on 27 July 2015 in the Meeting Hall of the Memorial Town Hall. First Selectwoman Bonnie Reemsnyder, Selectwoman Mary Jo Nosal, and Selectman Skip Sibley were present.
Also present was Attorney Patrick McHale.
- Consider recommendation to proceed with Rte. 156/Sound View Improvements DOT Project #104-172
First Selectwoman Reemsnyder summarized the status of the Rte. 156/Sound View Improvements project. A Public Information Session on the project was held on June 30 and attended by approximately 60 people. Comments on the project were accepted during a two week period following the session.
Comments fell into three main categories: 1) positive comments encouraging the Town to proceed; 2) expressions of concern that the public restrooms and green on Hartford Avenue would not be part of the first phase of the project; 3) comments expressing concern about reduced parking.
The Rte. 156/Sound View Improvements Committee voted on July 7 to make a recommendation to the Board of Selectmen to proceed with the project. Selectman Sibley believed that vote was premature because the comment period had not yet closed. The Committee met at 8am on the morning of 27 July and voted unanimously to recommend proceeding with the project.
A motion was made by Selectwoman Nosal to proceed to final design on the project. First Selectwoman Reemsnyder seconded the motion.
Selectwoman Nosal noted that the Committee had considered and discussed all comments received on the project. All the comments will be summarized and published on the Town website. She thanked all who took the time to comment.
Selectman Sibley called the 45 minute discussion at the morning Committee meeting very worthwhile.
Motion passed.
- Hearing for Step 2 on Police Grievances Number 2015-2, 2015-3, 2015-4, 2015-6, 2015-7, 2015-8, and 2015-9
Police Officers Martin Lane and Tom Heinssen, and Police Union representative John Miller presented grievances to the Board of Selectmen.
Grievances 2015-2, 2015-3, 2015-4, 2015-6, 2015-7, 2015-8 state that Officer Lane was not offered overtime and/or DUI overtime assignments on June 4, 5, 6, 18, or 19 in violation of Contract provisions in Article XII, Section 5, and Article XIV, Sections 3 and 4. He asserts he should be paid for the missed opportunities.
Attorney McHale noted that at the time of Grievances 2015-2 and 2015-3, Officer Lane was on leave due to a work related injury.
Officer Lane asserted that the Resident State Trooper, TFC Inglis, was aware by 3:45pm on June 3 that he had been medically cleared to return to duty.
Attorney McHale ascertained that the duty schedule had been prepared on June 3, and that TFC Inglis had delegated assignment of shifts to Police union members Solari and Zipadelli.
Officer Heinssen said it had been the department’s practice for several years to offer overtime assignments to off duty officers.
Attorney McHale said the situations in 2015-2 and 2015-3 are unique because the schedule was set on June 3, and Officer Lane returned to duty on June 4. He asked which provision in the contract prohibits the Town from scheduling shifts in advance. Attorney McHale stated the position of management is that the schedule was set before Officer Lane was eligible to return to duty.
Grievance 2015-4 and 2015-6 state that Officer Lane was not offered overtime slots on June 6. Officer Heinssen’s shift that day was changed from evenings to days. Officer Lane was off duty and asserts that he should have been offered the overtime day shift. Resident State Trooper Inglis worked an 8 hour DUI overtime shift and Officer Lane asserts he should have been offered the DUI shift. Past practice has been to offer DUI shifts to off duty officers.
Selectman Sibley noted that an evening overtime shift was offered to and declined by Officer Lane for the same day. Officer Lane said he could not accept a regular evening shift because of a family obligation. The start time for a DUI shift is more flexible and he would have been able to accept a DUI shift, but a DUI shift was not offered. There is an 8 hour window for DUI shifts which can start anytime between 5 and 8pm. Regular evening shifts begin at 3:45pm.
Selectwoman Nosal said there is a higher pay rate for DUI than for regular overtime, and asked if the officers’ priority is to protect and serve or is it about the money.
Attorney McHale stated the decision about whether to fill a shift is up to the Town. He said the Town’s priority is to fill patrol shifts first, and that nothing in the contract provides for DUI coverage.
Officers Lane and Heinssen stated that DUI coverage dates are specified in the DUI Grant. Officer Heinssen said DUI coverage has always been important to the Town. He said he had tried to show the Resident State Trooper how shift scheduling had been handled in the past. Attorney McHale asked if Officer Heinssen believes the past practice is the only fair way to handle scheduling.
Grievances 2015-7 and 2015-8 state that Officer Martin Lane was off duty due to a vacation day and was not offered one DUI shift that went unfilled on June 18, and another DUI shift that was worked by TFC Inglis on June 19. Past practice has been to offer DUI shifts to officers on vacation or holiday.
First Selectwoman Reemsnyder said she has a written statement from Officer Solari that he phoned Officer Lane to offer DUI shifts on those dates. Officer Lane says he was not offered the shifts.
Officer Heinssen said the scheduling documentation shows no written notation that those shifts were offered to Officer Lane. The First Selectwoman said she understands when an officer is on vacation a notation may not always be made. She told Attorney McHale she will ask Officer Solari for clarification of the procedure when an officer is on vacation.
Grievance 2015-9 asserts that Officer Tom Heinssen was not paid for a cancelled Private Duty assignment in violation of Contract provisions in Article XIV. Office Heinssen was assigned to Private Duty for Eversource on June 1 and 2. The Eversource assignment was cancelled shortly after he reported for duty on June 1. He was subsequently reassigned to another private duty job for the same time period. Officer Heinssen said the police contract calls for 4 hours minimum pay for private duty cancelled without 24 hour notice. He asserts he should be paid for 8 hours for the cancelled assignment.
Officers Heinssen and Lane stated that similar circumstances have happened occasionally and Attorney McHale asked for specifics.
Selectwoman Reemsnyder said a question had been raised in the Finance Department when Officer Heinssen’s timesheet listed two private duty assignments on the same date and time. The question was referred to the Resident State Trooper for clarification.
Officer Heinssen did not know he had not been paid for the cancelled private duty until he received his pay notice for the period.
Selectman Sibley asked if there had been a seamless transition between Officer Heinssen’s release from one job and reassignment to another. Officer Heinssen said he was heading home for the day when he was offered the reassignment although he was still in Old Lyme.
Selectwoman Nosal asked about the timing requirements for the filing of Grievances. The Selectmen are considering Grievances in Step 2 of the process.
Grievances must be filed initially within 10 days of an occurrence. The Board of Selectmen will meet with Attorney McHale to further discuss the Grievances. They are allowed to meet privately because the matter falls under collective bargaining.
- Review State Police Contract w/ Atty. Patrick McHale
The Town’s current contract with the State Police for Resident State Trooper services has been extended to the end of July. Deadlines were extended while the legislature finalized the State Budget. Towns will now pay 85% of the cost of service, an increase from 70%.
Attorney McHale reviewed the contract, raising points in specific sections. He explained that inconsistencies between requirements in the State Police Contract and the Town’s collective bargaining agreement must be reported to the State.
Assignments: The Town should clarify that it delegates scheduling of assignments to the Resident State Trooper; that Grants are the Town’s responsibility, and that the Resident State Trooper makes grant related assignments.
Reports and Records: The Contract requires that all State Police related FOI requests be made to the State Police. The State Police should also be responsible for any complaints related to those requests. Attorney McHale suggests the Town ask for indemnification for matters arising from those FOI requests and/or complaints.
Chain of Command: Attorney McHale noted the importance of communication between a Resident State Trooper and the First Selectman. Because Resident State Troopers may also have Troop responsibilities that require their absence from the town, Towns should have the right to request reassignment of a particular Trooper.
Administrative Responsibilities: Because of the Town’s responsibility to maintain personnel records, the Resident State Trooper should be required to forward entry level discipline records, including performance observation reports and counseling reports, to the Town.
Evaluation: Finance Director Nicole Stajduhar indicated to Attorney McHale that she was not aware of a work performance procedure in place. Attorney McHale said the Resident State Trooper should provide information that would be needed for a work performance evaluation to the Town.
Indemnification: Attorney McHale reiterated that the State requires indemnification from the
actions of Town employees, and the Town should request indemnification from the actions of state employees.
Attorney McHale will draft a letter stating the Town’s concerns with the State Police Contract. He said it will be good to have a record of those concerns should any issues arise. First Selectwoman Reemsnyder said the concerns may impact future Contracts even if changes are not made to the one currently under consideration.
Selectman Sibley suggested that the First Selectwoman share the letter of concerns with CCM, our State Representative and our State Senator.
A motion was made by Selectman Sibley to adjourn at 5:35pm. The motion was seconded by Selectwoman Nosal.
Catherine Frank
7/28/15
| 
