Wellfleet Personnel Board
Minutes of Meeting of June 4, 2002
Town Hall, 2nd Floor Conference Room
Present: Lisa Benson, Chair; Sue Peters, Ken Kimball, Deborah Davis; Tim Smith,
Town Administrator; Rex Peterson, Assistant Town Administrator
Chair Benson called the meeting to order at 4:32 p.m.
Discussion with Tim Smith: The Board had invited Mr. Smith to this meeting to cover questions stemming from an earlier meeting (see minutes of 4/30/02). Chair Benson explained that members of the Personnel Board had expressed themselves unsure of what they were recommending when they voted to recommend a warrant article proposing a new position, since they did not feel that it was Personnel Board's province to recommend financially. She added that it was felt that the Town perceives the Board's recommendation as a mandate to fill the position. The Board wished to consider:
Procedure for placing newly proposed positions on the Town Meeting Warrant
Inclusion of newly proposed positions in departmental budgets
Employee performance evaluations
Mr. Smith stated that the BOS has jurisdiction over the warrant, that he presents the proposals for new positions to the Selectmen and they decide whether or not to place them on the warrant (#1). He commented that in Wellfleet, historically, new positions are presented in warrant articles and that this practice is supported by the BOS and FinCom; he, however, would prefer that new positions be introduced as budget items (#2). It is his responsibility to present the town budget to FinCom, the BOS, and other agencies, and he would rather have the money for any newly proposed position placed in the context of a departmental budget than in a warrant article.
Ms. Benson wondered if there were a way other than that used at present to word Personnel Board's involvement in the recommendation of a new position. Ken Kimball stated that Personnel Board's job is to analyze a position, to make sure it understands the position and its function, and to learn more about it by requesting information from the appropriate department. In the cases where the Board is asked to recommend, he felt that it would be a good idea to be able to give the public as much information as possible about the proposed position. Smith commented that the financial aspect of a new position is political; he remains neutral about whether a position is needed and is not involved in supporting one area or another. Kimball agreed that when the Board is asked for a
recommendation that it becomes political and repeated that it would be very valuable for the Board to have more data. Sue Peters asked if the warrant could contain two votes from Personnel board: one containing the grade assigned to the position and the other to recommend to the town. Chair Benson stated that Personnel Board reviews positions but has nothing to do with deciding that they are necessary, but Ken Kimball pointed out that the recommendation on the warrant article is for the necessity of the position and that Personnel Board has the expertise to make a decision about this. Benson pointed out the ambiguity of the vote--that if Personnel Board votes no on a position, it might mean that the decision is financial or it might mean the Board lacks information. Smith stated that he would like to see the Town follow the letter of the Charter so that new positions would go into the budget rather than be presented as articles; he added that getting
positions approved has become political rather than being part of the budget process.
Sue Peters moved that Personnel Board recommend to the Board of Selectmen that proposed new positions be included in the departmental budgets with an explanation from the Town Administrator rather than being introduced as warrant articles. Ken Kimball seconded; the motion passed unanimously 4-0. Deb Davis stated that FinCom would like to see all benefits fully stated in the budget so that it is clear what the totals for the new positions would be.
Ken Kimball asked Smith if he could suggest ways in which the Board could make better decisions on new positions, adding that, if needed, the Board could develop a standard checklist. Lisa Benson suggested a standard sheet of guidelines for a department head to follow when writing up a new position for presentation. Deb Davis asked if there were suggested guidelines for getting rid of a position.
Mr. Smith and the Board considered the last discussion item, employee performance evaluations (#3). Smith commented that in a large organization, such evaluations make sense as a "weeding-out process," although they can be detrimental. He does not see them as useful in Wellfleet, which uses a step system for advancement. He added that he has tried in his meetings with his department heads to impress upon them the fact that they need to know and work with their people. Chair Benson stated that in her experience staff members were pleased with evaluations, which gave them items against which to measure their performance. She continued that evaluations were also helpful to department heads and that a system that contributes to the whole department is beneficial.
Sue Peters added that meeting in a formal situation is helpful and makes the discussion of both problems and new ideas possible. Ken Kimball saw benefits in sitting down with employees and looking at yearly objectives from both the supervisor's and the employee's points of view, plus conducting a follow-up on the discussion to determine what objectives had been accomplished. Sue Peters added that in the Board's previous interviews of Wellfleet department heads, the conclusion had been reached that morale was quite low and that department heads might try to assume leadership roles through such a "mutual feedback program." Chair Benson asked Smith if it would be appropriate for Personnel Board to draft a description of this type of evaluation. Although pointing out that evaluation at this time is a contractual issue with set procedures (e.g., a case of a supervisor who is unhappy with an employee's performance), Smith stated that he would be
willing to take a look at any proposal.
Other Business
Tim Smith announced that Ken Kimball had been named Chair of the newly formed Public Safety Review Committee; the Board offered congratulations to Mr. Kimball.
Deborah Davis introduced a discussion of the State's proposal that Wellfleet increase its reserve fund, a recommendation that it be 10% of the operating budget. Smith pointed out the danger of increasing the stabilization fund in that "if it's there, we'll spend it," and commented that because Wellfleet's debt level is low, the level of this fund is not a problem.
It was decided that the Board was not prepared to discuss the agenda item of discussion of changes in the OMNI questionnaire. Chair Benson suggested going through the questionnaire at the next meeting and deciding on procedure, perhaps working together on the first few items.
Assistant Town Administrator Rex Peterson, in connection with his suggestion that the Board consider the descriptions of part-time, temporary employees, distributed copies of the Personnel Bylaw definitions of EMPLOYEE, REGULAR FULL-TIME EMPLOYEE, REGULAR PART-TIME EMPLOYEE, and TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE. Discussion ensued, touching upon problems of what constituted temporary help in the various departments, e.g., shellfish, police, marina. Stating that the definition for TEMPORARY EMPLOYEE has caused difficulty because of differing interpretations, Peterson suggested that the Board study the definitions and come up with suggestions to improve them and remove any ambiguities. Chair Brown proposed looking at other towns' definitions for seasonal temps and placed this item on
the agenda for the next meeting.
It was decided that the sum of $88.37 left in this fiscal year's budget should be turned back to the town.
Minutes of 4/30/02--Sue Peters moved and Deborah Davis seconded approval of the minutes of 4/30/02 as amended. Passed unanimously, 4-0.
Personnel Board still needs one more member; the Chair urged members to recruit likely candidates.
Peterson informed the Board that it would be receiving job descriptions from the Recreation Department, not for OMNI grading but for review and approval. He will let Becky Rosenberg know that the Board will conduct this review at its next meeting.
The next meeting of the Personnel Board will be Monday, June 17, at 4:30 p.m.
Sue Peters moved for adjournment; Chair Benson seconded. The meeting adjourned at 6:05 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
_____________________________ _____________________________
Frances J. Castillo, Assistant to the Lisa Benson, Chair
Committee Secretary
| 