SOUTHWICK — The Select Board was supposed to discuss the possibility of renewing the personal contract with Town Accountant Laura Fletcher at its meeting on Aug. 3.
That, however, couldn’t happen after the board learned that the contract couldn’t be renewed without a performance evaluation.
“So, did we not kind of set the tone based on the town administrator’s [contract] evaluation issue … that we hadn’t done hers and this [contract] has similar language,” said Select Board member Russ Anderson.
His statement referred to Fletcher’s contract and the similar situation the board found itself in at its last meeting when it discussed renewing Nicole Parker’s contract, the town’s chief administrative officer.
At the board’s last meeting, it acknowledged it hadn’t conducted any evaluation of Parker’s performance, which limited its options regarding her continued employment with the town.
On Aug. 3, the board faced the same situation with Fletcher’s contract.
“The old contract had evaluations in it as well?” Anderson asked Nadine Cignoni, the town’s assistant CAO and director of human resources.
She nodded yes, which prompted a comment from Select Board member Joseph Deedy.
“Everyone got evaluations for all those years, right? Over the years, everyone. You got them back then,” Deedy said, looking over at Anderson, who served as the town’s fire chief for seven years before retiring in 2022.
“No,” answered Anderson.
“Nothing from [former CAO Karl Stinehart]?” Deedy asked Anderson.
Anderson then said he had tried to find any evaluations conducted by former select boards of Stinehart’s performance and couldn’t find any.
“Look, you guys didn’t do them on Karl either, did you?” Anderson specifically asked Deedy, who served nine years on the board between 2013 and 2022, when Stinehart was the town’s CAO.
“We had … I don’t feel like … goals and objectives, maybe?” Deedy answered.
Anderson said he had goals and objectives when serving as fire chief, but he was never evaluated.
He said that none of Stinehart’s previous evaluations had existed.
“They never did any. So, you guys were here. I wasn’t,” Anderson said, referring to Deedy and Select Board member Douglas Moglin, who has served on the board since 2015.
Anderson, referring to renewing Fletcher’s contract, then said he didn’t know how her contract could be renewed without an evaluation, since Parker’s contract couldn’t be renewed without one.
“If we change our message on this one, then that’s not being consistent,” Anderson said, adding that Fletcher’s contract could not be renewed without “knowing if that person met their goals …and we don’t know what those goals were.”
Cignoni jumped in and reminded the board that Parker, who didn’t attend the meeting, said that she didn’t feel comfortable conducting evaluations of others without being evaluated herself.
Anderson suggested tabling the matter until Parker returned.
Moglin turned to Deedy and asked whether he had anything else to add or whether he wanted to wait for Parker’s return.
“I don’t know,” Deedy said. “I guess, but I don’t know what that’s going to do. You know, either way, I don’t understand which way that would go, but obviously nobody wants to make a decision tonight.”
As for Parker’s contract, if the board evaluates Parker by June 17, 2027, and decides not to offer her a new contract, she will still be paid a salary of over $145,000 plus benefits because the board was required to notify Parker one year before the end of her three-year contract that it wouldn’t be renewed.
If the board conducts its evaluation of Parker before June 17, 2027, and decides it does not want to extend her contract, she will collect her salary and benefits through June 30, 2028.
In other board business, Moglin continued a discussion he started the week before about how the board handles public comments.
Currently, the board allows public comments at the beginning of the meeting with the caveat that comments can’t be on agenda items. Also, board members aren’t required, legally or otherwise, to respond to comments or answer questions posed to them during that portion of the meeting.
The discussion was prompted by the board’s meeting two weeks ago about the possible deployment of automatic license plate readers.
About 20 people attended the meeting, and at its beginning, two residents spoke out against the surveillance devices.
When the discussion on the automatic license plate readers began, Police Chief Rhett Bannish and Sgt. Michael Westcott explained how, why and when the department used a grant to purchase three of the devices.
Once they finished, many residents wanted to give their comments and ask questions.
Moglin allowed it, understanding that the topic had become controversial not only in town but across the country.
“Two weeks ago we wildly diverged from our normal format of a Select Board meeting; even for me, I thought it was productive. Everyone was courteous and respectful of each other, and we had a very good discussion that was very educational for all involved. The purpose wasn’t to change minds. It was to get information out there and share information as we had it,” he said.
Moglin suggested allowing comments on any item or issue at the beginning of each meeting and allowing residents to ask questions or offer opinions when an agenda item comes up for discussion.
“[Meetings] don’t necessarily need to be interactive or a back and forth or Q and A. We tend to do that. I think it’s just generally good government. And where we can answer questions, we will, and when we can’t because we may not have all the data right in front of us to give a fully qualified answer, we’ll get back to you, and if you’d like, we can present the data at our next meeting in public for everyone to hear it,” he said.
Anderson had no problem with Moglin’s suggestion except that he thought a podium for residents was needed. He also believed that a time limit should be established with the option to allow additional time, and that residents should be asked to use the sign-in sheets before the meeting starts.
The board didn’t vote to formalize the suggestions and left the topic open for additional discussion.
