In my continuing coverage of what the Select Board hopes to tackle this year, I’m providing context on goals that were under “HR & Organizational Development”.
The most notable is “Abolish the Public Works Planning Board”. Based on their discussion the board may seek to replace the board rather than simply eliminate it.
As I previously noted, the goal setting meeting was only in-person (not recorded) and minutes don’t provide discussion/context around the goals. But I can provide context on this goal based on other public discussions before and after they adopted it.
Abolish Public Works Planning Board (PWPB)
This week, the Planning Board, which appoints 2/5 of the members, discussed concerns over the intent and potential impact of the goal. They want to ensure that they are involved in the decision about what to present to voters.
At the Select Board’s July 11th meeting, Chair Andrew Dennington stated that the goal was his idea. He followed that it didn’t preclude the concept of another committee to help the DPW, including on issues like Recycling. But he agreed with member Kathy Cook that the current structure is “weird”.
Member Al Hamilton argued that the board should be trying to “simplify the lines of authority”. While the DPW reports to the Select Board, the PWPB (its advisory board) is appointed by the Moderator and the Planning Board.
Member Sam Stivers also serves on the PWPB and has advocated for the board to take a much more active and wide ranging role. He said he would vote “to abolish myself” but that they need to “find the right language”.
Later that night, Dennington opined that the efforts should wait until spring rather than pursuing a vote on it in the fall.* He wanted to give the new Director a chance to give feedback on what type of sounding board would be helpful. (DPW Superintendent Bill Cundiff didn’t start until July 24th.)
On Monday, Planning Board Chair Meme Luttrell informed her board about the goal to abolish the PWPB. She acknowledged some talk of a replacement, but she reported that Hamilton wanted to see it eliminated and planned to write an Article for Annual Town Meeting.
Eliminating or changing the PWPB would require Town Meeting to authorize the Select Board to ask the state legislature to modify the special act for its founding charter.
Planning members were upset to hear that the Select Board had agreed on that goal without first reaching out to the PWPB’s appointing authorities. After discussion their concerns, members agreed that they should send a letter to the Select Board asking to be involved in any Article being written.
PWPB origins and recent controversy
The PWPB was created in 1991 as part of the consolidation of Town departments for trees, highway, water and cemetery as the Department of Public Works. The Select Board was put in charge of the DPW and PWPB was charged with advising them “in matters of planning, managing and financing”.
Current Chair Bill Boland, who has been criticized for rarely holding meetings in the past few years has argued that the charter is outdated and should have sunsetted after the transitioning departments were successfully integrated.
In recent years, the PWPB came under fire for not doing enough to provide oversight/advice to the DPW and transparency for the public on DPW projects. (And for violating Open Meeting Law.) Boland publicly punched back at critics, arguing that the board’s role isn’t oversight.
Boland claimed that if either the DPW chief or Select Board had requested their advice on a matter the PWPB would have provided it. He didn’t believe they had a proactive role to play.
In public discussions, it became clear that the Select Board had assumed the PWPB was unwilling to provide advice. (On some matters they turned to Capital Planning. That’s something that has continued as the asked the committee to research road and sidewalk projects to recommend.)
The Select Board publicly called for the PWPB to help vet the Hopkinton Water Connection proposal. But after PWPB held a joint meeting with Capital Planning on the project, both boards were surprised to learn that former Advisory member John Butler had been enlisted by then-Select Board Chair (Cook) to study the same issue and report to the Select Board.
When the Select Board held a discussion with Boland in November about how his board could be used, he made it clear they were unhappy with a past history of studying issues only to have their recommendations ignored by the Select Board. He wanted to make sure his board’s time wasn’t wasted. But he indicated they would act at the Select Board’s request.
But at that time, Dennington pushed to wait until a new chief was hired and in place to decide how the PWPB should be used.
This week, Planning Board members appeared to feel blindsided by what they viewed as an unexpected shift in the Select Board’s position on the issue. But at least one member’s change was previewed this spring.
A Citizen Petition Article by Patricia Burns Fiore called for changing the authority for who appoints members to the PWPB. She was unhappy that one person (the moderator) is able to appoint the majority of seats. She sought to shift those seats to be appointed by the Planning Board and Board of Health.
At Town Meeting, John Butler opposed the Article arguing that the problem with the ineffectual board wasn’t the appointing authority but it’s charge. Cook followed by agreeing with Butler and said the issue of the strange charge would be on an upcoming Select Board agenda. (The Article failed.)
Replace or abolish?
Boland has repeatedly pointed out that the police and fire departments don’t have advisory boards. That perspective was echoed by Butler in his Town Meeting comments.
But it’s worth noting that fire and police are the exceptions to the rule. (And even they worked with two committees for creation of their Public Safety Building.)
Almost every department/position has a board that oversees, advises, or collaborates with them. (Assessors, Building & Zoning, Conservation, Economic Development, Health, Library, Planning, Senior Center, Schools, Technology, and Youth & Family Services.) The Town Administrator team has to work with the Personnel Board on issues related to their Human Resources role and the Advisory Committee advises voters on whether or not they agree with the budgets proposed by the Administration and Finance team.
In November, Cook remarked to Boland that the former DPW head had “more going on than any dept in this town probably besides maybe the schools. So I can’t believe you can’t have a monthly meeting where there’s a robust discussion about all kinds of projects.”
Planning Board & Public Response
Planning’s Debbie DeMuria, who is also a member of PWPB, referred to the different structures that other Towns have for handling DPW issues. She indicated that she was open to working with the Select Board on a proposed replacement. But simply eliminating it would create less transparency. Other members supported her position.
Their main concern was making sure that whatever change is sought is through collaboration with their board.
Moderator Paul Cimino was invited to participate in the discussion as the other appointing authority. He said that he trusted the Select Board to make the right decision about what board/committee is needed/not needed to advise them.
Cimino chose not to sign onto the Planning Board’s letter. But he followed that if the Select Board wanted his input, he would get involved.
Tim Litt made a public comment at each board’s meeting. He argued that if the Town is going to seek a special act from the state, they should make sure to address all of the problems that need fixing and not just the board. That included designating an appointed Tree Warden rather than having it be the Select Board. In the Planning discussion, he added that a replacement committee should be a committee under the Town bylaws. That would allow the Town to make changes as needed in the future.
Fiore indicated to Planning that she believed the PWPB could be effective with the right members. But she said that she would support the change if Planning believed it would create a more effective replacement:
the DPW is such a large use of our taxpayer funds. It controls a huge portion of the budget. it controls a huge portion of the work that is done in this town, and there is a lot of input that should go into that. . . however the best way is to resolve that, I’m all behind it. but I would hate to see that committee go away so that there is not that additional avenue of input for the kinds of things that the DPW does, the money that they control and the projects that they oversee in the town.
Additional HR & Organizational Development goals
The other goals and tasks on the board’s list for this category were:
- Enhanced staff training
- Support revision standardization or Job descriptions by Personnel Board
- Create policies manual, and handbooks for Depts and employees
- Additional tasks:
- Performance review process update
*The fall vote would have been at a Special Town Meeting the Select Board had considered holding in October. This was just one of the potential Articles.
