Select Board hears Personnel Board debate over SAP amendment procedure and printing in town code

The Town of Southborough Select Board on March 4 heard the Personnel Board present proposed changes to the Salary Administration Plan (SAP), including a contested provision, Section 18, that would affect how amendments introduced from the town meeting floor are handled.

Jason Llanoski, chair of the Personnel Board, told the Select Board the current SAP redline packet contains mostly “lighter in touch” changes this year but called out Section 18 as warranting discussion because it could limit the moderator’s handling of floor amendments and could prevent voters from proposing on-the-floor changes. “Right now…this would not be permissible, at least if you just follow the SAP,” Llanoski said, urging the Select Board to consider how the SAP’s wording interacts with moderator precedent.

Nut graf: The dispute centers on whether the SAP should include a procedural bar that gives the Personnel Board time to analyze and recommend on amendments before they take effect, or whether town meeting voters should retain the same amendment rights they exercise on other warrant articles. That choice affects the balance between technical coherence of the SAP and direct voter control at town meeting.

In discussion, Select Board members expressed split views. Several officials said the Personnel Board’s role is to ensure the SAP is internally consistent across positions and stipends and that allowing ad hoc edits at town meeting could create conflicting or unintended changes. Others, including some who have introduced or supported past on-the-floor amendments, said they trust town meeting voters to reject frivolous proposals and favored removing restrictive language.

Marguerite (Select Board member) said the Personnel Board will vote on Section 18 at its Monday meeting and asked the Select Board to provide any strong views for the Personnel Board to consider. Llanoski said the Personnel Board had not yet taken a formal position because members wanted legal clarity about how the language would work in practice.

The Personnel Board also asked the Select Board for input on where the SAP should be referenced in the town code. The town clerk recommended a single-line reference with the full SAP kept on file in the clerk’s office; Personnel Board members and Select Board members discussed whether adding the SAP text to the town code would make it easier for residents to find but noted a potential administrative downside of infrequent code updates.

No formal changes were voted at the March 4 meeting. The Personnel Board intends to take a vote at its next meeting and will return with a recommendation to the Select Board and, if printed in the warrant, to town meeting.

Ending: The Select Board asked members to flag any strong positions to Llanoski before the Personnel Board’s vote. If the Personnel Board votes to retain Section 18, the SAP with that language will be printed in the warrant; if not, the town clerk indicated the language could be omitted and an individual could attempt a floor amendment at town meeting.