Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Union and building‑department employees urge board to halt outside hires; Town approves appointments after public comment and request for executive session
Summary
CSEA and two building-department employees told the board that in-house, reachable candidates were skipped in favor of outside hires to two Plans Examiner 1 positions. The board heard public testimony alleging unfair treatment and asked staff to consider an executive-session review while proceeding to approve the appointments at the meeting.
Item 46 — a set of appointment and personnel resolutions — drew public comment from union representatives and longtime building‑department staff. Tom McDonough, president of CSEA Unit 7555, urged the board to vote no on two specific appointment items (46‑6 and 46‑7), saying two internal employees who have been performing plan‑examination duties and who were reachable on the civil‑service list were passed over for outside hires. McDonough said the two in‑house employees have direct experience, longevity and institutional knowledge and that skipping reachable internal candidates undermines morale and the civil‑service expectations.
Two town employees who said they were passed over, Doris Rendon and Paul Vateri, described their qualifications and asked that the appointments be halted pending investigation. Rendon said she has performed plan‑examiner work since 2018, holds a bachelor’s degree in architecture and a master’s in project management, and was told she was "not qualified" despite long service and responsibilities that include stamp approvals. Vateri said he scored number 1 on the placement exam and has done plan‑examination duties for years; he said he was told his recent time off for family illness was the reason he was bypassed. Both asked for a formal review and for the board to pause the appointments.
A motion to go into executive session to discuss personnel was made; council members discussed the appropriate next step. Ultimately the board moved forward with the personnel resolution at the public meeting and adopted Item 46. The town attorney cautioned about discussing personnel details on the public record; the board proceeded with the scheduled vote but public commenters asked for follow‑up and a more formal investigation mechanism. The board did not provide details of any personnel records or disciplinary findings during the public session.
The town’s personnel action will stand unless the board or the appropriate administrative procedures produce a different result after any internal or union‑agreement processes. The public comments recorded a request for a formal review; staff and the union may pursue the contractual grievance process or an internal investigation as provided under civil‑service and collective‑bargaining rules.
