Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Richmond staff proposes 12‑month administrative assistant (ARPA-funded pilot) to manage grants and special projects
Summary
Town staff proposed a temporary 25‑hour/week administrative assistant, funded in part by ARPA, to handle grant management, reimbursements, minutes and short projects. The board approved a pilot concept but asked for clear performance metrics, budgetary implications for FY26, and clarification on the packet's cost figure before committing ongoing funds.
Town staff presented a follow‑up proposal on June 17 to create a temporary administrative assistant role to relieve workload pressures in the town manager’s office and to manage an expanding portfolio of grants and special projects.
Position proposal and funding: Staff proposed a 12‑month, 25‑hour/week temporary position to be funded using ARPA or other one‑time sources for this fiscal period. The packet listed an estimated total payment that staff read as "about $334,000 to $336,000" for the period; board members treated that figure with caution and asked staff to confirm the calculation because it appeared inconsistent with a 25‑hours/week temporary position. Staff clarified the role would be hourly without benefits for the trial period and suggested later budget discussions (FY26) would determine whether to make the role permanent.
Duties and anticipated benefits: The role would take over grant administration, invoice tracking, reimbursements (FEMA, FHWA), production of minutes, and special projects to free the town manager and assistant town manager to focus on higher‑priority work. Staff argued the position could improve timeliness of reimbursements, reduce backlog on grant tasks and allow more proactive management of ongoing recovery and programmatic grants.
Board response and conditions: Select Board members expressed support for a time‑limited pilot but asked that staff: (1) confirm the correct cost estimate and hourly rate (staff suggested $23–$24/hour in discussion), (2) set measurable performance targets and reporting back during the next budget cycle, and (3) avoid creating an implicit ongoing commitment without a formal FY26 budget decision. Several members recommended treating the hire as a pilot funded by one‑time ARPA money and then assessing payback in terms of recovered grant reimbursements and improved project delivery.
What's next: The board voted to approve the temporary position concept and directed staff to bring final job description, recruitment approach and clarified budget numbers to a future meeting so the board can evaluate outcomes when setting the FY26 budget.
