Comment: Two important items missing from the Selectboard packet

I am going to whine. Two important items are missing from the Selectboard packet for the meeting on Wednesday evening, December 4th.

1. Proposed budget for FYE 2021. Budget discussions kick off on Wednesday, with a presentation by the DPW, followed by "Board Discussion/Possible Action".  No budget numbers are in the Selectboard packet or on the Town's website. The Selectboard had the budget proposal two weeks ago, but the public does not.
2. Town Manager's written report for November. I thought a written report of the Town Manager's activities for the prior month was "expected" at the first Selectboard meeting of the following month. The last report I located was for August, 2019, buried in the Selectboard packet for September 11.  My modest review indicates that since March, written reports were also not in the Selectboard packets for March 13, June 12 or July 10. (My count is six months of nine.) The last Town Manager report on the Town's website is for July 2016. Not a typo ... over three years ago. The public should not be in the dark.

I am disappointed, even though the omissions are very likely oversights due to the press of other business. Yes, the website and packet materials are primarily the responsibility of the the Town Manager. But the Selectboard is the boss. If the website is out of date, if materials do not make it to the packet, or if reports are not being written, that's a shortcoming of the Selectboard as well.
==================
Posted on HereCast on: 12.04.2019.

Thank You, Norwich Selectboard

Norwich Selectboard meeting 1/23/19. Source: CATV screen shot.

If you see a Norwich Selectboard member, shake her or his hand and thank the Selectboard member for the hard work on the budget.  Even if you disagree with the final product.  †

This was no ordinary budget year. The Selectboard rolled up its sleeves, donned a green eyeshade, sharpened its pencils, and got down to work

It wasn't all peaches and cream. To quote John Pepper's blog, there were "moments of tension and WTF-ness." That is to be expected. 

I don't agree with every decision made.  That is to be expected too. 

Board members came to the meetings prepared and with thoughtful points of view. Discussions were not driven by the Town Manager or one or two members of the Selectboard. That was my impression, from watching the various meetings on CATV.  

I appreciate the diligent effort. Thank you, Norwich Selectboard.

=============

†  If you want to contribute as a Selectboard member, there is still time to run for one of the two Selectboard seats up for election this year. Deadline is Monday. See Information for Candidates for Local Office.

Published on HereCast on 01.26.19

Fire District Increases, By 50%, Hydrant Rental Fee Paid By Town

The Norwich Fire District set at $18,000 the Hydrant Rental Fee (now known as the Town Fire Protection charge) that it will charge the Town this year, according to draft meeting minutes of the Prudential Committee meeting of October 22. Last year the hydrant rental fee was $11,700, although during budget discussions, the Fire District told the Selectboard to expect the increase.

Both amounts, $18,000 and $11,700, deserve review by the Selectboard. The amount of $18,057 was placed in the budget with the understanding that the Town might need to pay up to that amount, but had not agreed to do so. At least that is my recollection.

It not clear how this Selectboard and the Town Manager will approach the issue. Last budget season, Selectboard member Stephen Flanders questioned the amount of the hydrant rental fee, even at $11,7000. In a memorandum to the Selectboard, in the January 10 2018 Selectboard packet, Mr. Flanders, who has since retired from the Selectboard, suggested $7,000 was an appropriate amount using a cost approach. He recommended an "interim budget figure of $18K, until an agreement is reached" between the Fire District and the Town. 

About 10 months ago, I discussed the hydrant rental fee in a series of four blog posts, How to pay for fire hydrants?. Part I, Part II and Part II-A are located here , here and here.  Part III is here and raises a number of points for the Selectboard to consider. 

As discussed in those blog posts, hydrant rental fees, also known as fire protection charges**, are a legitimate charge.  As currently operated, the Fire District is in essence a water company that provides drinking water to customers and delivers water for fighting fires. To perform the latter, a water company needs added infrastructure in order to provide the high flows and pressures needed to fight fires, such as larger pipes, larger reservoirs and more powerful pumps. That is what the hydrant rental fee is presumably supposed to cover.  

However, of the 67 hydrants of the Fire District, few hydrants, if any, serve the area outside of Village. Plus, the Fire Department already pays for the water to fill its tanker truck. On the other hand, the Town does not pay any property tax to the Fire District. That 'may' mean the Town gets all its water at a discount. See Did you know: The Fire District Charges Property Taxes 

Mr. Flanders' memorandum raised two questions. First, is the amount the Fire District allocates to fire protection overhead, $90,000, appropriate, when maintenance of the hydrants costs $35,000? Second, why should Town taxpayers cover 20% of that $90,000, when the hydrants are all located in the Village. The memo also noted that the Fire District allocation formulas were "based on judgment and rule of thumb," meaning to me, back-of-the-envelope. 

I don't know what is an appropriate amount. A first step might be to see how other municipalities in Vermont  approach the matter. 

In Part III of my blog post,  the opening paragraph says: 

Has the Fire District made a convincing case for the Town paying hydrant rental of over $18,000? If the Selectboard serious about being cost conscious, then it needs to take a hard look at this expense. So far, the Selectboard has not.

Ten months later, it seems the Selectboard is no further along.

===============

** The Fire District now labels the hydrant rental fee as "Town Fire Protection" charge per the draft meeting minutes. 

Originally published on the dailyUV.

Town Proposes $23,000 Gift To Norwich Fire District For Sidewalk Repairs

Sidewalks need repair and maintenance and that takes money.  Many years ago, our Norwich  forefathers decided that the homes and businesses in the Village, rather than the entire Town, should pay for the Village sidewalks. Hence, the Norwich Fire District, a special municipal entity that can tax and spend, is responsible for most sidewalks in its geographic area.  Today, the District’s principle purpose is to supply potable water to approximately 310 homes and 20 commercial businesses in the Village, but the sidewalk responsibility is not unusual for Fire Districts in Vermont.
On Wednesday, July 29, the Selectboard will consider two proposals that will shift the responsibility for the sidewalks from the Fire District to the Town.    Item 8 on  the Selectboard agenda for its meeting sounds innocuous  — “Main Street Sidewalk from Hazen Street to Koch Road” — but these proposals will increase taxes for Town taxpayers.  Both proposals shortcut the democratic process without much analysis of the pros and cons.

The first proposal is that the Town pay $23,000 for sidewalk repairs that should be paid by the Norwich Fire District. Call the payment what you like, but the money will not be repaid, and that is simply a gift from the taxpayers of Norwich, Vermont to the Fire District.  I doubt the gift was part of the budget approved by the voters at Town Meeting in March, but I could be wrong.  For budgetary reasons, the Town has not funded the sidewalk reserve fund for several years, so its sidewalk budget is not flush.  If the Norwich Fire District budget is tight this year, because of the pump house fire, then the Town should be patient and tackle the work next year or after fire insurance issues are resolved.

The second proposal carries the recommendation of the Town Manager and is for the Town to take over ownership and the ongoing responsibility to repair and maintain sidewalks of the Fire District.  This is a complete reversal of the cost sharing policy that our Norwich forefathers established.  However, nothing in the packet explains why a change is justified, other than that the Town previously assumed responsibility for some sidewalks from the Fire District.  The cost to the Town is not clear; nor is it clear why the Fire District can not raise the money in the coming years, as it has done in the past.
Both proposals deserve an airing when the agenda description gives better notice to the public.  A vote of the public at Town meeting is appropriate before the Town takes over the obligation of the Fire District.

More information about Fire Districts in Vermont is available at the Colchester Fire District No. 1 web site.

The portion of the Selectboard packet relating to sidewalks is here.


LINKS
http://www.cfd1.org/about_fire_districts.html
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5p_pfaeTTstNzkzUXgyWDVSWlU/view?usp=sharing

Weekly Roundup - Norwich News, for week ending March 9, 2013

Election March 2013

All budgets and other articles passed. Incumbents survived in all uncontested races. Of significant note was the passage of Article 34, petitioned on the ballot by Norwich residents and opposed by the Town Manager.  The bond vote was largely viewed as a referendum on whether Norwich or VTel should build and own the emergency communication tower.  Voters resoundingly supported Town ownership with 689 voting yes to 341 voting no.

Official Election Results
Official election results for Norwich are on the Town web site.
LINK: http://norwich.vt.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/VotingResults030513.pdf

Dresden Teachers Contracts, Budgets Pass
By Sarah Brubeck, Valley News Staff Writer
March 6, 2013
After going two years without a contract, Dresden and Hanover teachers yesterday won voter approval for new contracts as residents also approved the Hanover and Dresden school budgets and all accompanying warrant articles.
The Dresden contract passed by a ratio of 2-to-1 with 1,221 in favor and 574 against, and the Hanover contract passed 584-198.
Hanover School Board Chairman Robin Carpenter said he wasn’t surprised by the overwhelming support for the Hanover and Dresden districts, but the margins were larger than he had guessed.
“When an article is in trouble there is a buzz about it, letters to the editor and phone calls. I didn’t get any of that,” Carpenter said.
Read the rest of the story.
LINK:
http://www.vnews.com/news/4908909-95/hanover-contract-dresden-teachers

Norwich Balks At Tower Deal
By Sarah Brubeck, Valley News Staff Writer
March 6, 2013
 Voters sent a firm message to the Selectboard yesterday by voting overwhelmingly in favor of borrowing money to build a communication tower rather than have the town partner on the project with a private firm.
Selectman Steve Flanders, who in the past has supported the agreement with Springfield, Vt.-based VTel, said last night that the results likely means that the town would try to fund and manage the construction of the tower on its own.
“I will respect the fact that I’m pretty sure that the people voting thought that the town should have the tower itself instead of going through VTel and I will proceed with that expectation,” Flanders said.
Selectboard Chairman Christopher Ashley and Selectwoman Linda Cook both stood in front of the polls yesterday with signs that said they each supported the warning article for the communication tower.
Read the rest of the story.
LINK:
http://www.vnews.com/news/4876377-95/town-tower-vtel-selectboard?ID=abcde&CSAuthResp=62892%3A24547117%3A248%3A15%3A24%3Asuccess%3ADDA9E51B83A1515E8EF9F989E9729525

Shumlin taps Michael Kainen as State’s Attorney

By Christian Avard, Rutland Herald Staff Writer
March 09, 2013
Gov. Peter Shumlin appointed Michael Kainen as Windsor County state’s attorney on Friday.
Kainen is an Orange County deputy state’s attorney in Chelsea and ill replace Robert Sand who will be assisting the Department of Public Safety in redefining drunk-driving sentencing and treatment efforts in Vermont.
Kainen was informed of the governor’s decision Thursday. He will begin his new job March 23 and said he is pleased to represent Windsor County.
“I’m happy to have the appointment,” Kainen said. “I’ll be working on some transition items while in White River Junction and button up what’s left up here in Orange County and go from there.”
Shumlin said in a statement that Kainen is known for his common-sense approach to law and is seen by many as a consensus builder. Kainen attributed these traits to Sand, with whom he worked at the state’s attorney’s office in Windsor County for 15 years.
Windsor County Democrats nominated Kainen and Windsor County Deputy State’s Attorney David Cahill of Norwich as candidates to succeed Sand. The committee thought both candidates were well qualified for the job.
Cahill also heard about the governor’s selection Thursday and congratulated Kainen in his new role.
“It was a hard fought campaign among colleagues and I wish him the best,” Cahill said in an email. “It was an honor to have earned the trust and confidence of the many people who do the difficult, often thankless work of delivering justice to crime victims, offenders, and the taxpaying public. I look forward to playing a continued role in public service and in modernizing our criminal justice system for the benefit of all of its stakeholders.”
Read the rest of the story.
LINK:
http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20130309/NEWS02/703099914/1003

VTDigger Named Best Political Blog in Vermont 

Kudos to VTDigger for being named by Washington Post as the best political blog in Vermont for 2013.  In 2011, VTDigger shared the honor with Green Mountain Daily and Vermont Daily Briefing.
The VTDigger story is here and the Washington Post's 50 state rundown is here.
LINKS:
http://vtdigger.org/2013/03/06/washpo-puts-vtdigger-on-best-state-based-political-blog-list/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/03/05/the-fixs-best-state-based-political-blogs-list-is-here/

A subscription may be required for access to the Valley News stories.

Town Meeting 2013

Norwich Divided Over Tower

By Sarah Brubeck, Valley News Staff Writer
March 5, 2013
Residents and Selectboard members last night were once again divided over whether a proposed communication tower should be owned by VTel or the town, and they haggled over salary increases for some department heads.

More than 160 people filled Tracy Hall for the discussion portion of Norwich’s Town Meeting, with voting to take place by Australian ballot today from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.

After a 40-minute budget presentation by Town Manager Neil Fulton, Town Treasurer Cheryl Lindberg, a member of the Norwich Finance Committee, noted that the panel voted 4-0 not to support the proposed budget. In the town report, the Finance Committee cited large salary increases for several town employees.

The proposed $4 million municipal budget is essentially flat this year and is $10,000 less than the current budget. The budget includes large salary increases for the planning, finance and recreations directors of about 14 percent, 19 percent and 27 percent, respectively.

Selectboard Chairman Christopher Ashley soon stood up and spoke his mind.

“Our director of planning, director of finance and our director of recreation, I think we owe them a legitimate salary on what they currently do,” Ashley said.

But as is accustomed in Norwich, not all agreed. Both Selectboard members Linda Cook and Keith Moran said they didn’t support the increases because they didn’t think a $15,000 salary-comparison study conducted by Condrey & Associates for the town was accurate.

Read the rest of the story.
LINK:
http://www.vnews.com/home/4873651-95/town-tower-norwich-vtel

A subscription may be required for access to the Valley News stories. 

Norwich, VT 05055 

Wage Increases In The Budget Are Way Too Much

Seven full-time Town employees that primarily work from Tracy Hall will be receiving raises that average over 16%, if the budget is approved by voters.  For context, police officers in Norwich are getting a 3.68% increase in pay.  My Social Security check went up 1.7% this year.  Wall Street bonuses rose 8% in 2012.

Call me a Tea Party wannabe, but those bumps (jumps!) in pay strike me as imprudent. Norwich faces significant but not budgeted expenditures in the coming years: $200,000 for communication gear on the Tower (with or without VTel), at least $500,000 for record restoration, and $2 million for a new police and fire station. These are spread over years but the cumulative budget impact is unknown. 

The uncertainty is not just for big ticket items.  Union contracts expire this June.  We might add hours for an assistant Town Clerk. In addition, the Town Manager wants to let employees choose cash in lieu of benefits, which no doubt will cost the Town more.  And, health care costs in 2014 will be more uncertain than usual as Norwich is required to be part of a health exchange.  

The Condrey and Associates report was not cheap, costing $15,000. Norwich has 20 full-time employees, 9 of which are in a union.  Why did  the Town need to hire an international consulting firm to develop a plan for 11 non-union workers? That is over $1300 per employee. 

Admittedly, the study covered union and part-time employees, making the total 29.  But if Norwich needs an expert from afar to set part-time wages, then the Town Manager is not doing his job.  Union pay is set through negotiations, not by reference to a study. 

The Town did not hire a consultant for advice on economic terms with VTel.  Negotiating a tower lease must be at least as complicated as setting wages.

Town Manager Fulton wanted a classification and compensation plan to treat employees uniformly. He told me that a prior Town Manager had gone “local and cheap” and got little to show for it, wasting $6000. However, as noted in the Valley News, getting Norwich to adopt a step-and-grade compensation plan is a project Mr. Fulton "has been working on since 2002,” when he was on the Selectboard.  Was it needed? If so, a flawed consultant’s report is not the way to go. 

For critiques of the Condrey and Associates report, check out the Finance Committee listserv post on March 1, Harry Roberts letter to the Selectboard on November 30,  my blog post from January 17 and the charts on the municipalities surveyed by Condrey and Associates and on the percent increase in pay.

How did the Selectboard and Town Manager respond to the outcry about jumps in pay? They reduced spending by $50,000.  But only $4800 was cut from salaries -- less than 1.4% of the amounts involved and only from three employees. Seven employees are getting big increases.   The Selectboard approved the budget by a 3-2 vote. (Moran and Cook voted no).

The elephant in the room is the Town Manager's pay.  At over $97,000, he makes nearly 23% more than the next highest employee.  The pay is a stretch for Norwich but circumstances support it. But, it is not a basis to give big raises to others, particularly when the Finance Committee cannot justify the increases after looking at market data. Similarly, if the Town is overpaying some employees, that needs to be sorted out over time.   Defter management and Selectboard vigilance for taxpayers seems a better course than simply handing out big raises.

To me, it almost appears as if  some members of the Selectboard are afraid to say “no” to the Town Manager, rather than fight for the taxpayers. Telling is the action of the Selectboard regarding the Town Manager's pay.  On January 9, the Selectboard approved a cost of living increase. Town Manager Fulton said the increase was “unacceptable” and reflected poorly on his performance, because it  was $614 less than the “scale” set by Condrey and Associates. CATV [01/09/13 Selectboard, minute 211- 220]; Valley News.  

At the next meeting on January 16.  the Town Manager presented a revised budget, making the cuts in  the dollar amount - $50000 - the Selectboard requested.  What was ADDED to the budget was the full amount the Town Manager wanted, not the lesser amount the Selectboard had approved by a vote a week earlier. No member of the Selectboard called the Town Manager out on this action.  

LINKS:

http://catv8.org/videos-demand.html 

http://lists.valley.net/lists/arc/norwich/2013-03/msg00017.html

http://norwich.vt.us/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/SBc121130-Roberts.pdf

http://norwichobserver.blogspot.com/2013/01/salary-study-by-condrey-associates.html

http://norwichobserver.blogspot.com/2013/02/towns-in-salary-study.html

http://norwichobserver.blogspot.com/2013/02/percent-increase-in-wages.html

http://www.vnews.com/news/3766559-95/fulton-budget-selectboard-town

http://www.vnews.com/news/townbytown/norwich/4397511-95/town-budget-selectboard-increase

A subscription may be required for access to the Valley News stories. 

The Norwich Finance Committee Position On The Town Budget

2013-2014 Proposed Norwich Town Budget:

The Norwich Finance Committee voted 4-0 (one member was absent from the meeting and two seats are vacant) not to support the proposed Norwich Town Budget.

Members of the Committee are concerned that the large raises proposed for several positions are excessive and, as currently proposed, are not supported by a majority of voters based on voter feedback provided to members of the Committee. An annual VLCT survey of Vermont Municipal Director Elected positions based on 2011 data, shows that Vermont towns with populations under 5,000 generally paid Municipal Director positions between approximately $32,000 and $60,000.  The inflation adjusted salaries proposed in the FY14 budget are at the top end of that range ($57,422), but the data does not demonstrate a compelling need to increase the salaries of these positions to be in line with other communities. The current salaries for the Norwich positions are in the mid- to high-$40Ks, which is squarely within the survey range.  In addition, the Consultant used by the Town justified the raises based upon three local Towns with much larger populations (and much larger overall budgets) than Norwich’s:  Hanover, Lebanon, and Hartford. The Consultant’s report appears to be designed to support a predetermined outcome as opposed to providing an objective analysis.  Accordingly, the survey also does not demonstrate a compelling need to increase the Director or Elected position salaries by such large percentages.  The Committee is not opposed to the objective of equalizing town employee pay, but is opposed to making large increases all in one year when the town tax rate is already increasing by approximately 6% (before other monetary articles).  Furthermore, lack of turnover in these Town positions supports the opinion that the positions are not significantly underpaid.
In addition, while members of the Committee appreciate the Selectboard’s willingness to reexamine the budget to reduce the initially proposed 10.65% tax rate increase to approximately a 6% increase, the Committee urges the Selectboard to critically evaluate the needs (versus wants) to provide a necessary level of services to the town and find additional ways to reduce the budget.


Norwich Finance Committee
Nate Stearns, Chair

Published on the Norwich listserv on March 1, 2013
http://lists.valley.net/lists/arc/norwich

Percent Increase In Wages

This Chart shows the increase by percent in wages for each of the stated positions.  Benefits are not included.  

Position	Last Yr. Increase %	Proposed Increase %
Town Manager	16.5	8.77
Town Manager Asst	18.35	7.79
Town Clerk	3.50	15.25
Finance Director	5.00	18.52
Finance Asst	108.00	23.97
Planning Director	3.50	13.90
Planning Asst	3.50	26.12
Recreation Director	3.50	26.51
Police Chief	3.00	4.00
Fire Chief	6.28	1.76
Director of Public Works	3.50	3.16
Social Security	3.60	1.70

All "Proposed Increase %" numbers are as reported in the recently released Town Report for 2012.  The numbers listed in "Last Yr. Increase %" are from the 2011 Town Report.  Social Security numbers are from SSA.gov/cola.

Weekly Roundup - Norwich News, for week ending February 16, 2013

CoreValue Software Helps Small and Medium Businesses Find Value

CoreValue Software in Norwich, VT, co-founded by Chuck Richards and Lisa Kable, creates web-based software to help owners of private companies build valuable companies. A profile of the firm appeared on February 10, 2013 in the Valley News.

Finding Hidden Value: Norwich Firm Helps Small Businesses Figure Out What They're Worth 
By Warren Johnston Valley News Staff
February 10, 2013
The mission of CoreValue Software is easy to see, although it’s not readily apparent.
Clues — large photographs of aged, closed factories, steam locomotives, rusted, discarded machinery — populate the office walls of the global company that operates in the back of a two-story building with no sign on Main Street to announce its presence.
However, even the poster-sized black-and-white photos don’t give a clear picture of what CoreValue is about. The bright office, functionally furnished with sensible desks and chairs, computers, an occasional dog bowl under a desk and bags of canine treats covering an entry shelf, could house any number of businesses — perhaps a real estate firm that sells off shuttered or dying factories or an equipment brokerage that finds buyers for obsolete machines.
But instead of hovering over the decaying carcasses of outmoded industries, CoreValue’s plan is to swoop and save them with a software program that makes closely held small- and medium-sized businesses look deeply at their operations with an eye on the future.
“The photographs are a reminder of what we do, and what we’re trying to prevent,” said Lisa Kable, the president of CoreValue, who co-founded the company with Chief Executive Officer Chuck Richards.
“We feel like we’re reaching and helping business owners, and when they transfer their business, it will be a net job generator — that the business will do well and jobs will be created,” Kable said.

Read the rest of the story.
CoreValue Software Web Site
LINKS:
http://www.vnews.com/home/4102921-95/business-corevalue-businesses-companies
http://www.corevaluesoftware.com/

Former Chef at Carpenter &  Main In Minneapolis

"Man, this guy can cook" reports the Star Tribune

Lynn on Bryant: A neighborhood gem of a restaurant
By Rick Nelson, Star Tribune
February 14, 2013

REVIEW: A transplanted Vermont chef sets up a great-looking shop in south Minneapolis. Are there more chefs like him?

The Twin Cities area has more than its share of local-chefs-made-good stories, but the culinary scene has also prospered from the fresh perspectives and enviable skills brought here by gifted out-of-towners.

Including Peter Ireland. The Vermont native cooked for big-name chefs in Chicago, New York and France — then ran his own acclaimed restaurant, Carpenter & Main, in his hometown of Norwich, Vt. — before relocating to Minneapolis (where his wife, Rebecca, was enrolled in law school) and opening the Lynn on Bryant.

The name is a reference to the surrounding Lynnhurst neighborhood. That only seems right, since the Lynn is billed as a neighborhood restaurant, and its breakfast-lunch-dinner format bears that out. But with Ireland at the helm, it’s also so much more.

Man, this guy can cook. The menu is tightly focused. At dinner, it’s just six appetizers and as many entrees, which could feel limited, but doesn’t. What makes the Lynn such a remarkable dining experience is Ireland’s intrinsic ability to subtly manipulate and balance outcomes up and down the continuums of flavor and texture: bitter-sweet, tangy-mellow, crispy-silky; all masterfully exploited.

Read the rest of the story.
LINK:
http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/taste/191058101.html?refer=y

Preview Of Town Meeting

Sarah Brubeck of the Valley News nicely summarizes the big topics for Town Meting 2013

Cell Tower On Warning In Norwich

By Sarah Brubeck Valley News Staff Writer
February 14, 2013

Norwich town and school budgets will be discussed Monday, March 4 at 7 p.m. in Tracy Hall. Voting for town officers and all warning articles will be done by Australian ballot on Tuesday, March 5 from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. at Tracy Hall.

Norwich — This year’s Town Meeting warning isn’t lacking for controversy with one nonbinding article that would authorize the Selectboard to spend $275,000 to build a new communications tower, undercutting a deal the Selectboard struck with a private telecommunications company.

Voters will also decide whether an assistant town clerk who has been working full time will have her hours reduced to part time.

The tower flap started last fall when the Selectboard authorized Town Manager Neil Fulton to sign a letter of intent with VTel, a Springfield, Vt.-based telecommunications company, that would allow the firm to lease property on New Boston Road in order to build a communications tower to provide high-speed Internet service to the area. In return, the town could freely use the tower to upgrade radio communication among the police, fire and public works departments.

Norwich residents petitioned the article that calls on the town to build and own the tower itself. Proponents said passage would show the Selectboard that there is widespread opposition in town over the deal with VTel. The article is not legally binding, however, and if it does pass ... .

Read the rest of the story.
LINK:
http://www.vnews.com/news/townbytown/norwich/4397511-95/town-budget-selectboard-increase

Towns in Salary Study [Revised]

This table is the population, density and municipal budget of the seven towns used in the Condrey and Associates report, as well as Norwich. 

Municipalities	Population	Density pop/sq mile	Current Budget approx
Charlotte	3569	70.9	$2,800,000
Dorset	2036	42.6	1,300,000
Hanover	11,331	229.7	22,400,000
Hartford	10,367	225.9	19,100,000
Hartland	3223	71.4	2,200,000
Lebanon	13,643	326.2	35,700,000
Norwich	3,544	79.2	4,300,000
Woodstock	3,232	72.5	4,000,000

Population and density from government sources.  Budget numbers culled from various internet sources and are APPROXIMATE.  Budget numbers revised 334 PST.

All municipalities are in the Upper Valley, except Dorset (Bennington County, VT) and Charlotte (Chittenden County, VT).

Weekly Roundup - Norwich News, for week ending January 19, 2013

from the Wall Street Journal

Kearney returns with a win

Olympic champion Hannah Kearney made a successful return to the moguls World Cup circuit Thursday with a win in the ASANA Freestyle Cup at Whiteface Mountain.

Kearney missed the first two World Cup races this season after fracturing two ribs during a training crash in Switzerland in October.

"I expected myself to pick up where I left off, and I think I did," Kearney said. "I think that's what I'm the most proud of, both with the results and my skiing."

Kearney, of Norwich, Vt., has won the moguls event at Whiteface Mountain four straight years. Last season, she was the overall World Cup leader and set the record for most consecutive World Cup victories in moguls with 16, dating back to the previous season.

from the Valley News:


Kearney A Winner In Return: Norwich Native Takes First Race Since Injury
Friday, January 18, 2013

Wilmington, n.y. — Three months ago, Hannah Kearney was lying in a basket dangling from a helicopter high above a glacier in Switzerland. And she wasn’t sightseeing. The Olympic moguls champion fell hard after landing a jump while training in Zermatt in early October. Her head and knees were OK. But it felt like someone had kicked her in the …

Norwich Board OKs Budget
Thursday, January 17, 2013

Norwich — The Selectboard knocked down proposed salary increases for three department heads, but the planning, finance and recreation directors will still receive pay increases of 13, 18 and 26 percent, respectively. Town Manager Neil Fulton’s proposed budget included large salary increases for several department heads based on a compensation analysis that was done by Condrey & Associates, which was hired by the …

School Budgets Shape Up
Tuesday, January 15, 2013

Hanover — Norwich and Hanover school boards are in the home stretch of finalizing their budgets, which they plan to adopt by the end of the month. Along with the budgets, residents will also be asked to approve teacher contracts for all three districts, which in some cases could increase taxes. The Hanover School District is proposing a $11.6 million budget, which is …

LINKS

http://online.wsj.com/article/AP505b4cba9dec4564b32cf9eb962f24b1.html

http://www.vnews.com/news/townbytown/norwich/

Salary Study By Condrey & Associates

from the listserv:
 Mon, 14 Jan 2013

Condrey & Associates Report 

Preparing a budget and reviewing it are tough jobs.  Nevertheless, I share concerns expressed by others about the Condrey & Associates Report being the basis for salary increases for department heads.  For those who want to read the Report, it begins at page 54 of the FY14 Budget Information packet available on the Town's website under Selectboard.  

The biggest problem I have is that Condrey & Associates surveyed only 7 municipalities for data. See Table I at page 3 of the Report.  Those 7 municipalities form the "relevant labor market" for the Report and are viewed as "similar municipal organizations".  Three of those municipalities -- Hartford, Hanover and Lebanon -- are nothing like Norwich.  One Town, Charlotte, is in Chittenden County.  Another, Dorset, is located in Bennington County.   How and why these municipalities were selected is not evident in the report.  

While pay for hourly municipal workers in Hartford, Hanover and Lebanon might be relevant for Norwich hourly employees, I doubt we compete for hourly workers with the Towns of Charlotte and Dorset.  For department heads, I don't think Hartford, Hanover and Lebanon are direct correlations. The smallest of these three municipalities has more than two and one-half times the population of Norwich.  Bigger towns have bigger budgets and bigger problems.  Department heads have different responsibilities and require different skill sets. The Report, without any analysis, presents three options.  The apparent recommendation is Plan C, characterized as "approximately 94% of the relevant labor market."  Report at page 10.  How and why 94% is a good number is not stated in the Report.  It is simply a naked number.  I  would have expected much more to justify a pay raise of 18 - 31%. 

Finally, the use of the salary scale seems selective.  The budget proposes a salary of $59,704 for our for Finance, Planning and Recreation Directors.  According to the salary chart, that is a Grade 21 Job, at Step A.  See Table C  Plus  2% at page 15.   The Town Manager position is Grade 25.  According to the salary scale, the salary for Grade 25, Step A is $88,631.07.  However, based on Saturday’s Valley News article, the Town Manager says he is underpaid, at $95,000.  Plus, according to the Condrey & Associates pay scale at Step A, the Fire Chief is underpaid but two other department heads are overpaid under the proposed budget.  How and when will those pay levels be addressed?

Thanks for reading.

Chris Katucki 

Agenda - Special Selectboard Meeting - January 16, 2013

Agenda for the Special Selectboard Meeting of Wednesday, January 16, 2013 at 6:30 PM

(Times Are Approximate)

1)    Possible Bond Article for Tower and Communications System Improvements for Town Meeting Warning (Discussion/Possible Action Item) 20 minutes

2)    FY14 Budget (Discussion/Action Item) 45 minutes

3)    Selectboard

a)    Review of Next Agenda (Discussion/Possible Action Item) 5 minutes

b)    Personnel (Executive Session May be Required)