One notable issue during the meeting was the grievance process involving the police union and the position of a lieutenant within the department. The lieutenant expressed frustration over perceived unfair treatment in contract negotiations, particularly concerning his inclusion in the union’s detail and overtime rotation lists. The lieutenant stated he felt sidelined in discussions affecting his position, emphasizing the unchanged calling procedure and the lack of immediate grievance filing due to a split opinion among union members. He described the union’s decision as a “50/50 split.”

The lieutenant accused the union of attempting to undermine his position by creating two separate lists for details and overtime, which he interpreted as a move to limit his earning potential as a non-union employee. He remarked, “I think the objective is completely unfair and uncalled for,” indicating his belief that the union’s actions were motivated by an effort to restrict his opportunities. A union member responded, asserting, “the grievance process is certainly not a dirty laundry,” defending the established procedures and the legitimacy of their actions. The lieutenant suggested that the grievance handling and subsequent negotiations were being conducted improperly, stating, “I apologize to the public for having listened to our dirty laundry.”

Further complicating the matter, the lieutenant highlighted discrepancies arising when the union negotiated their contract without addressing the call-in procedure, which he felt should have included him. He challenged the union’s decision to renegotiate terms following the election of new board members. He cited an incident where a union e-board member allegedly told other employees it was “inappropriate and unethical” for him to negotiate his contract, viewing it as part of a broader pattern to marginalize his position.

As the dialogue progressed, a union representative clarified the agreement related to the lieutenant’s contract, stating that the police lieutenant would be eligible for overtime shifts only after all eligible union members had declined them, placing him at the bottom of the list. This representative argued that the union had negotiated in good faith and reiterated that the grievance process had been followed correctly. The lieutenant countered by emphasizing his unfair placement in a subordinate position on the lists and argued against restrictions limiting his ability to accept overtime or detail work.

Following this heated discussion, the board moved on to more routine matters. These included the approval of park reservations for GAA soccer practice and games at Brown Ellison Park and Du Frain Park from August 28 to November 15, 2024. The board addressed the matter of ensuring follow-up communication regarding the Town Administrator task force.

The board also tackled a proclamation related to the Constitution of the United States. A representative from the Daughters of the American Revolution presented handouts and requested the Select Board’s endorsement of a proclamation for Constitution Week, scheduled for September 17 to 23, 2024. The proclamation recognized the anniversary of the Constitution’s framing and called for public remembrance of its ideals. The board agreed to consider and sign the proclamation, with discussions indicating a willingness to commemorate the occasion.

In other business, George Randall from the Granby Firefighters Association spoke during the citizen participation segment, expressing gratitude to various individuals for their contributions to the unveiling of a 911 memorial. Randall thanked Mrs. Duin for representing the Select Board during the ceremony, complimenting her eloquence. He also acknowledged Jeremy Carrier and his staff, as well as the support of Chief O’Neal and Chief O’Grady for the project.

The meeting continued with the acceptance of departmental reports, the approval and signing of maintenance warrants, and the granting of a common victualer license to Rocking Ranch, doing business as Clara’s Coup. The board also addressed an Agricultural Preservation Restriction (APR) project led by Peter Kabasa, Trustee of the Lion Street Trust, agreeing to acknowledge the notice from the Massachusetts Department of Agricultural Resources and consenting to reduce the notification period for the APR project from 120 days to 60 days due to the time-sensitive nature of the closing.

Additionally, the board approved a revised special counsel contract, retaining the law firm of Me Talerman and Costa LLC as the town’s special counsel. A typographical error in the document was noted for correction.

The meeting also covered the town accountant situation, with a member reporting progress in contacting Markham out of Greenfield and discussing potential pricing for their services. The board planned to interview another individual, Mr. Quirk, if Markham’s pricing was not favorable, with a goal to have Mr. Quirk come in for an interview during the next regular meeting on the 23rd.

The board revisited the goals for fiscal year 2025, discussing the potential benefits of meeting quarterly with other boards, such as the school committee and finance committee, to discuss collaborative efforts to move Granby forward. They emphasized the importance of having a clear agenda for such meetings to avoid unfocused discussions.