0:07The project’s goal is to compare Newbury’s compensation with that of other towns in Essex County. Board members discussed the preliminary data Sandy had provided, although it was noted that some towns had yet to respond. The board debated whether to review the draft data independently before Sandy’s presentation or to wait for her guidance. Some members felt that preliminary review could lead to more informed questions, while others preferred to rely on Sandy’s expertise during her presentation to avoid misinterpretation. There was a shared understanding that Sandy’s role as a consultant was critical in synthesizing the data and offering insights that could shape the town’s strategic direction regarding compensation.

The board also examined philosophical considerations about where Newbury should position itself in the market regarding employee compensation. Concerns were raised about whether the town should aim for a competitive edge by positioning itself at the 75th percentile or settle for a more moderate ranking at the 50th percentile. Comparisons with nearby towns were discussed, with a report from Manchester providing context for the town’s standing across various categories.

In addition to the salary survey, the board addressed recent staffing changes in the town’s police and fire departments. Two resignations were noted: a full-time dispatcher from the police department and a full-time firefighter. The dispatcher resigned to pursue a career in law enforcement, while the firefighter left to focus on obtaining emergency medical technician (EMT) certification. These resignations prompted the need to post the positions for hiring. The board noted that a previous vacancy for a full-time patrolman had been filled by someone named James Fitzgerald.

13:00The meeting also covered the board’s ongoing dialogue with Town Administrator Tracy Blais, emphasizing the need for a preliminary meeting to refine the project focus before Sandy’s presentation. With a town population of about 6,300 residents and a workforce of approximately 60 employees, the board acknowledged the importance of tailoring Sandy’s analysis to Newbury’s specific needs. There was a consensus that a brief meeting with Tracy could enhance the understanding of the town’s unique circumstances and direct Sandy’s analysis more effectively.

25:16The board discussed logistical considerations for the upcoming meetings and presentations. Concerns were raised about potential scheduling conflicts, with some members unable to attend the February 24 meeting due to prior commitments. The possibility of rescheduling to March 3 was explored, contingent on the availability of Sandy and Tracy. Despite these challenges, there was a strong desire to maintain the original date to accommodate outside stakeholders.

Members expressed a desire to avoid potential violations of open meeting laws, preferring to minimize informal interactions to ensure transparency and compliance.

13:00In the final stages of the meeting, a suggestion was made to distribute the draft data for individual review without prior discussion among board members. This approach aimed to prepare members for a more informed discussion with Sandy, who would explain the data analysis, including average pay rates for various positions at different percentiles. The goal was to foster an informed discussion while respecting the dynamic of having a consultant who could provide valuable insights into the data and its implications for the town’s compensation strategies.