My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8/20/1980 BOARD OF SELECTMEN Minutes
>
8/20/1980 BOARD OF SELECTMEN Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/13/2018 5:01:50 PM
Creation date
7/13/2018 3:54:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
BOARD OF SELECTMEN
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
08/20/1980
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Fi <br /> t <br /> that we move on to that subject.. <br /> h� i'rMan:- I ' ll subscript that bar once 'again sabring that -if anyone has <br /> anything they want to bring, written signed statement or <br /> charge, that' s what we are here for. <br /> 15. Chairman recognized Mr. Rich, Chairman of the Personnel Board. <br /> Mr. Rich stated that he had a few things he would like to go over. <br /> #1. we received a letter back on the mechanic wanting more recommendations. <br /> That as far as we can find, is not necessary, we found .only one <br /> person to be qualified and that' s the one person we recomme d .d. <br /> We have looked through the PAP and the bar-laws and it 's net necessary <br /> to recommend more than one. We -couldn' t find .one and for the sake <br /> of putting down another- name, I wouldn' t do it* <br /> hai-rman 'responded that this goes war back and the nut is this . The <br /> appointing authority is the Board of Selectmen. To have only re ommended <br /> one person to us out of 5, means that we can only select the one that- <br /> you gave us. We want .to retain for us- if you will, that obligation of <br /> appointing from a -series of 2 or 3 candidates . I . think what would -survice <br /> us is for you to say in the letter: The follo ing people have been <br /> interviewed and our -recommendation is Joe Peters . The following people <br /> are not qualified but they are and list their names. <br /> Mr, Rich stated that was acceptable <br /> Selectman Thomas sta.ted that when we just receive one name that you are <br /> more or less telling us who to appoint. You are not, giving us a choice. <br /> Chairman stated that the choice is obviously. <br /> Mr. Rich responded that they could reword their letter but that this <br /> man is qualified. I personally checked out where he work myself. <br /> chairman stated that the Board agrees and that it probably is,:-th <br /> intention of this Board to follow that recommendation but we just want <br /> to keep on the same track. <br /> 2. On the sargeant appointment. we were asked to rush that right <br /> along and we spent a 'whole Saturday and nothing has been clone <br /> on it, we were wondering why we were rush and it has been <br /> dropped for so long. <br /> Chairman stated that the Board was meeting on Thursday at 1:00 p.rn, <br /> to discuss the promotion to sergeant. I think that the rush was - <br /> coming from the Police Department. <br /> #3, There was a letter seat to us from Town Counsel, Joe Reardon, <br /> wondering whir we bypast hire and went directly to John weld. That <br /> wasn' t the fact. John worked on the PAP and we felt that the <br /> question we had directly concerned hire. <br /> Chairman stated that he understood. The only thing .that concerned <br /> Joe was that he had some information that John didn' t have and John <br /> might have core out differently in what he said, if he had talked with <br /> Toe. I think it' s more of a communications thing than anything else. <br /> � _. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.