patching...
Update: House votes to kill the casino bill in NH. See reaction video, comments and more from yesterday's 199-164 vote. »
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

Selectmen Overturn Decision to Pursue Outside Investigator

Instead, Selectman Stephen Campbell has been directed to resolve any conflict with a sit-down conversation.

 

The Salem Board of Selectmen voted 5-0 to overturn its decision to hire an outside party to investigate Selectman Stephen Campbell’s interactions with town.

Instead, the board directed Campbell to resolve any conflict with town personnel through a sit-down conversation.

Concerns surrounding Selectman Stephen Campbell’s interactions with members of town staff, specifically those during a particular incident with Human Resources Director Molly McKean, were raised at the board’s Feb. 11 meeting.

In a memo to Town Manager Keith Hickey, McKean describes an interaction she had with Campbell and alleges Campbell’s demeanor was “aggressive and intimidating.”

McKean told the council she has fielded complaints from at least three other town employees that Campbell “has been aggressive or hostile to them.”

The board agreed at their previous meeting to pursue hiring an outside party to investigate Campbell’s interactions with town staff.

But Chair Patrick Hargreaves said hiring an outside party to complete the investigation would have cost the town around $20,000.

“We think there’s a better way to spend $20,000 and the people bringing this to me want to do that [have the conversation with Campbell,]” he said at the board’s Monday evening meeting.

In a written statement Hargreaves read out loud at the meeting, Campbell said he must “find a way to treat the people I am speaking with respectfully and not let my emotions overrule my judgment.”

Campbell additionally noted selectmen’s actions should show respect for those who voted them into the position, and that there’s an expectation of the people that the board will show respect to others despite their personal emotions.

Hargreaves said he and town staff will present the board with a complete report detailing the results of the conversation between Campbell and personnel. The board is to receive that information by March 11.

Related Topics: Board Of Selectmen, Investigation, Selectman, Stephen Campbell, and conflict

Jill Sacco

8:21 am on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

What is wrong with the people in this town electing these bullies! We have programs in our schools that teach our children how not to behave this way. I teach my children at home the same! Maybe some people need to be sent back to school for a crash course. We got rid of one bully … Maybe it is time to get rid of another!

Reply
Comment_arrow

Reggie

8:57 am on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

I agree, shame on town employees.

Comment_arrow

Patriot

4:45 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

You see I see people stealing my money in a quest for more Taxes real bullying. Elderly that will have to give up their home because they retired when $20,000.00 was an adequate income. Selectman Campbell gets the most criticism from employees making over $70 grand a year with no increase in sight.

Rusty

10:04 am on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Gee an old fashion sit down conversation to try to resolve differences.... now that's refreshing!

Reply

B. SHANER

12:17 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Hargreaves and McBride should be ashamed of themselves. Sounds like the good/ole/boy club has some new members. Stephen Campbell is a disgrace and deserves to be publically flogged for his behavior- past, current, and now we are assured it will also be future. No one can prove to me what good he does for this communtiy.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Reggie

12:24 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Union s/b ashamed for concocting this episode of a cheesy soap opera.

Comment_arrow

Patriot

4:40 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Only those who have not received a pay raise wanted an investigation.

Betty Gay

12:50 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Hooray! Good sense prevails. Sitting down and talking can do so much good. At work, I watched two people from two different departments who were furious with each other. They were directed to discuss everything associated with their disagreement and came out with a much kinder attitude toward each other, once they shared the difficulties the other person was putting them through. Thank goodness we aren't spending $20K on someone who could only report what was happening without actually being able to correct the situation. It will help all employees to learn that when they feel like they are being treated less than respectfully, they can speak up right then and ask for a kinder discussion. It isn't easy working with the public day after day, who can be pretty rude. It also is good to keep in mind that public employees often are the envy of the people they serve, who have no guarantee of a job and no retirement plan.

Reply

Simon Says

1:34 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Wait a minute. This whole thing started with somebody getting a big check when leaving. Lets not lose sight of that.

Name of former employee?
How much money was involved?
Who authorized the payment?

If I pay my taxes on time am I entitled to a bonus payment?

Reply
Comment_arrow

Tom Linehan

6:51 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

The answer to your first two question I think are public. The last question - exactly who authorized it and why - is the question. Asking it is what got Stephen in trouble. Stephen has been a lightning rod but in this case I am not sure no matter how he asked, the results might have been similar.

Comment_arrow

F Jackie Marlow

8:03 am on Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Maybe someone can clear up some of the questions. If this settlement was part of the contract, why didn't Mr. Campbell know about it already? Wasn't he part of the decision to eliminate this job, thus causing the payoff? It almost looks like he caused a stink to hide an oversight on his part. If all of the circumstances surrounding the payoff were contractual, based on the actions of the selectmen or budget committee, then it is all about how he asked.

Comment_arrow

Patriot

3:25 pm on Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Maybe F Jackie Marlow, it was not a settlement. It probably came out when they signed payroll.
Again, why was everyone told "Sam" retired? He would not have received the $42,000.00 if he retired which is what I read on Patch. To bad Patch did not publish the pays.

Comment_arrow

SalemResident

9:58 pm on Wednesday, February 27, 2013

Sam Zaninni is getting a payout of tens of thousands of dollars and because Campbell asked about it his head is on the chopping block apparently.

The real issue is why is someone that retired receiving so much money after his retirement! The NH Retirement system is in place and not optional for employees so he retires with a pay check from that - why are we as tax payers providing him with MORE!?

Seems a little convenient that this uppity secretary all of a sudden takes an issue with someone for asking a question. Why not just answer it huh?

james thomas

1:39 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

Any money spent on this would of been a waste of money but 20k thats crazy I would like to know who told who 20k that number sounds inflated big time or it was just thrown out there so no one will complain about the sit down didnt the president have one of these with beers maybe steve can find out what evryone likes and settle this for $20 instead of 20k and again who said 20k?

Reply

Patriot

5:05 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

There was nothing to investigate, this was a way to save face for staff.
We still do not know who the three supposedly where that complained.
We still have not read or heard a reason why the public was told "Sam" retired instead of the truth which is that his job was cut and they did not want him to go to a different job.
If he is in a union why did he not bump someone? My guess is there where 42 thousand reasons.
Trumped up charges not worthy of the paper to write a written compliant to the police.
Maybe there is no reason to fight when you can get away with a cheap shot once in awhile.

Reply

Oldsalt44

5:19 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

In dealing with Mr Campbell over a three year period, I found Mr Campbell to be sincere in his efforts to promote what he believed was in the best interest of the entire town. Having had many heated debates with Mr Campbell, none of which I took to be aggressive , he always attempted to present his position and the reason for his position in a manner that was clear and concise. I found him to be a person of integrity in our dealings over the three year period.

Tom Eden, former selectman

Reply
Comment_arrow

Patriot

6:32 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

So happy to read your comments Tom. Hope you are doing well.

Survivor.

5:28 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

The voters like Steve, If town employees have a problem with that, tough.

Reply

Patriot

6:34 pm on Tuesday, February 26, 2013

$84,000.00 for 40 hours a week! Not bad
To bad Patch won't print all the pays out then readers would know why the employees are attacking Selectman Campbell!

Reply
Comment_arrow

SalemResident

10:01 pm on Wednesday, February 27, 2013

4 hours a week? You obviously never tried to get in touch with Sam. He was in the office for 2 hours a day maximum and took several months vacation to Florida starting in November EVERY YEAR and I think he returned in late January - basically leaving no one in charge and everyone hanging! His secretary is all but useless and gives bad advice constantly. Doesn't return phonecalls or help at all when you go in there. Now that he is gone is the town eliminating her position as his message taker??? That would be another salary GONE. Cut it!

Leave a comment