"Item One: By voting to confirm our Highway Superintendent's choice for hiring a certain individual as a part time driver, our town board has, in effect, 'dumped money out a window.'
"Our town board sought out and paid for legal assistance for advice on proper methods for dealing with a host of issues, problems, and disputes in regards to highway department employees. Following legal advisement several interviews were conducted and numerous issues were identified. One issue of importance rose to the level that resulted in an employee losing his employment with us. The remaining plethora of issues were dealt with by 'handing' the gathered information off to the newly installed Highway Superintendent, to be dealt with by him.
"Conclusion: If money has been squandered on legal advice and attorney fees, it should be noted that it was squandered on a large number of issues dealing with several of our highway employees and not on any one, particular, individual employee.
"Item Two: Applicants for a part time position as a driver for the highway department were not granted an interview.
"At a recent town board meeting our Highway Superintendent indicated that he did review, and consider all of the applications that he received. Nowhere in any of our town's policies does it state that when an individual fills out an application for employment, that this individual is automatically entitled to an interview.
"It is my understanding, that it is the responsibility of the Highway Superintendent to decide (in his own way) who he feels is the best suited applicant for a particular position.
"Item Three: Our town's ethics policy has come into question, in the form of 'How could you vote yes to return a person into town employment when he was removed (by a vote of 3-2) from his position just a few months ago?'"