Summary of Guilford’s 3/24/25 Selectboard Meeting

 

Questions for the Selectboard

 

1) During the Community Comment Period, Dolores Clark asked if the Selectboard would allow the public to express their opinions as the Board worked through its agenda. Dolores noted that all surrounding towns conduct their business following that standard and the Secretary of States office recommends this practice. There was no indication that the current Selectboard would change.

 

Would the selectboard please allow residents to express their opinions (at an appropriate time, with equal time limits set by the Chair) as the board works through its agenda?

 

2) One of the Selectboard’s reconfirmed Committee Appointments is named Linda Hecker. She is a known child predator whose husband admitted to his first statutory rape in 1982.

 

Are the current members of the Selectboard aware of the allegations against Zeke and Linda Hecker?

​

3) Tara suggested prioritizing and setting tangible Annual Selectboard Goals with measurable outcomes. I believe this is important considering the Priority Criteria in the new Asset Management policy. 

 

    Asset projects may receive a higher priority if they meet certain criteria, such as:

1. The project meets a policy goal or fulfills a strategic objective of the Selectboard and the Town Plan.

 

I believe this was the reason for the 2018 Capital Needs Assessment Plan which was ignored since its inception and then became obsolete with the enactment of the new policy.

​

The Selectboard and Residents of Guilford should have a clear understanding of the state of assets. The new assessment could then be used to set clear Selectboard goals.

​

Would the Selectboard consider completing an updated Asset Assessment which could then align with the Selectboard Goals?

 

4) Should Sheila recuse herself from Selectboard Votes Concerning the Traffic Committee and the Friends of Algiers Village?

 

Concerning the traffic committee, Sheila argued on 3/10/25 that she doesn’t benefit from those decisions more than any other resident of Guilford. Mike and Varanda then argued on 3/24/25 that Sheila didn’t have a conflict because she wasn’t receiving any direct financial compensation.

​

However, Tara and Chip pointed out that a direct financial benefit is not required for a real or perceived conflict to exist. But what about Sheila’s argument about her not benefiting more than the average resident of Guilford?

​

Sheila is a founding member of the Friends of Algiers Village (FOA). She is the current Principal Officer and the Treasurer of the “Friends.” This role makes Sheila a fiduciary for the “Friends” which is a person who holds a legal or ethical relationship of trust with one or more other parties. Typically, a fiduciary prudently takes care of money or other assets for another person or group.

​

Sheila is also the Chair and voting member of the Algiers Traffic Committee and now a voting member of the Selectboard.

​

As Chip pointed out, Sheila has a conflict as a voting member on the Traffic Committee and a voting member of the Selectboard, it really is just that simple. That’s because Sheila is a fiduciary to the traffic committee and a fiduciary to the average resident of Guilford. However, Sheila’s primary fiduciary responsibility lies with the Friends of Algiers Village which predates any of her numerous municipal roles.

​

The FOA filed purpose states that it shall seek to buy, sell, and hold land, and property including housing.

​

The “Friends” own the building that houses the Guilford Store. Whoever operates the store, or any space in their building, pays their rent to the Friends for that privilege. The Friends would benefit by slowing traffic to a stop and adding crosswalks directly in front of their retail building.

​

The selectboard should not have appointed Sheila to sit on the Algiers Traffic Committee in the first place because of her Conflict with the Friends of Algiers Village. Sheila clearly cares more about slowing traffic to a stop and adding crosswalks outside of her nonprofit retail building than the average resident of Guilford.

​

Just for reference, anyone sitting on the traffic committee whose business or general real estate value could benefit from a new traffic pattern should also be removed. They are all free to communicate their traffic preferences, but they have a conflict when voting as an Advisor to the Selectboard.

​

Sheila agreed to recuse herself when voting on the traffic study and I applaud that first step.

​

However, will the selectboard consider updating the current COI policy to clarify, identify and stop these types of conflicts?

​

5) Recording Advisory Board Meetings. The selectboard was concerned that they didn’t have the authority to require Advisory Boards to record their meetings. They talked about encouraging those boards to record, but that is where the discussion stopped.

 

The selectboard establishes advisory boards and appoints the members. They insert a liaison to ensure compliance with the Selectboard’s expectations. The Selectboard can fire each member, as they did with the Planning Commission, or simply disband it like they did with the Finance Advisory Committee. If the Selectboard requires those boards to record their meetings, they must be recorded and should be archived to a source that can never be deleted.

​

Would the selectboard please create a policy requiring all advisory boards to record their meetings and ensure they are archived for future reference?

 

Good catch identifying a nonmatching grant opportunity for Ash tree removal. If Guilford continues to participate in the grant scheme, I believe that nonmatching grants which help our highway department should be prioritized.

​

Thank you to all selectboard members for your votes to repair the Historical Society! This is exactly what the capital fund was originally established for.

​

Thank you in advance for considering and responding to my questions,

Jason Herron

501 Lakeridge Road