Residents urge outside help for codification, warn against supervisors creating new positions

During the committee’s citizens‑to‑be‑heard period, multiple residents recommended that the transition committee leverage existing study‑commission materials and hire outside consultants to handle codification and onboarding work rather than rely solely on the township solicitor.

Sue Weber told the committee that RFP responses should list approximate hours and hourly rates and urged the committee to seek fees below "$310 an hour that Mark Shaw charges," a rate she named during her remarks. Weber suggested transferring money from the supervisors’ legal‑fees line into a transition committee budget to fund consultant work and asked that quotes include a clear scope and estimated hours.

Other speakers echoed the call to avoid “reinventing the wheel.” Several commenters named potential vendors and resources — General Code, the Pennsylvania Economy League/Allegheny League of Municipalities (ALOM), and templates used by other municipalities — and urged the committee to review those materials and incorporate proven onboarding brochures and manager‑search templates.

A public commenter also criticized the board of supervisors for creating new high‑pay positions after the referendum passed, saying such appointments should wait for the incoming manager; the committee responded that it has no authority to overturn supervisor staffing decisions but heard the concern and said it could communicate it to the supervisors. The committee repeatedly reminded the public that its role is advisory and that budget and hiring authority rests with the board of supervisors.

The committee thanked speakers and agreed to solicit RFPs and quotes, emphasizing cost comparisons before recommending procurement steps to the supervisors.