The never ending story -partie deux

Having presented the letter from Attorney Bartulis where he questions the wisdom of the employee protection clauses, I would like to present the text of those clauses. You can find them here.
Some people have asked in comments to the first post for the notes on who were present at the meeting mentioned in the letter. Attorney Barulis' notes from the February 9, 2006 meeting can be seen here. (I added the highlight.)
You will notice that Att'y Bartulis is providing these contract changes to the Executive Administrator while corresponding with Ms. Copley, not the Executive Administrator or Select Board members. This can be confirmed by emails which I will publish in future posts. These changes were not in the town's interests but in that of the employee. Nonetheless, the town was paying Att'y Bartulis to draft them, not the employee who will benefit from the changes. Certainly employees can and should have an attorney help them draft contracts to present to the town ...

... but they should pay for it, not the town. Having the taxpayer pay for contracts which are contrary to their interests is adding insult to injury.
The portion of this contract language which I find as egregious as the automatic renewal is this

“For purposes of this agreement, the phrase “subject to the availability of Town appropriations” shall be understood to mean that the TOWN will make every reasonable effort to secure the necessary appropriation to fully fund this position. The Select Board will have an affirmative duty to budget for the position and to speak in favor of funding this position in total. It is also understood that if layoffs or staff cutbacks are needed in the Town, this EMPLOYEE’S position will only be decreased or eliminated after the Town has already undertaken to decrease or eliminate other positions which add up to the amount of the annual salary of this position first. In the event that the funding for the position of EMPLOYEE is not appropriated or is otherwise decreased or eliminated during the life of this agreement, it is further understood between the parties to this Agreement that EMPLOYEE will be offered another management position in Town, if any exists, as determined by the Executive Administrator, for the same pay and benefits which inure to him/her under this Agreement, for the remaining duration/term of this written agreement.

Bold emphasis added by me
Those who say these contract don't tie the hands of the town, please note that future Select Boards are to have a contractual DUTY to speak in favor of the funding. Then the town must still pay an equal salary even if the job is not funded by Town Meeting.
I am astounded and outraged to this day that five individuals who presumably should have been watching out for the taxpayers interests could think that language was a good idea. What do you think about it? Tell us in comments.