Sorry, I left off the link! Here it is. Please read this and tell me how this relates to changing the government structure?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/opini … shkin.html

Thanks for the info, Larry.
After reading it, Prof. Fishkin is talking apples to oranges.
He has no concept of what a REAL New England Town Meeting is. No idea that the traditional Town Meeting is the purest form of democracy in the Nation.
If the CRC relied on that piece, they should be so ashamed of themselves they should hide from public view.
I would love to be there when one of you, in a public forum, takes them to task and ridicules them for their ignorance of history and their inability to be truly foresighted.
I don't think they have chance on Town Meeting floor.
Town Meeting can order another committee be appointed by the new Board of Selectmen in April of 2010.

The "informational column" they're putting out is a joke.  Not good for anything except wiping your butt.  The decision was made before they were appointed.  They were picked because the BOS knew they would be good little rubber stamp flunkies. 

They're just going to google shit, cut and paste it and twist it around to suit their needs.  Give me a break.  We've had this form of government for hundreds of years.  Towns much larger than ours have it and they do just fine. 

At town meeting, you win some and you lose some.  Our side loses now and then at town meeting, you don't see us trying to rewrite the town constitution.  But oh, they lose and we have to scrap town meeting and give them total control plus a big salary plus benefits plus their own army of personal flunkies on the taxpayer dime.

Fight this, people.  Fight for your right to stand up at town meeting and be heard!  Don't let them take it away!

By the way, Mr. Slager wrote a very fine editorial today about the CRC.
I complimented him in a post I put on the site.
I always appreciate good writing, and it is good to know that he can see the issue clearly and, at least not now, be persuaded that a change of government is a good idea.

Dan, I'm going to have to disagree with you.  Bobo proclaims that he is the man of the people.  Then why for the love of God is he not fighting like a rabid dog against this shameless attempt to take away the right of the PEOPLE, any person, no matter who they are, what background, rich or poor, any person under our current form of government, if he cared about the people, then he'd fight for the people and say the selectmen were wrong for stacking the CRC deck...that they are wrong FOR TRYING TO ROB THE PEOPLE'S RIGHT to stand up at town meeting and be a part of the town legislative process.  They are trying to rob the people of this right and once it is taken away, the people will never be able to get it back again!

In the end, he is no better than the BOS flunkies on the CRC.  Once again, the "man of the people" pitches the people overboard.  No rabid dog for the people, just a lap dog for the BOS and Brucey as usual.  More of the same.

There's no "convincing."  They want to steal away the people's right to be a part of town meeting.  If you're not 100 percent against that from the start, then take off your "man of the people" name tag Bobo and pitch it in the trash can.

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2009-08-26 15:10:30)

this is a post i put in 3 days ago!!!! under the charter dump thread patting my own back here.. again i caught this 3 days ago and slager is just writing about it today..

LIZdaGNOME
this is where again i have a problem..
1.  8/14  the charter review comm. published a statement to the courier said there would be more updates to fallow along with interaction q&a etc..
2.  8/20 the CRC gives a statement to slager NOT  courier slager states"rewrite would include changing the system of government in Wareham from five selectmen and town meeting to a mayoral system with city councilmen, according to a source within the committee."
3.  8/23 the CRC again gives slager a statement & the courier has a statement but its the one slager ran on 8/20..
1........ SLAGER AGAIN IS MAKING COMMENTS ABOUT OUR TOWN AND ITS FUTURE FROM A SOURCE HAHAHA OR HE IS LYING...
2........IF THE CRC IS TALKING TO SLAGER THEY SHOULD HAVE THE BALLS TO TALK TO US!!! DONT PLAY THIS GAME POSTING IN THE COURIER THEN WITH SLAGER AND GIVING HIM INFO IF HE IS TELLING THE TRUTH..


sorry for the venting i just see a chain of shady sneaky things going on already and i am not happy...

Give Liz credit, she brought it to my attention 3 days ago. I finally had time to read the article and start this thread! In all honesty, we have been discussing this since we found out the makeup of the CRC. It was before that when we first began hearing little "statements" from the Selectmen, especially Donahue, that the current system wasn't working. So, it's not big shock they stacked the CRC to press their agenda ahead. Why do for free, what you can get paid to do? Now we have to face the fact that we are having to come together to combat this growing problem. Why?

So many people do not want to rock the boat or take on the Selectmen for fear or retribution. The problem with that is while people sit on their hands in fear, we lose a valuable opportunity to stop them before they get started. it's the same with low voter turnout. Why? Because people don't think they matter and their vote doesn't matter. Poppycock! That is how you develop a majority. Each vote counts! We cannot wait until after the fact and bitch and complain, we need to get ahead of the curve, put positive qualified people that have an agenda for Wareham, not themselves. Let's stop waiting for the ball to drop and do something about it.

Poppycock?

Did you like the "poppycock"? I went old english on you there...sorry....

gogatemen wrote:

Liz:

I agree that jumping to a mayoral system is a very radical step.  However, just for the sake of accuracy Amherst has a representative town meeting.  Many larger towns have gone to this model.  It might be a compromise.  People who love town meeting can easily get themselves elected. People who want to watch TV can stay home and let others argue the budget.  If  I remember correctly, Amherst had over two hundred representatives to the town meeting, which is about how many people show up in Wareham. Just a thought.

yes 254 i believe..

Dan,
I want to help the Selectmen and Town Moderator pack their bags and get on the USS Minnow. They are very damaging to this town.

I'm not in favor of representative town meeting either.  We have a system where anyone, no matter who they are, can stand up and be a part of the legislative process.  There's no purer form of government by the people than that.

I'd support a change to hold town meeting on Saturdays, though.  More people would be able to attend, they'd be fresh, start in the morning instead of at night after a long work day.  With a town moderator with brains (not deer caught in the headlights boy that we have now) and having it on Saturday, you could probably get through the town business all in one day.

Our current system of government isn't flawed.  The people in power are flawed.  It's like playing a boardgame - when the rules on the back of the box are followed by everyone, then there is fairness all around for everyone.  But whenever things don't go their way, these clowns smack the board up in the air and send all the pieces and dice flying all over.

The rules aren't flawed.  The players are flawed.  Luckily, the system gives us a chance to rectify that.  That's called the next town election in April, where they're going to have their political asses handed to them on a silver platter.

Thanks again, casual. I believe that Winthrop has been a City for a long time, correct? If I remember correctly, they have been chartered a City for over 100 years.

heres the last line in the crc last statement does this sound like they are open for citizen discussion???

"Next week, we'll detail the possible options open to us and how we narrowed them down to one choice."

Casual...are you kidding? You have NOTHING to apologize for.
I appreciate the information you give all of us. You are a wealth of knowledge and your research is impeccable.
Thank you again for the education.

Ham... There are over 14,000 registered voters in Wareham. Don't you think we might consider or at least think about a representative town meeting. Even if we filled every seat at town meeting, that still leaves a lot of people left out of the decision making process. There are a lot of seniors that can't make it to town meeting because they are disabled, they can't sit for 3 or 4 hours and other medical reasons.

If you've been around for as long as I have and understand why the citizens of Wareham decided to change to a Charter form of government, you'd also understand what the Charter really was meant to do. 

Read the dissenting opinion of Elizabeth Carmichael, who felt the Town Charter form of governent would give Wareham a Town Administrator who had all the power of a mayor. Betty was afraid of that. She honestly feared that under this Charter, a Town Administrator would have total control over the day to day operations....just as a mayor does. However, that is exactly what the voters wanted. They wanted an administrator who ran the day to day operations. But, still with some oversight.

The Charter was designed to give us a form of government with a strong leader, yet still give the voters some control. How?

We get to elect the Board of Selectmen, hopefully voting for people who we feel will be responsible and intelligent. The  BOS in turn, would get to "hire" the Town Administrator, and hopefully, choose someone who would serve the community well. 

The reason we chose not to go with a mayor was that a mayor would be elected and could potentially be someone who does not have adequate qualifications, but could win by popular vote based on his/her ability to get people to vote for him/her. The citizens of Wareham wanted a strong leader, but wanted to have some control in the choosing of that person, based on qualifications.

Hence, we elect the BOS and then rely on them to make an intelligent choice for us in choosing a Town Administrator. So we get a "mayor" but he's "chosen" based on his qualifications, not elected.

Instead of a City Council, this same Board of Selectmen appoint good people, with financial expertise, to serve on the Finance Committee. These people would serve as "city councilers".  Again, rather than being elected by popular vote, the "city councilers a.k.a. the finance committee, are chosen, not elected.

The finace committee oversees the financial aspects of the town and we wanted some say as to who would hold those positions, based on experience and intellligence, not based on popular vote.

The next componnt would be that we still wanted to have some control in our affairs, even though we had a strong leader to run the day to day operations. We kept town meeting where everyone would have the opportunity to attend and vote on certain matters.

So we got the best of everything. We got a "mayor" a.k.a Town Administrator by choosing him based on qualifications,  not elected based on a popularity vote... an Administrator given all the powers of a mayor, who would be in charge of the day to day operations of the town.............a  "town council" a.k.a Finance Committee who were chosen based on qualifications , not elected based on popular vote to oversee the financial condition of our community.

That is what this Charter was supposed to do.

However, we have a very warped Board of Selectmen, who want to have all the control and because the Charter does not give it to them, they want to change the Charter and change our form of governement.

For those of us who were around those many years ago, it was intentional that we took the power away from the Board of Selectmen and only gave them the power to set policy.  That was the number one priority back then and for valid reasons.

Even though we wanted to take the power away from the Board of Selectmen, we did not want to give total power to just one person, a mayor, so we kept the three member board of Selectmen, but incorporated a Town Administrator to run the day to day operation....giving him all the powers of a mayor but still maintaining some control. We maintained our ability to have imput by keeping town meeting and being able to vote on the budget and other things that keep the town running.

Let's not even discuss this Charter Review Committee who are merely puppets to carry out the wishes of Jane Donahue. If they were truly a committee, they would have held  several open meetings and invited citizen participation, they would have spoken with the original authors of the Charter to ask for explanatins of the Charter and why the Charter was written the way it was, and they would have taken the full year to review the Charter instead of making a decision at their very first meeting. Nuf said.

Last edited by Maturevoter (2009-08-26 20:02:56)

Marny, the seniors that can't make it to town meeting, a representative system doesn't help them get involved.  Seniors right now who can't make it to the meeting but still want to be part of the process can talk to their friends, neighbors, family, etc...they can lobby people they know and get them to go, tell them their ideas, etc.

Maturevoter, That was excellent. Thanks for your insight.

I was thinking, if you listen to when Steve/Searay was talking with the board about crimewatch (you remember. The lies, the "Jesus"), Sweet Brucie starts his perturbed rant toward Steve after Steve asked if Crimewatch was supported financially by the town. Sweet Brucie says "the fact that they're not supported financially is a crime itself". It's safe to assume he finds it even more criminal that himself and the others are not supported financially. Maybe he feels unappreciated for all the good things he's done for Wareham. He's a pompous ass who treats people like dirt. Warped indeed.

http://takebackwareham86bos.blogspot.co … about.html

PShooter

Last edited by PShooter (2009-08-26 20:13:14)

Charter Review Committee 2nd & 4th Thursday  6:00 P.M. Multi-Service Center, Room 228

this meeting is open and able to be recorded wink wink pshooter we all should attend....

Thank you Maturevoter...I served when you speak of the change in the Charter.
We went from three full time Selectmen/Assessors to 5 part time Selectmen ($1,000.00 per year salary), and three full time Assessors.
Didn't make a lot of sense to me then, and it still doesn't to this day.
There was frustration with the BOS then too, but why change the government, and not the people?
You need a strong Selectman-Town Meeting form of government, in my opinion.

Dan,
Having three paid Selectmen who worked in town hall on a daily basis created a situation where there were literally "three bosses". On any given day, one Board member could walk into any office in town hall and tell the department head that he should do a particular thing  "this way". Then the second Selectman found out, had a different opinion of how it should be done and walked down stairs and said to the department head," No, forget what Selectmen #1 told you, I want you to do it my way". Later that day, #3 Selectmen found out that the other two had given the department head an order, and he walked downstairs and told the department head, "No, forget what both of them told you, I want you to go back to the way you originally did it." This occurred on a daily basis, not only in daily decision making, but with financial decisions as well.   
When you have three independent thinking Selectmen, who feel that "their way" is the correct way, it creates chaos for the department heads. Who do they listen to, without fear of reprisal and loss of their job?
Having a Town Administrator, who controlled the day to day operations, resulted in only one person being responsible for the decision making. The buck stops there. The department heads report to and follow the direction of only one person.
The TA reports to the Board of Selectmen and if he isn't doing a good job, then depending on the terms of his contract, he can certainly be held accountable.
If my memory serves me correctly, at the time the Charter was enacted and we went to a part time Board of Selectmen, the three member Board got a stipend of maybe $3000(?) and were covered under the town's health insurance plan. That was done away with sometime in the 70's, I think (when Joe Grassia served). I remember the nastiness of the debate on town meeting floor as to whether or not the Selectmen should get paid. It was not a question of whether they should get paid, but rather it was that IF you paid them they were entitled to insurance. And, that was costing the town a lot of money. The insurance cost was the catalyst to end their salary.

That is what we are here for Mature! Take Back Wareham is a grassroots effort to get everyone involved and bring the sense of community and cooperation to Wareham. I'm sure we can work with whoever to get seniors to the Town Meeting and also to the polls. I am sure Marcia would be cooperative and helpful in this effort :) If not, we will find someone who is!

Linda,

While I appreciate what you are saying about attending a Charter Review Committee meeting, I think anything I would have to say would fall on deaf ears. We all know that this committee had one charge and one charge only and that these members will not think for them selves  nor will they look at the Charter objectively.

I think my remarks would be more receptive to those who will attend town meeting and actually vote on the matter.

emma6782 wrote:

On the CBW site there are the articles Jane Hanley wrote when she was chairman of the last CRC about various forms of town government with the pros and cons of each type that was looked at by the previous committee.  Maybe someone from her can link the articles to this site.  I am not very good at doing that.

I tried to find this and couldn't. If anyone can find the link please post it.

I did find this on the Town's site: "Several Options Exist For Changing Local Government Structure"

http://www.wareham.ma.us/Public_Documen … ucture.pdf

PShooter