absolutely commonsense.  why would they settle moments before the hearing.  they knew they had no cause.  have the hearing and take your chances you were going to pay either way.  this just saved them the embarressment.  i understand there are some cases where we are in the dark but this is different these are (elected) town officials bullying people and ponying up our money when they get called on it.  ill bet the bank that they have been told numerous times by town counsel that they were wrong and did it anyhow

i think you were right bill it is starting to unravel and people are finally asking the right questions.

MAYBE BRUCE IS TRYING TO SECURE A POSITION THERE IF HE EVER PASSES THE BAR.  FUNNY WONDER IF HIS LITTLE SIDEKICK HAS EVER PASSED A BAR. (Hiccckuup)

We tried getting info. and were told (not politely): It would take a lawsuit to find out how and how much was spent.  The Selectmen have an "open checkbook". Once they cry "lawyer" there is no limit!

Come to the "hearing" Decvember 2 at 7:30 to see them spending more money they don't have: an attempt to correct a mistake they made when they thought no one would care if they renamed Wankinquoah Avenue to "Oceanside Ave." to memorialize the name of the Pizza Shop (now Bruce's office?).

The fiasco has already cost the Town plenty after the people who live there filed an appeal (95 signatures) to the Mass. Hihway Dept. and entered a process from hell. The judge ruled for the property owners.  The Town Appealed, filed a Motion for a "STAY" the process (More lawyer time).  This hearing (more lawyer time) will be interesting.

The neighbors can't afford to hire a lawyer to protect their rights, but the Town just writes the checks to K&P.

Last edited by waterview (2008-11-21 07:41:30)

Finally, think about this for a minute.  Town meeting is required to approve the budget...but we were told by the Fin Com and selectmen that we town meeting voters will never be told by them how much the town spends on legal fees.  That's right.  You heard it correctly.  Town meeting voters, who have the job of approving the budget, were told they cannot know how much is in the legal fee budget item.

Wow. 

I have to wonder though, if the selectmen truly believe that all of the legal actions they have entered into were completely righteous and proper, then what's the big deal?  Why not tell us what the price tag is on all of the wonderful justice they claim we are getting?

Probably because if you ever saw how much we're spending, you'd realize that money would be better used by spreading it out amongst the town departments, rather than using town attorneys to settle old scores (which apparently, in their eyes, are never settled, no matter how much they do).

Bob Brady of the Citizens for a Better Wareham gave the figure of $575,000 as an estimate of what we've spent on legal fees in just the past couple of years.  I'm willing to bet it's more than that.

Especially if the 2 year sabbatical we sent the short lived town administrator on the town's dime is considered a legal fee.  If it is, that's probably why they won't tell us. 

They don't want us to know how much it cost the town to send the TA on a 2 year vacation because he rubbed Brucey the wrong way.

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2008-11-21 09:58:16)

Oneear -

He's been spouting that $30,000 crap for a long time now with absolutely nothing to back it up other than some longwinded nonsensical argument that he interpreted the charter himself and came up with that figure.

BULLS&%T!!!

Pardon my french.  First, let's keep in mind that $30,000 to pay someone NOT TO WORK when they are willing to is a waste when that $30,000 could be the salary of one lower level town employee.

But it was clearly way more than that.  And unless Ragman or one of these clowns can point to a check that actually says "To John, here's x dollars to go away because Bruce doesn't like you," then they are only pulling figures out of their rumps.

It was clearly way, way more than $30,000.  I doubt he walked away from it with less than $100,000.  And that's a conservative estimate.  I'm sure it was way more than that.

Think about it.  If you're McAulliffe, why would you want a gag order on the amount?  If he walks away with a tiny sum, doesn't that make him a good guy because even though he was sucker punched in a midnight session, he agreed to walk away with only a small amount of the town's money, when he was clearly entitled by contract to walk away with alot more? 

He was not even a year into a 3 year contract.  Just almost one year.  They lied to him weeks before about hiring an independent lawyer to "negotiate" with him and told him no, he had nothing to worry about.  They sprang a laundry list of unfounded charges against him after midnight.  Then Brucey announced in open session that no matter the outcome of the hearing, he was gone.  So much for due process.

McAulliffe had an excellent case, and believe it - he wouldn't have dropped a slam dunk unless the town paid him a hefty, hefty, ridiculous sum to go dribble his ball elsewhere.

Now they're back taking $85,000 to hire an assistant, which was Sanguinet's job, but Sanguinet is now acting TA.

It comes down to this - these people say justice is on their side.  If all of these legal actions are above board, then why not tell us the full price tag of all this so called justice? 

Blow us pesky bloggers out of the water and tell us how much the legal fees are, how much McAulliffe really got - itemize it all and explain it all.  Why not?  What is there to hide?

They'll never do it.  Because they knew if the voters knew how much they were spending on legal fees when that money could go to the police, the library, the COA, even restore the recreation department...but instead, all that money wasted on Brucey's grudges?

Yeah, you better believe they're going to keep those figures under wraps until the cows come home.

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2008-11-21 13:19:13)

Look at those baby blue innocent eyes.  Check out the lump in his pants.  Probably his bulging wallet!