#1 2009-09-18 17:48:20
Meeting Audio: This is from the Charter Review meeting on 8/27/09. The recording is only the first twenty minutes or so. The quality is NOT good. But, if you're interested, turn up the volume and pay attention. They start off, oddly enough, complaining that they were misrepresented by Bobo in a recent article. They go on to discuss PR, media, etc.. Later in the meeting, the part not recorded, they discussed details and changes to be made in the new charter.
The most recent meeting minutes posted on the Town's website are over three months old, (5 or 6 mtgs). Transparency?
Charter Review Mtg. 8/27/09
Town Clerk: Issues have been raised about the fact that the Town Clerk, Mary Ann Silva, is also on the CRC. It has been stated that her inclusion on the committee is inappropriate because an elected official should not be a part of the process due to potential bias, as decisions being discussed and determined can effect the position which she holds.
Missing member: They have been functioning, essentially from the start, without the full complement of committee members. After being absent from the first meeting, it is stated at the second meeting that Larry Gaines had to resign from the committee. They have never filled that vacancy.
No review at any point of the Current Charter, as reflected in the public record, none: There are only references that the committee members had read and reviewed them on their own. The decision was made to change the form of government (and I feel like I’m giving them some, here) at the first meeting, as reflected in the 3/12/09 meeting minutes, when reference was made of a newspaper article in the Brockton Enterprise. (check the minutes)
Seeming ignorance of, or intentional effort to disregard, MGL and Open Meeting Law, as required by their appointment, in regards to the videotaping of a public meeting, which is a protected right of any citizen.
Less than adequate postings on the Town’s websites of Public Records: Aside from the informational pieces (not public records) put out in the papers and posted on the Town’s website, for what I view as essentially PR, the posting of meeting minutes saw a gap of over three months when they were unavailable. And, it is still missing a few. Technically, they may not be required to post them, at all maybe, but it doesn’t speak to their openness.
What a Mayoral Gov't in Wareham will look like
PShooter
Auto-edited on 2020-08-11 to update URLs
Last edited by PShooter (2009-11-27 20:45:19)
Offline
#2 2009-09-18 17:54:43
You are the MAN!!!
I am so proud of you!!
Offline
#3 2009-09-27 16:51:02
You might find this worth watching. I think this plays into the ST article OUR VIEW: Demand open government point pretty neatly.
There's some text that pops up in the middle of the screen throughout the recording. It's just a watermark, because the software I had to use for this one is new and a trial version.
Charter Review Mtg. 9/24/09
Charter Review Mtg. 9/24/09 Full Video
MGL Ch. 39: s. 23B.: Open meetings of governmental bodies
Charter Review Committee: Meeting Minutes
PShooter
Auto-edited on 2020-08-11 to update URLs
Last edited by PShooter (2009-09-27 19:49:29)
Offline
#4 2009-09-27 17:35:04
Great job, PShooter!
Offline
#5 2009-09-27 18:36:44
Wow, that's some open and honest government right there! (NOT!) You see it right here folks, the Charter Review Committee wants to shove a Mayoralty down your throat, but they don't want you to see at all how they came by that decision. What have they got to hide? It's an open meeting and video cameras are allowed, that's not even open to debate.
Switch our whole form of government because these clowns say so? I don't think so...
Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2009-09-27 18:37:41)
Offline
#6 2009-09-27 19:29:08
Go read Bobo make the case against open government.
Here's a taste, "..The Secretary of State’s Office provides a 56-page analysis of public records law on its web site. There are 19 specific exemptions described over 24 pages in which town officials are legally authorized to withhold information from the public."
Exactly the stance we'd expect, Bobo. At least your consistent.
PShooter
Offline
#7 2009-09-27 19:47:18
In all my life I never thought I'd see someone who calls himself a journalist spend his Sunday defending the government for NOT giving out information.
What a lackey.
Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2009-09-27 19:48:57)
Offline
#8 2009-09-27 20:16:14
i am truly amazed at this committee... you would expect and assume them to know the rules about public meetings.. or atleast have a vague clue...
wow the guy asking if the camera guy was a lawyer.. sounded like bruce S talking for a minute..
the guy i dont want to be taped.. LAW FLASH BUDDY.. you are on a crc that holds public meeting do some research before you submit you application..
did i hear correct.. our clerk using our selectmen cronans line.."JUST SUE EM"
and why arent they reviewing our current charter???
Last edited by LIZdaGNOME (2009-09-27 23:23:04)
Offline
#9 2009-09-27 20:26:50
mass general law.. chapter 39 section 23b states..
"Upon qualification for office following an appointment or election to a governmental body, as defined in this section, the member shall be furnished by the city or town clerk with a copy of this section. Each such member shall sign a written acknowledgement that he has been provided with such a copy."
all of these crc members SHOULD have been furnished with these rules by our town clerk who just happens to be on this crc.. and not 1 of them had a clue..
so if they got thier copy did they even read it once?
have it with them onhand at crc meetings?
i really question if they ever even read our charter as a crc..?
Offline
#10 2009-09-27 21:08:14
Hey, remember when the BOS kicked Bill out for taking pictures and Bobo said that if the selectmen were just kicking someone out over pictures, that he'd call for the selectmen to be recalled?
I wonder when Bobo will call on this Charter Review Committee to removed from office for trying to keep their open public meeting from being taped. Won't hold my breath.
Offline
#11 2009-09-27 21:25:28
Good point Ham. And great info Liz, thanks.
I'm wondering if they've been functioning within the guidelines at all. I think they've been working, taking votes, etc., but have been without the ninth member required of their board. They've made mention of it several times in the minutes.
Larry Gaines, after being absent from the first meeting, is mentioned as having to drop out in the 3/26 meeting minutes:
"..then announced that Larry Gains had submitted his resignation due to a previous commitment to the Counsel on Aging Board of Directors."
And in the 7/23 minutes it's stated:
"The Chairman stated that we are still one person short. Alan to discuss this with Brenda and see what the status is on a new member, as we need to have nine members."
There are currently eight names listed on the Town's website, and they have been functioning without the required ninth board member from day one.
PShooter
Offline
#12 2009-09-27 22:35:06
kudos pshooter.. there is room on my soapbox for you sqeeze in hamm i mean ham (haha) can step up on it also..
there has been no personel board for the town for months either but oh well.. why would the town need a personel board anyway...
here is a window into what they do.. note as far as the town website states there is 2 members of this board and 1 has no experation date..
http://www.wareham.ma.us/Public_Documen … 9%20TM.pdf
Last edited by LIZdaGNOME (2009-09-27 22:41:56)
Offline
#13 2009-09-28 07:15:08
LIZdaGNOME wrote:
mass general law.. chapter 39 section 23b states..
"Upon qualification for office following an appointment or election to a governmental body, as defined in this section, the member shall be furnished by the city or town clerk with a copy of this section. Each such member shall sign a written acknowledgement that he has been provided with such a copy."
all of these crc members SHOULD have been furnished with these rules by our town clerk who just happens to be on this crc.. and not 1 of them had a clue..
so if they got thier copy did they even read it once?
have it with them onhand at crc meetings?
i really question if they ever even read our charter as a crc..?
What really bothers me about this clip and the above quote by Liz is that the clerk was notably quiet during the discussion of whether or not the meeting could be video recorded. She could have and SHOULD have spoken up immediately. Instead, the discussion went on for almost 5 minutes over whether it could be done. A town clerk should know this information. If she did not give this committee the open meeting law copy and get signatures, she is not doing her job.
Her main concern was the camera angle and how she would look on video? Huh?
THIS IS ANOTHER REASON WHY SHE SHOULD BE VOTED OUT OF OFFICE IN APRIL. We need a town clerk who is not a puppet of the bos and who upholds the laws of the commonwealth, and the by laws and charter of the town.
Offline
#14 2009-09-28 07:48:55
I still think it is a conflict of interest for the town clerk to be a part of the Charter Review committee. This committee was supposed to review and consider changes to our government, but obviously, with the town clerk on the committee, no possible changes to the town clerk position were ever going to be considered.
It's pretty simple. If you have a job that could be affected by a charter review, then you should not be on the Charter Review Committee. That's easy for anyone but our brainless selectmen to understand. Or maybe they do understand and just wanted to be sure they'd have another person on the committee that would do their bidding.
When they kicked Bill out of the Selectmen's meeting, Bobo said he was kicked out over a flash, but if Bill was kicked out just for taking photos, he'd have called for any selectmen who approved of that to be recalled.
Well, Bobo, where's your outrage? We have it caught on tape, the Charter Review Commitee, and one member especially, trying to kick a videographer out of a meeting, trying to intimidate him into shutting off his camera so the business of the committee can remain hidden.
They don't want the public to see what is going on during these meetings. Why not?
Change to a Mayor goverment based on the say-so of these BOS flunkies? NO WAY!!!
Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2009-09-28 08:00:06)
Offline
#15 2009-09-28 11:46:23
I thought the same thing H5000 regarding the conflict of intrest, however I would not have taken issue if the position was to be used as a liason to the committee, is the clerk allowed to vote and if so has she been part of any voting during the process.
Who is the verbally confrontational person on the committee? Is he the same gentleman that was pushing the expensive septic systems? By the amount of information PShooter has posted, (thank you we would have never really known what was going on!) and their actions on this last clip, they have compromised their intentions. This article needs to be voted down, they are forcing something down our throats again. This force tactic seems to be the norm. with our current elected officials and committee's.
Thanks again PShooter for getting all this information out to people so we can really see whats going on, I would have never thought anything about this issue until I started watching the posted links you provided.
Offline
#16 2009-09-28 12:59:47
PShooter is the MAN!!
Offline
#17 2009-09-28 14:26:05
wareham pride wrote:
I thought the same thing H5000 regarding the conflict of intrest, however I would not have taken issue if the position was to be used as a liason to the committee, is the clerk allowed to vote and if so has she been part of any voting during the process.
Who is the verbally confrontational person on the committee? Is he the same gentleman that was pushing the expensive septic systems?
Thanks Pride. The Town clerk, Mary Ann Silva is the clerk on this committee, and has voted, etc., throughout. She also was the first one (previous to the start of the recording), to state it couldn't be videotaped....and, good point about her, Ham.
The boardmember who is most vocal in his resistance is Edward Pacewicz. I'm not sure about the septic systems question. Maybe someone else can help us out on that.
..and again, How can they explain not having the required ninth boardmember? It's been over SIX MONTHS!
PShooter
Offline
#18 2009-09-28 14:55:15
Pride, yes Pacewicz is the same guy that is the chairman of the clean water committee. He is also the same person that lied to town meeting about the cranberry grower's support for his bylaw a few town meetings ago. He is also the same person that the other members of the committee that stood up and complained about at last town meeting. He is nothing more than a selectman lackey. He will stop at nothing to do their bidding.
Offline
#19 2009-09-28 18:45:35
Thanks ruk, he has the personality of a wooden plank!
Offline
#20 2009-09-28 19:37:33
Had they succeeded in forcing the camera man to turn his camera off, this would have been a violation of the open meeting law. And these are the people who think they know how to change town government.
Why was the Charter Review Committee so scared to have its meeting taped? What do they have to hide?
No Mayor For Wareham!!!
Offline
#21 2009-09-28 22:14:05
I've spent the last few days reviewing the minutes and preparing a letter to address my concerns with the CRC.
I would encourage everyone who has a complaint or question to use the link on the town site to get that question to the CRC.
One of the issues I think we, as a group should ask is how do they plan to fill the open position on the committee. I would think they can draw from the citizens who applied. It would certainly help to have someone who has not only read the charter but understand it. Based on last weeks meeting, it would also help if this person understood MGL. I suggest Cara Winslow or Peter Baum. They could lend their expertise to the committee.
Last edited by Larry McDonald (2009-09-28 22:20:28)
Offline
#23 2009-09-29 06:59:44
Larry, I would like to know why they believe the town clerk is not in a conflict of interest position. I think a question like " Whereas the town clerk's position is defined in the existing charter, why do you believe that having the incumbent town clerk as an active member of this committee is not an actual conflict of interest?"
Offline
#24 2009-09-29 07:03:12
Larry, good suggestions on filling the open position. But they did not want anyone on the committee who they knew would not automatically fall in line. They put people on the committee who had only been to a few town meetings and had never read the charter--the applicants they appointed admitted it during interviews. THE FIX WAS IN FROM THE BEGINNING.
There should have been two committees--the first a REAL charter review committee as required by the charter consisting of 9 members. These people should have done what they were supposed to do--REVIEW THE CURRENT CHARTER.
Then, the bos could have appointed a committee to research the different types of town government and given the people pros and cons of each type. Then the people could have made a decision on whether or not we thought it was time to change town government. Instead, we have a completely slanted opinion--mayor or nothing. It is a completely different topic from charter review and should not be part of that committee's discussion.
Bully the people to vote for what you want. Don't give the people intelligent choices--choose for them. It has to stop. This whole process was done incorrectly.
Is there any way we can find out how much K and P money has been spent so far by this committee?
Offline
#25 2009-09-29 08:32:18
One easy way to find out what has been spent is to question the first article at Town Meeting.
Demand a line by line accounting of all monies spent and for what reasons.
Get to the bottom line and force some one's feet to the fire to explain the expenditures.
Those you disagree with, toss out as a line item veto.
Open Town Meeting...what a wonderful concept.
Offline
#26 2009-09-29 08:34:42
dan thank you for that!!!
Offline
#27 2009-09-29 18:22:26
Maybe they'll talk about the missing ninth member tonight. How many Executive sessions will they have? They've been having them before and after. But, I don't think they've been opening the first one "by the book". Are you surprised?
Warm up the Telly.
Watch the display of open government on the third post of this thread for an appetizer.
PShooter
Last edited by PShooter (2009-09-29 18:23:19)
Offline
#28 2009-09-30 09:43:30
Brenda Eckstrom, Board of Selectman & Selectmen liason to the Charter Review Committee during the "Move Wareham Forward" Rally portion of the 9/29/09 BOS meeting emotionally stated:
Brenda said:"We have people resigning from committees because they're being attacked for being on committees, because the committee might vote some way, or have a discussion at a meeting. We're having them videotaping our, our, our citizens..y'know at the workshop meetings that people are having, editing them, and putting them on, and, and, and questions and answers not, y'know, proper and stuff. And they think it's funny, and they think it's enjoyable to do that.."
This statement is false on so many levels, I don't know where to begin. But, I'll try. First, the meeting (only one, not "meetings", as she stated) she refers to was not a "workshop meetings that people are having", it was a Charter Review Committee meeting, at which decisions are being made about the Town's governmental change, and it is completely legal to videotape and share this information with the citizens of Wareham, who might have some interest in the proceedings.
"editing them", I've already stated that I edited out ONLY the names of the audience members, including the cameraman, as I don't believe their names are relevant, and should never have been brought into the discussion, publically. Besides, if I chose to use only "portions" of the meeting, I don't see why I couldn't do that. I make every effort to present any meeting I've posted to be "as is", full and complete, with few, if any edits.
"and questions and answers not, y'know, proper and stuff" , Give me one example of this. Any questions posed or answers given were, by all means "proper and stuff", I defy you to find one example to the contrary.
Lastly, I do not find it "funny" or "enjoyable" to point out the errors and inconsistencies of the "leadership" of Wareham. In fact, I'd rather have never gotten involved in Town affairs at all. I'd just as soon have leaders who act responsibly and in the citizens of Wareham's best interests. Your actions, and the actions of the other "leaders" have brought on the turmoil now present in the Town.
I'm editing this in, because it's so ridiculous, I think I just ignored it the first few times around. Ms. Eckstrom stated:
"We have people resigning from committees because they're being attacked for being on committees"
Who has resigned? That's news. Do we now have two, three vacancies on a committee? I think we should be made aware if a member or members of say, the Charter Review Committee has/have dropped out. There might be some good people willing to step up and fill the void...No one's attacked anyone, and certainly not for something as benign as being on a committee. The record of their actions is up for debate.
Her comments begin at (6:50)
Move Wareham Forward? (pt.1)
PShooter
Last edited by PShooter (2010-02-14 13:06:56)
Offline
#29 2009-09-30 10:19:25
Pshooter,
I agree 100% with you! That was a display of tears because they are being held accountable, not because we find it enjoyable or funny. In fact, I am dead serious about what the CRC is doing. This is not harrassment, this is how open government works. So much of what is being done is being done behind closed doors or outside of meetings.
Brenda may be referring to the questions I posted to the CRC link on the town website. If she feels they are harrassing her, she is wrong. They are legitimate questons that I would like answers to:
1. Has there been any consideration as to whether it our current elected officials contribute to the problems with our government? Could this be a bigger issue than the actual charter?
2. Is it a conflict of interest to have an elected official, Mary Ann Silva, as a committee member?
3. Because the committee is one member short, has there been any consideration given to some of the citizens who were intereviewd? In particular, two citizens that have a firm grasp of the charter and MGL? (Peter Baum and/or Cara Winslow). If not, why not?
4. Wouldn’t it be better to review the current charter and discuss the issues with each piece of the charter? It would give the citizens of this town a better comfort level if you can show an actual effort to review the charter instead of chucking it out the window.
5. If the citizens of Wareham reject your changes at Town Meeting, why would you pursue it against their wishes?
As requested by Bruce Sauvageau at last night's meeting: we are seeking more accountability, open government, and responsibility to the citizens of Wareham. (And not just from the library).
Offline
#30 2009-09-30 23:04:45
Bobo Wrote: "Eckstrom said meetings are being videotaped, edited and posted on the internet, distorting what was actually said at these meetings as a means to embarrass the volunteer board members"
No she didn't. Read post #28 of this thread, and check the video. What's the matter, the truth's not good enough for you Bobo? Come on Bobo, do your homework. Or, as I suspect, your incremental twists of reality eventually turn into full blown fairy tales.
Brenda Said: "We have people resigning from committees because they're being attacked for being on committees, because the committee might vote some way, or have a discussion at a meeting. We're having them videotaping our, our, our citizens..y'know at the workshop meetings that people are having, editing them, and putting them on, and, and, and questions and answers not, y'know, proper and stuff. And they think it's funny, and they think it's enjoyable to do that.."
Last edited by PShooter (2009-10-01 00:13:06)
Offline
#32 2009-10-01 06:46:53
PShooter--since slager won't be reading this site anymore, he won't see that you have exposed him for spreading that "negativity plague" Ms. Begley was talking about.
Let's supply this clown with stones--you know, since he lives in a glass house and has been hurling so many, he must be running low.
And I wonder if Brenda will correct slager since he clearly got her message wrong. I'm sure she wouldn't want to be portrayed as spreading that "negativity plague" herself.
Don't hold your breath. Remember, she's not reading this site either.
Offline
#34 2009-10-07 09:08:46
Sounds more like a Charter Rewrite Committee than just the appointed "review".
NO MAYORAL FORM OF GOVERNENT!!
Offline
#35 2009-10-07 09:55:31
To clear up an "inaccuracy" by Alan Slavin at the end of the interview with WCTV. The last CRC Mtg. wasn't "recorded by a group with special interests", it was recorded by an interested individual citizen, pursuing open government, who just so happens to think the process, as implemented by the CRC, has had considerable "shortcomings".
PShooter
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
Auto-edited on 2020-08-11 to update URLs
Offline
#36 2009-10-07 14:11:11
Need to vent.
In a court of law you need X amount of jurors and 2 stand-bys. If the Charter Review Committee is lacking a member, it SHOULD NOT PROCEED until that spot is filled and it would be nice to have an xtra two citizens to just sit back and listen in case someone drops out. My personal belief is that our Town Clerk should not be a "member" of this committee, but she should be there (as a liaison position) and allowed to act as a member, excluding voting.
And, Alan is going to discuss with Brenda suggestions for a new member? Hi Ho.........in walks Liz Pezzoli. NOT. To be perfectly clear, her name was never mentioned, but knowing Brenda's BOS background I would be leery of any one she suggests. Sorry if I just made your heart skip a beat!
I want to hear from each committee member, word for word, the answer to this question/statement. "DEFINE WHAT CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE MEANS TO YOU."
REVIEW, as defined by Webster's New World Dictionery: 1. a looking at or looking over again 2. a general survey or report 3. a looking back on (past events, etc.) 4. a reexamination, as of the decision of a lower court 5. a critical evaluation of a book, play, etc. 6. a formal inspection, as of troops on parade more definition: 1. to look back on 2. to survey in thought, speech, etc. 3. to inspect (troops, etc.) formally 4. to give a critical evaluation of (a book, etc.) 5. to study again
Noun or verb doesn't matter. Does anyone out there see "REWRITE" in the above definitions? I think Molly is 100% right in saying we should have had a committee of 9 to review our town charter and another committee to study other town's (comparable to ours) forms of government. But of course this would never happen because if you are sitting in on a BOS meeting and a review was contemplated and agreed upon, you have NO right to raise your hand to discuss this or make suggestions.
This needs to be blown out of the water, fast! What we think, is not what is written.
When Brenda was first elected, I recalled some actions that sounded a little off key. Listening more, I wondered if she was going through the town charter. I think (my opinion) that she was truly trying to hold people accountable. (New kid on the block). Within a very short time, she changed.
I would love to go back to the original charter, but it is outdated - but not that much! It should have been reviewed years ago, as our town was growing, changing. We are all to blame for that - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Well it was breaking down. Amendments have been made to the Constitution, but it's backbone is still standing tall. We need to update, not rewrite.
Okay, I feel a little better now. Thanks.
Offline
#37 2009-10-07 14:15:20
Born,
Please put those concerns and question to the CRC through the town website. I have already put my questions and concerns. I haven't heard a reply yet, but I'll wait a bit longer. If I don't hear anything, I will likely return to the meeting and ask them in person.
Offline
#38 2009-10-07 19:12:44
Done.
Offline
#39 2009-10-07 19:33:57
Born...you know I love you!!
Offline
#40 2009-10-07 22:56:45
Sauvageau stressed the importance of supporting Town Meeting and urged all residents to attend.
“It’s a civic duty and deeply important to the future of the community,” he said. “There are several articles that will generate debate and decide on the future of this town.”
He said he understood the difficulties of attending Town Meeting and that people had families and commitments to consider.
“But this is a vital commitment,” he said. “I plead on behalf of the board that everyone who can possibly attend do so. Democracy happens at Town Meeting, more so than at elections. No matter what side of the issues you’re on, please come.”
Remember he said this when it comes time to vote for a change in the form of Government, and loss of Town Meeting.
Courier: Selectmen weigh in on warrant
PShooter
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
Offline
#41 2009-10-07 23:26:46
danoconnell wrote:
Born...you know I love you!!
Ya, Ya, Ya...you say that to everyone!
wink
Offline
#42 2009-10-07 23:37:47
Most people in office like a low turn out this includes Tm that puts them in controll. If Bruce is incurraging voters to turn out for town meetning he is calling for his own down fall. yes turn out for town meeting and in April show them who is running Wareham. the voters will speak and the incumbants will not like what they hear. It is time to take back Wareham and move it forward. Is there any other direction to go.
Offline
#43 2009-10-10 17:27:35
The first few minutes (I don't know exactly how much) of this are cutoff. I think the broadcast started a little earlier than I expected.
CRC/WCTV 10/7/09 Full Video
Charter Review Committee: Meeting Minutes
PShooter
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
Auto-edited on 2020-08-11 to update URLs
Offline
#44 2009-10-22 16:29:43
Courier: Wareham Charter Review Committee: state OK with town clerk’s role on committee
Relevance? Can the public have a say in what is considered relevant? Please Alan?
I'm glad they addressed it, they probably wouldn't have issued any statement about the potential inappropriateness of her inclusion on the committee. If she has "invaluable knowledge" of the Charter (maybe?? there could be others), and may be useful if/when it does/doesn't get passed in April. I wonder? What if you used the (at least) three TM's that came and went, when you could have actually reviewed the current Charter, and proposed refinements??...and, how come in the "Paul Show", you never mention your intention to go for an elected Charter Commision if it gets voted down in April. Quit your power plays, and try listening to the public. Some are paying attention.
PShooter
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
Last edited by PShooter (2009-10-22 18:24:48)
Offline
#46 2009-11-13 22:57:39
Ok, it's actually pretty tiring pointing out things that bug me when I listen to "Citizen of the Year" Alan Slavin..In just the first ten minutes of the interview (link above) he says things that as Chairman of the CRC I find "troubling"
They are obviously sour about TM..though a turnout of 500 on night one (and a Westfield/Article 2 vote that was what? 261-220, or something)...and 23 Articles on the Warrant (Both of which fly in the face of your claims that TM is somehow broken. You've claimed up to 60 Articles (happened once) and 150 attendees on average..actually the average warrant article number (last 5 years) is about 34, and this TM far exceeded your claims concerning attendance.
They also claim that "winning" and "losing" is "our" prime motivation..
Nope, check the record Bud, look back and check the date stamps..we made every attempt to fully understand these articles, and by your comments I'm certain I understood them better than you..and the information here did far more to inform people than any of you did. That's a fact. The whole body was in on the fix, is that it?
There's more but my head hurts..Please watch some of these meetings, misery loves company...and I usually have to go back myself when I get a chance a watch through them..I think it's often worth the time..ok, where's the aspirin?
..and Paul..you show yourself to be woefully lacking in understanding on too many issues. Even if it's for the benefit of those who may need additional information, and your asking questions on their behalf..Dan's right, and Bob was too..you need to "bone up" on a number of important topics concerning our town (IMO)
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
Offline
#47 2009-11-23 16:09:25
The Board of Selectmen hand-picked the required Charter Review Committee from a pool of approximately 13 candidates. These people were interviewed on television at regular selectmen’s meeting. Three people who were interviewed had years of experience attending town meeting and in local government. However, these people were also considered opponents of the current board and were not appointed.
Instead, the Board chose several of their followers for the Charter Review Committee, a few of them having only attended a couple of chaotic town meetings and have little or no experience in Wareham’s town government. Some even admitted they had never read the charter!! The Charter Review Committee does not represent the electorate of Wareham.
At the first Charter Review Committee meeting, the members determined that the form of town government should change from open town meeting, where every citizen has the right to speak and vote, to a mayoral form of government which this Board of Selectmen is pushing. Our present system works well when competent people serve, and there is no reason to change our form of government. Wareham simply needs
competent leaders and officials in power, and then our form of government will work as it is supposed to.
In addition, the Charter Review Committee must abide by open meeting law, as do all appointed town committees. Yet, when a citizen tried to video tape a meeting, which is allowed by law, the first person to refuse him permission was Town Clerk, Mary Ann Silva. She of all people should know the rules for open meeting law. (According to Mass General Law Ch. 39 Section 23b, each committee member should be furnished with a copy of the law by the Town Clerk, who must then get a signed verification that the member received it.) Other Charter Review committee members were noticeably upset at the taping. Their deliberations should be public. There should be no secrets. This Board of Selectmen insist upon transparency, yet it was not in evidence here. It also took many weeks to post the committee’s minutes and some have still not been posted.
The Charter Review Committee, instead of “reviewing” the charter as required, have decided to propose “tossing out” the charter. This change will most likely appear in a warrant article in next April’s town meeting. Be sure to attend the meeting to preserve our democratic form of government. Vote against changing Wareham to a mayoral form of government.
November Newsletter
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Offline
#48 2009-11-23 16:48:42
This clip shows the chairman of the Charter Review Committee (CRC), Alan Slavin (standing ready before those gathered even finished the Pledge of Allegiance) requesting to take "out of order" the petitioned Articles # 45 thru 53 (Bob Brady the petitioner). A few things are puzzling.
They were scheduled to start with Article # 41, so why not just wait a few minutes to get to #'s 45-53?
The chairman of the CRC (Alan Slavin) claimed that the committee was "presently working on the Articles" therefore he was recommending Further Study, yet their meeting minutes don't show any discussions for any of the Articles prior to town meeting.
Listen carefully. No main motion to Further Study the entire grouping of the Articles was ever proposed because the moderator didn't follow his own procedure to allow ONLY the petitioner to make the main motion on any and all petitioned Articles, but instead was complicit in circumventing the process by his actions. The moderator never even allowed Mr. Brady enough time to get to the microphone.
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Offline
#49 2009-11-23 17:15:42
Now we're getting a little closer to home so I'll add further that here we have the Chairman of the Charter Review Committee, Mr. Alan Slavin, circumventing the Town Meeting due process and now he wants US to believe the process is broken and WE should change it.
Mr. Slavin, if you want to see broken, look in the mirror. You are the wrong appointee for the task. You should resign too. You have become part of the problem. NO CREDIBILITY !
Offline
#50 2009-11-23 17:30:42
True that..Mr. Brady.
Mr. Slavin how many boards and committees do you intend to manipulate? Do you look in the mirror Mr. Brady speaks of and think (or say aloud), "Councilman Alan Slavin"??...Serve your Town, resign.
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Last edited by P-SPAN (2009-11-23 18:55:15)
Offline
#51 2009-11-27 16:59:42
Courier: Opinion: Charter Review Committee responds to editorials
...But any time a “special interest” IS malicious and hostile, if it carries the day, then democracy itself is undermined.
Because although democracy is defined as equal representation, it’s not just about that; it is also about being aware of a possible “greater good” than one’s own wallet, say, or personal comfort, and about respecting the rights and dignity of others.
And when a group votes against an article, not on the merits of the article, but, for example, to vanquish or humiliate a proponent, we have an example of damaging “special interest’ that makes a mockery of and undermines democracy.
It is these actions, not childish behavior at a meeting, that strengthens the committee’s recommendation. Yes, as one editor pointed out, most council members would have to deal with the disparity of wishes of her particular constituency. However difficult that might prove to be, it would healthfully limit the unhealthy “special interest” vote.
Wareham Charter Review Committee;
Alan Slavin, chairman, Mick Jones, vice chairman,
Mary Ann Silva, clerk,
Leie Carmody, Len Gay,
Jack Houton, Ed Pacewicz, Dave Smith
Ask yourself..Does this committee represent the desires of the citizens of Wareham?
A rather large group participated in TM a month ago, and this is their response to those "involved" enough to attend. Everyone who voted (against "them") were ignorant "rabble rousers"
...I can't tell you guys to kiss my ass hard enough.
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Last edited by P-SPAN (2009-11-27 17:15:48)
Offline
#52 2009-11-27 18:10:05
I read their letter..let me see now...ummmm....ahhh...gosh...ummmm....let me see....OK....I can describe it and the people who wrote it, in my opinion after carefully reading it:
BULLSHIT!!!
Offline
#53 2009-11-28 15:04:47
Where's Larry? On 10-7-09, I wrote to the CRC via the town website. This was about my blog on that day. I still have recieved no answer, did you ever get an answer from yours? I guess I'll have to print it out and use a stamp. More money, damn!
Offline
#54 2009-11-28 15:16:09
bornof..I'm not sure about Larry, but I sent in several comments and have received no response. I guess if your a citizen and they feel your "against them" it's not worthy of a response.
KEEPTOWNMEETING
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Offline
#55 2009-11-28 17:02:35
P-SPAN wrote:
bornof..I'm not sure about Larry, but I sent in several comments and have received no response. I guess if your a citizen and they feel your "against them" it's not worthy of a response.
KEEPTOWNMEETING
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
WELL, EXCUSE ME! They should check my name to see if it's on the voting list. I do vote. Now, why would they think I am against them unless they read my blog. Any selectmen out there? Are you listening? Are you reading this "HATEBLOGGER WEBSITE", if so you probably connected my blog to my name. Now, look on the list of town voters. Yup, that's my name on the list of voters. Due to your actions, I AM against you. You need to get your sanctimonious asses down off those big chairs and onto a metal fold up seat so you will be on our level. You work for us. That was the deal when you were elected and by the way.........in case you didn't understand this, YOU DO WORK FOR US. Start doing your job. I am worthy of a response.
Do you agree P-Span? Oh, by the way, I overheard Liz Pezzoli call us ''HATE BLOGGERS'' on a "HATE WEB SITE". I don't hate. I am angry!
Offline
#56 2009-11-28 17:47:26
bornofwareham wrote:
Do you agree P-Span? Oh, by the way, I overheard Liz Pezzoli call us ''HATE BLOGGERS'' on a "HATE WEB SITE". I don't hate. I am angry!
Oh, I do..bornof. My point exactly.
People. if you didn't catch the "workshop" meeting from Tuesday (and God knows they're hoping you don't), the comments about ST/DA etc.. as well as the appointments of Library Board, and significant discussion on the "pay to throw" (or whatever) Garbage issues is REALLY worth a look.
Their comments toward the ST I found particularly irritating. We need to get rid of these (edit) ASAP!!!
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Offline
#57 2009-11-28 19:56:32
bornofwareham wrote:
As I was dusting a book shelf today, I pulled out an old town report (Fiscal -
1980-81). On May 21, 1981 there was a dedication ceremony of the New Field Stone Memorial commemorating the sight of the former Pilgrim Memorial Grammar School and a new sign designating the area as the Richard H. Arruda Memorial Playground by the Board of Selectmen.
The Memorial contains one of the original tablets from the front of the former Pilgrim Memorial School and a bronze plaque commemorating the site of the school.
The beautiful Pilgrim Memorial School was built in 1920 and stood at the location of the present Arruda Tennis Courts. This famous school building was attended by generations of Wareham pupils and was destroyed by fire on July 7, 1966.
Former teachers of this school attending the ceremony were: Rose Pederzani, Ann Tooker, Olive Caires and Louise Westgate.
The inscription on the Tablet reads: THIS TABLET IS PLACED TO COMMEMORATE THE TERCENTENARY OF THE LANDING OF THE PILGRIMS 1620 - 1920 "DO NOT BASELY RELINQUISH WHAT THE FATHERS WITH DIFFICULTY ATTAINED."
The Richard H. Arruda Memorial Playground was previously dedicated to Richard H. Arruda, who was born on April 29, 1948, attended the Pilgrim Memorial School, graduated from Wareham High School, and was killed in action with the U. S. Marine Corps in Vietnam on September 12, l968.
My town, my school, my teachers, my friend.
To the citizens of Wareham who want our charter "updated" and not rewritten, but to continue with our current form of government...........and the the citizens of Wareham who want to keep the Chief of Police's job civil service..................and the citizens of Wareham who want to keep Westfield as open space and for family and recreation use.............................keep fighting the current BOS. Remember these words.
''DO NOT BASELY RELINQUISH WHAT THE FATHERS WITH DIFFICULTY ATTAINED."
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Offline
#58 2009-11-30 00:03:43
P-SPAN wrote:
bornofwareham wrote:
Do you agree P-Span? Oh, by the way, I overheard Liz Pezzoli call us ''HATE BLOGGERS'' on a "HATE WEB SITE". I don't hate. I am angry!
Oh, I do..bornof. My point exactly.
People. if you didn't catch the "workshop" meeting from Tuesday (and God knows they're hoping you don't), the comments about ST/DA etc.. as well as the appointments of Library Board, and significant discussion on the "pay to throw" (or whatever) Garbage issues is REALLY worth a look.
Their comments toward the ST I found particularly irritating. We need to get rid of these (edit) ASAP!!!
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
I wonder what color bag we should use to discard selectmen? I'll pay the $1.50 for that bag! I couldn't quite get what they said about the tipping fee. Will this decrease for the town? Doesn't SEMASS have anything to say about this?
Offline
#59 2009-11-30 08:41:59
Born,
I did not receive a reply of any sort from the CRC. I felt my questions were legit, but apparently they wanted avoid the hard questions. At any rate, I will address the CRC sometime this week. I read their letter to the editor and will have some sort of reply.
Offline
#60 2009-11-30 08:42:20
Sorry, PSpan.....12-0....go colts
Offline
#61 2009-11-30 09:33:02
i have given the CRC my 2 cents and asked several ?'s also thru the town website.. NO response either..
Offline
#62 2009-11-30 23:14:17
CRC stop complaining about the 2 meetings that were taped... if ya dont like the citizens taping your i mean our meetings that have WCTV tape them and be transparent..
Offline
#63 2009-12-02 01:04:06
OK, it's been awhile since I checked the Town's website to see if they've bothered to update the minutes postings. Well, I was shocked (not really) to see that there are 11 meeting minutes posted (the last dated 10/08/2009)..and 6 missing??..nobody cares, nobody notices...just like they want it. Let alone the content of those minutes clearly (IMO) shows the dysfunction. Who said "Review"?? Still appear to be missing the 9th member too.
Pay attention to these committee members..they "pop up" all over the place. Library Boards, everywhere (Alan), Bobo's blog (I hear, along with Mr. Moderator), MWF political rally's sponsored by the BoS, too "frightened" to speak at TM, and writing letters to the editor about it (and not mentioning CRC appointment), suggesting "Australian ballots" at TM (yeah, we trust JD and the gang to count votes)..oh, and trying to block recordings of open meetings. Etc.........
Let's see if some of you can think of where these folks have "popped up" elsewhere..
It can be like a "Where's Waldo" thing..trust me..the more pieces of the puzzle you see, the clearer the overall image becomes.
Charter Review Committee
John F. Houton Member Nov 2010
Leie Carmody Member Nov 2010
Edward Pacewicz Member Nov 2010
David Smith Member Nov 2010
Michael L. Jones Vice Chair Nov 2010
Linwood A. Gay Member Nov 2010
Alan Slavin Chairman Nov 2010
Mary Ann Silva Clerk Nov 2010
NO2LACKEYS
http://www.wareham.ma.us/Public_Documen … harterMin/
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Offline
#64 2009-12-07 19:03:55
Does anyone know why the Charter "Review" Committee's meeting's aren't listed on the Meeting's Calender on the Town's Website? Transparency?? They're itching to have you there...nice and quiet (they want it) until April..then see what happens. If it gets voted down EXPECT a Elected Charter Commission and more "ignoring" of the people's wishes....This is what they'll do. Count on it. Note the date their appointments run through (above).
http://www.wareham.ma.us/Public_Documen … formid=158
According to Article 89, Section 4, of the Massachusetts Constitution, a town may propose amendments to its charter by a two-thirds vote of Town Meeting and then ratify those amendments by a majority vote in an election, but the possibilities for amendments are limited. To change the way a town’s government is structured, say by going from a board of selectmen to a mayor, or even going from five selectmen to three, requires that a town go through a charter commission.
A charter commission can only be called for by a petition signed by at least 15 percent of registered voters in town. After the petition is certified, voters need to determine whether they want to revise the charter and who will make up the nine-member commission. Commission members are elected at large like other town officers.
http://www.wickedlocal.com/wareham/town … nterviewed
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Offline
#65 2009-12-08 10:56:42
Larry McDonald wrote:
Letter: Charter Review Committee is a special interest group in disguise
Mon Dec 07, 2009, 01:37 PM EST
To the editor:
I have a simple request for each member of the Charter Review Committee. Please resign and allow responsible and thoughtful people to undertake the challenge of reviewing and suggesting changes to our existing charter. You can sling all the big words you can muster to defend what you are doing, but it simply is a travesty.
Democracy, by the basic definition, is a political government that is carried out DIRECTLY by the people. That is what Town Meeting represents, DIRECTLY by the people. Were there hostilities? It depends on your definition of hostility. I prefer to classify the overall tone of our fall Town Meeting as confrontational. Instead of using the tone of Town Meeting as a means to justify your desire to change the form of government, why not eliminate the cause for this type of behavior? The town moderator, John Donahue, did an extremely poor job of controlling the meeting. His actions actually increased tension and aggravation with the citizens in attendance. Was it proper to leave his post while speakers were abusing the time limits? Did his instructions to the counters increase the confusion? Of course, the moderator’s liabilities were not the only issue. One of our very own selectmen, Brenda Eckstrom, made a motion to dissolve the meeting before all business was complete. In this case, the moderator allowed the improper motion to go to vote, which furthered the dissatisfaction among the attendees. Why are we not addressing the issues that threaten our current form of government? Is it the intent of the Charter Review Committee to blame the problems of our current system when the problems clearly are related the people occupying the elected positions?
What has allowed each of you, as members of this committee, to further the agenda of a minority of citizens is voter apathy. Low voter turnout has put the current slate of elected officials in place. That same current slate has appointed you to this board. The intent of this board was clear from the first meeting, when a vote was taken to change the current form of government. Contrary to your opinion of the citizens of this fine town, we are not blind! We have listened to the selectmen complain about being “unpaid volunteers” for too long to not see the connection. What some citizens may not be aware of is the effort to push your agenda through, even if Town Meeting votes against it. Could that be behind your efforts to soil the democratic process known at Town Meeting?
During my visit to your meetings, I was shocked to find that the Charter Review Committee is in the process of re-writing the charter to fit the type of government you are pushing. This should and will be a wasted effort when it is voted down at Town Meeting this spring. It is also a waste of taxpayer dollars to use Koppelman and Paige to review each change, as you informed the public you were doing. I realize you will then ignore the vote (just as our chairman of the selectmen is trying to do) and force your agenda on the very same people who are telling you no.
You are clearly a special interest group disguised as a committee. You speak of wanting public opinion and input and disregard written questions from citizens. Please consider resigning and placing this very important job in the hands of citizens that are not looking to further special interests. You are wasting the time and assets of this town, and that is unacceptable.
Larry McDonald
Wareham
http://www.wickedlocal.com/wareham/news … n-disguise
https://warehamwater.cruelery.com/viewt … 543#p62543
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Auto-edited on 2020-08-11 to update URLs
Last edited by P-SPAN (2009-12-08 17:08:43)
Offline
