Ok so now let me get this straight. I asked the question last week. Did or did not the Selectmen meet  on Tuesday. I asked this question because there was no meeting posted anywhere yet when I drove by the  Multi- service center there were selectmen vehicles in the lot and the lights were on in the meeting room. No one was sure. Now this info comes to light which implies that the Selctmen did indeed hold yet another illegal executive session. I try to be clean on here but I am sorry. This is pure unadulterated bullshit. This BOS is simply taunting the DA's office now. It has gone beyond any level of sanity. I doubt that they will but I hope the DA finnally wakes up and throws the book at the jokers. Inexcusable,but not at all surprising.

By: angel-joe on 12/28/09
I also noticed that the hate site bloggers have been eerily quiet the past few days.

I hope no member of the BOS gave them a heads up from executive meetings ...at the demcratic party !!!!

Of course, I am thinking, you already know why they have been quiet Robert... and I am thinking you already know if there might be a "snitch" or mole. .....Disgusting.


It's called Christmas ! Try getting a life Betty instead of blogging with Bobo

By: robertslager on 12/27/09
Weird entry on the police log this week:

09-33787 1707 SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY

Location/Address: [WAE 1] WAREHAM POLICE DEPT. - CRANBERRY HWY

Narrative:

RP REQUESTING A LOG ENTRY FOR HARRASSMENT BY

WAREHAMOBSERVER.COM WEB SITE.

I don't know anything more about this. We're www.thewarehamobserver.com. Whitehouse is www.warehamobserver.com



Ana Paulina strikes again. Yes the poet who worked for slager until she attempted to be homeland security in bourne , stole a car in wareham. Does anyone remember this site "harrassing" her lately? Bobo is she in your tin foil hat gang?

Jesus Christ, Bobo.  It's the holidays.  Take a break from kissing Sweet Brucey's ass and get a life, will ya?

Seriously Bobo, it's ok, take a break, put on some chapstick, don't worry because Brucey's ass will still be there in the new year, and after you rest up you'll be that much more refreshed and ready to slap your lips on Brucey's butt full force come January.

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2009-12-28 22:51:07)

How can the town not accept it? I read the settlement record on this site which was a legal document, not a wish list. I thought they considered it a win for their side. All I see is more money to K and P. Looks like 2010 will be a good year for K and P from their Wareham clients.

Dick Paulsen's idea of getting rid of K and P and hiring a lawyer on retainer is a good idea. What do we have to do to get that done? Maybe wait until April.  But remember this--if we didn't spend so much money on legal bills, we might have been able to hire a few more snow plowing contractors at the going rate instead of losing them to towns that pay for their plowing.  Now that would be a good use of my tax dollars.

Congratulations, Bobo.  You are officially the worst liar on earth.

The selectmen have been caught violating the law leaking private executive session information to their bitch lackey reporter, Bobo.  There is no spinning their way out of it.  They had a duty under the law to keep executive session information private and they blabbed to their lackey (or at the very least, to someone who blabbed to the lackey) and the lackey posted it on his blog for the world to see.  A private meeting, the only ones there the selectmen, and somehow Bobo manages to post it in his tin hat chat? 

Plus, the bagel biter POSTS IT HIMSELF and then he and Brucey try to blame the truthbloggers!  This is both appauling and funny at the same time.  Appauling that the selectmen would act like this, funny that these people have so little respect for Wareham that they think all of the voters are morons.

They should all resign immediately.

By: robertslager on 12/27/09
OK. I hate giving info in this forum, but what the heck. Word from my library sources is that the settlement has collapsed because selectmen will not sign it. Selectmen will not confirm a rumored vote that allegedly occured in executive session last week. That executive session was called to discuss potential criminal activity



OH WHAT THE HECK, THE BLOGGER IS ROBERT SLAGER!

Thanks for joining the New Year's Resolution to never read the rag again group, voter.

Now for the rest of you. It's New Year's eve. Those of you still reading and commenting on the rag--please join us in making Wareham rag-free. You will be glad you did. Begin 2010 without the toxic waste.

Mr.Paulson, you should also check with the town of Rochester. They had in house counsel, that I'm aware of, a couple of years ago for $45,000 per year. This lawyer came in every day for a couple of hours in the morning and met with all the dept heads and chairman of various boards and committees every morning to see if they had any questions he could answer or any material he needed to review. I'm sure that his cost has gone up, but if they still have this system it may be worthwhile to see how it's working for them.

However, the name of the game here is to follow the advice given by town counsel. If they tell you you should settle, you should settle. It's my understanding that in the library case, the lawyer for the town's insurer advised the town to settle and Brenda said, no way hosea, and the town went out and hired another lawer to go against the town insurer's lawyer. That is just plain abuse of taxpayer dollars. The same with the Donald Bliss case. The Selectmen have advised counsel Torres not to settle in any way shape or form, and to keep appealing it to the last resort and to stall for as long as they can (by not having paperwork prepared to file, asking for continuances etc.). At an addtional cost to us, the taxpayer.

Go back to the Eileeen Hinkley case. The town settled with her, gave her three years salary to bring her up to being employed long enough to collect her pension, instead of fighting the case, which would have cost thousands of dollars more. The BOS realized it would be much cheaper to settle the case than to fight it.

Look at the Mr. Janey case, the gentleman from Onset. Mr. Cronin told him to sue the town. And you know what, he did. Depositions were given this week.

In house council will not cure the antics of the current Board if they don't listen to the advice they are given. K&P are just as guilty. They should refuse to take the case any further if they have advised the Selectmen in an appropriate manner to settle and the Selectmen refuse to follow their advice. While it's nice to litigate if you think you have just cause, you need to compare the cost of litigation to the cost of settlement. Even though there might be legitimate reason for a lawsuit, it's taxpayers dollars you are using and you have to look at the cost carefully. Will the end result justify the cost?

The finance committee can also help by refusing to transfer money from the reserve account unless there is an emergency. And, legal cases are not emergencies, so if the BOS are asking for money from the reserve account to settle these cases, the fin com should refuse and bring it to Town meeting as a warrant article. This has been done in the past and there is precedent. There have in fact been articles before the voters to pay a legal bill. Can it be voted down? Yes, but most likely not, as we owe the bill. But it will bring to the attention of the voters that the Board of Selectmen are costing us money and that we need to vote these incompetent people out of office.

Last edited by Maturevoter (2009-12-31 11:02:35)

Yes mature voter I agree with you completely. Mr Paulsen before the voters can even begin to pro-actively look at a better way to handle legal issues a very strong message needs to be sent to the current BOS that abuse of the legal expence fund will no longer be tolerated. This fund is not and should not be limitless regardless of whether you can deficit spend in that account or not.

A prime example of this is if there is any truth to the rumor that the BOS has refused to sign the library settlement agreement. This was a hard fought legal battle costing the taxpayers a pretty hefty sum to fight. There was an agreement reached in court and that agreement should be honored. Instead it is rumored that the BOS is refusing to sign it so that they may at thier will continue to spend money in legal fees on a library fight in which a majority of the major players are either deceased or have moved on. They are refusing to settle based on rumors of wrongdoing in which there is only hearsay and no verifiable evidence. I am sorry but in my opinion this is wrong on many levels and it needs to stop now.

The sad part is the BOS is allowed to do this and in April we the taxpayers are handed the bill at Town Meeting. Because the lawyers have already logged the hours at the direction of the BOS we are left with little choice but to vote to pay the bill. I don't know about others but this often times leaves me feeling great anger. I especially get upset if one of the legal bills that I am forced into agreeing to pay is for somthing that I as a voter don't support or don't agree with. It also makes me upset when by spending that money on legal fees it means that I have lost services.

For example the condition of Town roads is deplorable. The town regaurdless of whether it was due to the Muncipal Maintenance Workers refusing to take furloughs or not, chose to lay off half of the Municipal Maintenace department.
Now imagine that at least two of these layoffs were due to the fact that the BOS had overspent on legal fees. For me I would much rather have those two Municipal Maintenance workers out there maintaining my roads then see that money wasted on long drawn out legal battles. Especially if those legal battles are being fought because of personal vandettas held by some on the BOS.

I know and understand that legal bills are part of doing buisness but at this point the legal spending here has gottten totally out of hand. Mr. Paulsen, since it seems that audits seem to be the order of the day as of late I think it is high time for yet one more. I ask of you to consider calling for a specific audit of any and all leagal fees inccured by the town from 2002 to present. If that audit would be to extensive or cost prohibitive  then at minimum an audit of the legal fees for fy 08,09, and 10. My hope is that this audit could be preformed and finalized prior to April town meeting. This audit should specifically reference each and every case that the town is and has been involved in during this time along with how much money had been spent on each case. The voters of Wareham have the right to know how and for what these legal fees have been spent. And you as an appointee of the finance committee should feel obligated to bring forward this information.

Anything short of this in my opinion could be constued as a blatent attempt to hide this critical information from the voters. It is time to put up or shut up.
The voters of the Town of Wareham deserve no less than complete and total transparency and accountability from both thier elected officials and the people that they appoint to serve on boards and committees. IF THE CURRENT BOS REFUSES TO BE TRANSPARENT OR BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE TO THE VOTERS FOR THIER ACTIONS. Then I feel that the finance committee should. You after all are the board that is appointed to watch over the budgets for the Town. You are the ones that are entrusted to make sure Tax dollars are spent properly. Since it is very apparent that we can not reley on the BOS anymore to do the right thing and be fiscally responsible. I am hoping we can rely on you.