THIS IS TRULY UNREAL. AND THE BOARD HAS STILL NOT ACKNOWLEDGED THE PREVIOUS OPEN MTG VIOLATION. 14 TIMES PEOPLE. 14. WE DEMAND GOOD GOVERNMENT AND IT ISNT HAPPENING IN WAREHAM FOLKS. PEOPLE ARE MAD AS HELL IN WAREHAM AND CANT WAIT TO VOTE THESE CLOWNS OUT. BOBO CAN KISS THEIR ASS ALL HE WANTS IN HIS NEWEST ARTICLE BUT THEY WILL BE DEFEATED.

Is there any way to read the article linked above without subscribing to the st?

Good question. What are the sanctions?

Hope the above helps.  I have it in PDF verison but do not know how to attach a file.

Ha..one violation for each crazy hatchatter...spin Bobo, spin..

P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010

By: robertslager on 1/20/10
I find it offensive that the hatebloggers take copyright-protected random comments out of context from this site, ignore the thousands of comments that don't serve their purpose, and try to make it seem like we're just like them.


IS THIS BRUCE TALKING OR BOBO? I FIND YOU OFFENSIVE BOBO. I SEE YOU WERE ABLE TO WRITE STUPID OFFENSIVE COMMENTS BUT NOTHING ON THE 14 VIOLATIONS OF THE BOS

OK..I know many are living in a Boboless world (and reaping the benefit of a more peaceful existence)..but, the comments by Sweet Brucey - reporting from Mexico - and others are..well????...here they are (in part), judge for yourself..quotes from the BobObserver..

BOBO wrote:

Bruce Sauvageau, chairman of the board who is currently on vacation in Mexico, was irate when informed of the content of Lee’s letter.
    “I have no faith whatsoever in this assistant district attorney or the Plymouth Country District Attorney’s office,” he said during a telephone interview. “They are absolutely reaching for a reason to deny us our computer disks back.”
    Last summer the District Attorney’s office confiscated a series of computer disks owned by the town after then-interim town administrator John Sanguinet ordered an audit of all town-owned computers. The DA has refused repeated requests to return those disks to the town.
    “If this is about settling a score with us for demanding our disks back then we’ll see them in court,” said Sauvageau, adding that he was speaking for himself and not for the rest of the board. “I’m sick and tired of these rulings, which are just the opinion of one lawyer. I want to see this come before a judge, where we will have civil procedure, hearsay protection and rules of evidence. The days of bowing to these petty accusations are over. The real story here is that they don't want to return the disks.”
     Sauvageau said if the board had failed to properly announce it would serve as the interview subcommittee it was nothing more than a procedural error.
    “Because we may have (accidently) failed to utter a single sentence in public this will become front-page news in the Standard-Times,” he said. “This is raw ugly politics now. We have an election coming up. The DA’s office has proven to be politically motivated. That’s why they are pushing nonsense like this. The computer disks are the 800-pound gorilla in the room. If there is nothing on those disks, release them. Prove us wrong.”
    The DA’s office also claimed selectmen failed to record two roll call votes in executive session minutes. Selectmen also allegedly failed to provide the DA four sets of open session minutes upon request.
    Donahue said she was previously aware of the accusations made against the board by the Standard-Times.
    “Most of the violations the Standard-Times claimed came from the failure of the board to adhere to a requirement to publicly announce that the selectmen would form the subcommittee,” she said.
    Donahue declined further comment until reading Lee’s letter.
    Cronan, who serves as clerk on the board and is responsible for compiling the minutes of all open and executive session, said he was shocked by the DA’s ruling regarding executive session minutes.
    “My recollection is that I put down the votes in several places,” he said. “Without seeing the letter and without knowing the date of the meetings the DA is referencing it’s difficult to comment further. If there was an error is was just an accident.”
    None of the selectmen interviewed knew of the DA’s request for public session minutes regarding the hiring of Andrews. Those minutes have been available on the town’s web site since last month.
    Sauvageau said as chairman he should have been informed of such a request from the DA’s office.
     “No one ever spoke to me with such a request,” he said.

Sweet Brucey..DRINK THE WATER!!

P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010

Last edited by P-SPAN (2010-01-20 21:49:58)

Good lord, is EVERYTHING going to be about those computer disks?  More rain coming this weekend folks. If only the DA had given Wareham back its computer disks maybe the sun would shine!!!! 

I do believe the DA has become the BoS's scapegoat for everything that goes wrong in Wareham. Hey, at least it isn't the library taking the blame this time!!!  DA = scapegoat #1    LIBRARY = scapegoat #2    HATEBLOGGERS = scapegoat #3

Shouldn't our elected officials take responsibility for their actions? Shouldn't they be transparent rather than hiding behind closed doors to do the town's business? I do believe we have another reason to-

TAKE BACK WAREHAM!!

We need to send them a LOUD, CLEAR message in April..Ignore the DA, ignore anyone who dares to question the horrendous jobs they've done..They won't be able to ignore the voters (well, they did at TM)..but, this time it'll be different. Vote their asses out..and the ones left over, with diminished "sway" can look forward to the same treatment when their time(s) come.



P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010

HOLY CRAP!!! 14 OPEN MEETING LAW VIOLATIONS!!!!!!!!!

14 OPEN MEETING LAW VIOLATIONS BY A CORRUPT BOARD OF SELECT-CLOWNS!!!!!

P-SPAN, I can't believe you're going to let me beat you to this:



There is absolutely no excuse for this.  If you add in their three previous violations, the count is really 17.  (McAulliffe hiring, Swifts Beach minutes, December ruling that exposed the audit as a blogger witchhunt).

17 open meeting law violations.  No excuses, they should just hand in their resignations immediately.

Bobo, Since you so so often like to ask, "If "the hatebloggers" want to know the truth, why aren't they crying for (the disks back, an investigation of the Library, the Friends to open up their (private) books, etc., etc..)"

It's pretty simple for me..I don't trust these people...the same reason I voted against Ed Paciewicz's "Australian Ballot" motion at TM on Article 2.. proponents were given extra time to speak by the Moderator, the issue had been thoroughly vetted, the vote was taken (and re-taken)..and surprise, surprise ED "are you a lawyer" Paciewicz (LACKEY) rears his ugly head and wants everyone to let "Them" count the votes...Nope, no thanks..I DON'T TRUST 'EM..and I voted that way.

The disks are in safer hands (but the money's spent)...An investigation based on anything you've claimed about the library is a fools errand. You're like the neighbor's noisy, "barky" dog that just won't shut up. Civil, incivil..the votes count either way..and stop trying to tell "us" how to "Win Friends and Influence People"...if you're the model of living that type of discipline, then I think we're all set. Well, have a crappy day liar. Don't slip on the ice..wouldn't want you to soil your barracuda jacket..

P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010

There are several "arms" in this pile. First, let's address the repeated violations of the open meeting law. Do you think it's a coincidence that the CRC is pushing for a change of government? It's clear the current elected officials of this town cannot follow rules, so why not change the rules? Instead of suggesting we need to change leadership because they do not follow the rules, it's suggested that the rules aren't working! (flop over in disbelief)

Second, the secrecy of the current elected officials is a telling sign. WHy not do business in an open forum? We are the CEO's of this town and it appears we may be the only CEO's that are not allowed to see our elected leaders in action. Why? Because they have an agenda that goes against the wishes of the citizens.

Apparently there is an ongoing investigation and unless the DA comes up and tells us it is complete, no amount of whining is going to bring the discs back. What I want to know is whether or not ALL the hard drives in town were copied? That includes the Town Clerk's office, the TA's office and any laptops used by the Selectmen. Was this a selective investigation or a complete investigation. If only part of the hard drives were copied, do the ITA and Selectmen have verifiable proof and was this the basis for the investigation. Otherwise, they performed the investigation on "hearsay" and we all know how Brucey feels about hearsay!

IN all likelihood, the hard drives were COPIED, not removed. The CD's that contain the content of the hard drive are in possession of the DA and most likely NOT the firm hired to perform the service. If the hard drives were removed, then we have an added expense of purchasing hard drives for town computers. Another excellent expenditure????

Look, it's pretty simple. If you can't see it, this is the Worst case of poor leadership/management I have ever seen. Poor planning, poor execution, no ability to follow the rules, and very unprofessional behavior. let's vote these clowns out of office.

This has got to be one for the record books - 14 open meeting law violations, there really should be some kind of legal punishment when a board of selectmen is this out of control.

There can be consequences for breaking the open meeting law and these are described in
http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/39-23b.htm
Here are two interesting possible consequences:

   
1. “ …Such order may invalidate any action taken at any meeting at which any provision of this section has been violated, provided that such complaint is filed within twenty-one days of the date when such action is made public.”

   
2. “… Such order may also include a civil fine against the governmental body in an amount no greater than one thousand dollars for each meeting held in violation of this section.”

In the first case, it could mean that we no longer have a town administrator, but somebody has to file a complaint within twenty-one days .
In the second, more financial pain.

And then there is taking matters into our own hands and just getting rid of the offending officials.  Whenever I tell people about Wareham politics who don’t live here, they always end up asking, “Why don’t the voters just recall the officials?”  I don’t have a good answer to that question.  Why indeed?  If there is no attempt at a recall of Selectmen Eckstrom and Selectmen Dohanue very soon, they will be in office for at least another year.

$1000 per meeting. That's $14,000. I would imagine that in general, the DA's office would be lenient about these fines. But, since the BoS still haven't remedied the last violation, and the DA didn't sound too happy about that, I wouldn't be surprised if the fines are imposed. Talk about fiscal irresponsibility. Unless it comes out of the BoS's personal pockets of course!!!!

I find this an embarrassment to the town. This kind of disregard for the law must stop. I expect my elected officials to uphold the law, not flagrantly disregard it and then try to blame it on someone else.

I do believe April we be here sooner than we think.

Edit for random thought--do they sell tin foil sombreros in Mexico? Looks like this conspiracy theory crossed the border. La cucaracha, la cucaracha!!!

Last edited by Nora Bicki (2010-01-21 13:08:20)

NOTICE NO COMMENTS ON SLAGERS STORY ABOUT THIS. NO COMMENTARY FROM ANGEL JOE? NONE? STILL TRYING TO PUT A SPIN ON THIS?

Is it time yet or does April 6th need to happen first? http://warehamrecall09.webs.com/recallprocedure.htm

"If the hiring body is permitted to conduct the process in secret, the hiring decision can essentially be made with no public oversight, a result that is explicitly prohibited by the statutes provisions"

Hey, they do it all the time...pesky public.

DA Letter

P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010

Last edited by P-SPAN (2010-01-21 19:15:09)

Thanks, Flyspeck...
I think someone should call the U. S. Atty's office.
The State is doing noting, the local DA and Court are being laughed at and sneered, the Court is a joke to a so called want to be lawyer, and the BOS don't care because the Town will pay their bills.
Call the U. S. Attorney and see if they'd like to rid a Town of a cancer. They can have the whole BOS removed from office.
Cruz...too bad. No balls...no mouth...why the hell did you ever run for Selectman?
You are a disgrace, and some people were hopeful for you.
Too bad.

Oh, Wareham!
By Jack Spillane  Published: January 21, 2010

It’s hard to read the continuing saga of the Wareham selectmen’s disregard for open meetings law without concluding the town’s Board of Selectmen just don’t care what the law is.

Today’s story by Steve DeCosta quoting the Plymouth District Attorney’s office saying the board recently violated the state Open Meeting Law 14 separate times almost defies belief. The occasions involved the board’s failure to create a screening committee in the hiring process for a new town administrator, and it’s failure to alert the public of upcoming interviews and even to record its own votes.

What’s more the district attorney’s office said Wareham selectmen have violated the Open Meeting Law an additional five times since 2006, “demonstrating at least a conscious disregard, and at worse intentional decisions by the board, to violate the statute.”

In the wake of the D.A.’s report, Selectman Chairman Bruce Sauvageau’s glib statement declining comment because he is on vacation until the end of the month, indicates a board chairman who is openly contemptuous of the rule of law and the public’s right to know how it’s town works.

http://blogs.southcoasttoday.com/new-be … wareham-2/

P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010

Last edited by P-SPAN (2010-01-21 22:40:17)

I was told by a former ADA that when there are this many violations, and when it is not the first time violations have occurred by the same group, that the AG might very well step in and take some action. I had no idea that the AG could/would do such a thing since the DA is involved in requiring a remedy. The fact that the BoS ignored the requirement to "remedy" the last five violations plays a big role in how this will be handled apparently. And don't forget, they had three other violations in the past.

So, this shows a pattern of disregard for the open meeting law. I guess we will see. If the AG steps in, how will they spin a "conspiracy" theory for that??  The AG, after all, doesn't have the computer disks!! LOL

One more thing, don't they teach you in law school to make "NO COMMENT" especially if you haven't read the document under discussion? That old bar exam might be quite a challenge for a certain lawyer wanna be.

By: angel-joe on 1/22/10
Main Entry: confiscate
Part of Speech: verb
Definition: steal; seize


Hey May? Maybe the BOS is filing criminal charges against the DA for "stealing" the disks. He did not have a COURT ORDER by a judge to do so, which would mean, in my laymen's head, he stole town property. ?


BETTY PUT DOWN THE FRUITCAKE. THE BOS CANNOT FILE CRIMINAL CHARGES. THEY ARE SELECTMAN. WHY DONT YOU GO MAKE A CITIZENS ARREST ON THE DA AND SEE HOW THAT GOES YOU NUT

Angel-joe just returned from the never- never land trip.
I hope she changes her name some day to avoid an arbitrary mistake.
Just for her information, the DA doesn't need permission from a Judge to investigate any crime. That is their job. The Judge's job is to sign off on warrants, etc.
No-one in law enforcement asks the crook to help them investigate and prosecute them. So, the person(s) being investigated will not have much information prior to them being cuffed and taken out of the Town Hall to the local lock up.
What a freakin' idiot.
Advise to angel-joe...listen to an idiot, believe the idiot, quote the idiot, you become an idiot. Assuming you weren't one before.
Two idiots together don't amount to one genius. Just two idiots.
The mind is a terrible thing to waste In angel-joe's case, the mind was already wasted. It was stimulated by someone else who's mind was gone a long time ago.
I think even the FBI, monitoring your e-mail and postings, will agree.

Ham,
They are "forcing" the DA to take action by not performing the remedy for their violations. In effect, they are playing with our tax dollars. If the DA feels they are not in compliance with the order, they will seek additional sanctions (including monetary). At that time, the lawyers are once again on the clock.

Basically, it's not Bruce's money or any of the Selectmen's money, it's OUR money. We should expect a reasonable amount of care when spending our tax dollars, but they just continue to thumb their nose at us.

In an article from the S-T last year, Jane Donahue said the Selectmen believe in accountability, fiscal responsibility, and professional behavior. Seriously, this has to end. Every town in the Commonwealth is laughing at us!

Main Entry: 1bitch
Pronunciation: \ˈbich\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English bicche, from Old English bicce
Date: before 12th century
1 : the female of the dog or some other carnivorous mammals
2 a : a lewd or immoral woman b : a malicious, spiteful, or overbearing woman —sometimes used as a generalized term of abuse
3 : something that is extremely difficult, objectionable, or unpleasant
4. ROBERT SLAGER

Oh God, Bobo the Assclown spins, spins, spins away for his BOS masters as usual.  I wonder if they toss him a doggy treat and give him a nice pat on the head once in awhile for being a good lap dog. 

Remember that old quote when they violated the open meeting law with the McAulliffe hiring?  "If they violate the open meeting law again, we'll be all over them."

As usual, Bobo, the only thing you're "all over" is Brucey's ass - covering it even while it's in Tiajuana.

By the way, maybe instead of putting all of the resources at the town government's disposal into trying to shut this site down, maybe they should try listening to it once in awhile. 

We have all been saying for months that the selectmen should have appointed a search committee while hiring a new TA.  Every other town has one, and this town did prior to these clowns.

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2010-01-22 13:12:18)

Main Entry: 1dead·beat
Pronunciation: \ˈded-ˌbēt\
Function: noun
Date: 1863
1 : loafer
2 : one who persistently fails to pay personal debts or expenses
3. ROBERT SLAGER

There's just no excuse for 14 open meeting law violations - 17 if you count their three priors.  Resign immediately.

Sweet Brucey, stay in Mexico.  Run for Mayor of Guadalajara.

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2010-01-22 13:55:11)

Main Entry: in·com·pe·tent
Pronunciation: \(ˌ)in-ˈkäm-pə-tənt\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle French incompétent, from in- + compétent competent
Date: 1595
1 : not legally qualified
2 : inadequate to or unsuitable for a particular purpose
3 a : lacking the qualities needed for effective action b : unable to function properly
4. ROBERT SLAGER

No story ever written by Bobo should begin "The Truth About...."

EVER!!!

Last edited by billw (2010-01-23 11:18:44)

Impotent:
Adjective
im·po·tent (mp-tnt)

1. Lacking physical strength or vigor; weak.
2. Lacking in power, as to act effectively; helpless: "Technology without morality is barbarous; morality without technology is impotent" (Freeman J. Dyson).
3. Obsolete Lacking self-restraint.
4. Robert Slager

un⋅em⋅ployed  /ˌʌnɛmˈplɔɪd/  Show Spelled Pronunciation [uhn-em-ploid]  Show IPA
Use unemployed in a Sentence
See images of unemployed
Search unemployed on the Web
–adjective 1. not employed; without a job; out of work: an unemployed secretary. 
2. not currently in use: unemployed productive capacity. 
3. not productively used: unemployed capital. 

–noun 4. (used with a plural verb) people who do not have jobs (usually prec. by the): programs to help the unemployed. 

Origin:
1590–1600; un- 1 + employ + -ed 2

Synonyms:
1. unoccupied, idle, at liberty, jobless.

2. Robert Slager

3. Sweet Brucie

4. The tin hats

5.  Pretty much everyone else in the Hypocrite Elite

Last edited by Hamatron5000 (2010-01-22 18:56:37)