#1 2009-07-01 15:00:46

Selectmen meeting turns downright nasty
By: Robert Slager

Posted: Wednesday, July 1, 2009 11:34 am



    Tuesday night’s Board of Selectmen meeting turned ugly during Citizen’s Participation when controversial local web host Bill Whitehouse asked Chairman Bruce Sauvageau if he beats his wife.


    Sauvageau, clearly stunned by the allegation, responded “I love my wife more than my own life.”


    Then Whitehouse and a woman later identified as Cara Pillsbury quickly left the room together. Pillsbury made a comment toward the board as she was leaving, questioning Sauvageau’s sincerity.


    Pillsbury’s husband Charles is a Wareham police officer who once pulled over Sauvageau’s wife for allegedly having an invalid registration. Charles Pillsbury, who claimed it was a random stop, was less than 10 minutes into his shift following 8 a.m. roll call at the Police Station.


    Rose Sauvageau’s car was towed about a block from her Swifts Beach home. The charges were dropped the next day.


    Bruce Sauvageau maintains that the incident was retaliatory. He had called for the resignation of Charles’ mother – Mary Jane Pillsbury – a short while earlier. At the time Mary Jane Pillsbury was embroiled in a lawsuit by a rival business owner who claimed the selectmen/library director had used her political influence to prevent another self-storage business from opening near her own. Minutes of ZBA meeting pertaining to the case disappeared while under Mary Jane Pillsbury’s watch.


    Following Cara Pillsbury’s departure, selectman Brenda Eckstrom asked an audience member if the woman who left was the one whose husband has been cheating on her.


    Eckstrom told the Observer that she didn’t realize the woman was Cara Pillsbury.


    “I would like to apologize to her,” Eckstrom said. “I didn’t know it was her. I ha d spoken to somebody who was in the audience earlier in the day. I thought it was somebody else."


    When asked if it was appropriate for a selectman to make such a comment about anyone during an open meeting, Eckstrom said no.


    “I was very upset not only that somebody not only accused the chairman of abusing his wife but that somebody in the audience would actually question the love he has for her,” Eckstrom said. “I made an inappropriate comment based on a conversation I had with somebody earlier. I did not know who the woman was who left.”


    Sauvageau, who showed remarkable restraint following Whitehouse’s comments, said the intention of Whitehouse’s question was to provoke a counter-attack, which Whitehouse would then use in his quest to recall the selectmen.


    “He wanted to get a visceral reaction from me, which would have become another story to distract from the main story. Mr. Whitehouse and his new friends are trying to change the story to deflect from the real issues that face us as a community. He wants this to devolve into a situation where personal attacks are responded by personal counter-attacks. The causality of that would be we’re trying to accomplish as a board. It was done to shock the b oard and create a reaction.”


    Sauvageau admitted it almost worked.


    “I came very close to giving Mr. Whitehouse the response he was looking for,” Sauvageau said. “What he said was the definition of defamation. He can check court records and police logs. I meant what I said. My wife is the most important thing in my life.”


    Sauvageau said Whitehouse’s words where “a deeply humiliating experience” for his wife.


    “Mr. Whitehouse attacked her every bit as much as he attacked me,” Sauvageau said.


Printer-friendly format 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Member Opinions:

By: angel-joe on 7/1/09
a restraining order for BW for harrassment of the board...the second time in one month's time.. harrassment, restraining order... This BOS needs to stop the mockery and harrassment LEGALLY, now.

Login and voice your opinion!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Offline

 

#2 2009-07-01 15:03:03

LETS SEE WHERE DO WE BEGIN?


WHO DID BRENDA THINK SHE WAS TALKING TOO? SHE SPOKE TO SOMEONE IN THE AUDIENCE EARLIER AND THEN DECIDED TO BLURT OUT THAT HER HUSBAND WAS CHEATING ON HER IN A PUBLIC MEETING? DOES THIS MAKE ANY SENSE TO ANYONE? RESIGN IMMEDIATELY

Offline

 

#3 2009-07-01 15:16:11

I WATCHED THE MEETING BILL GOT UP AND UNFOURNATLEY THE WOMEN LEFT AROUND THE SAME TIME  AND BRENDA  UN LEASHED HER VERBAL ABUSE , I HAVE HEARD BRENDA SAY  NASTY  THINGS OFF THE CUFF MANY TIMES TO PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE, THIS POLICEMAN PILLSBURY HAS BEEN VERBALY ABUSED BY THE RAG , BRUCE  AND NOW BRENDA, SHAME ON THEN ,I HERE HE A FINE POLICE OFFICER WHO DOES HIS JOB TO THE LEETER OF THE LAW. BY THE WAY SOES ANYONE KNOW IF PILLSBURY EVER RECEVIED A LETTER OF APOLGY FROM BRUCE  AS BRUCE SAID HE WOULD SEND HIM AN APOLOGY? WILL BRENDA SEND AN APOLGY LETTER ? WE EXPECT MORE FROM ARE ELECTED OFFICIALS.

Offline

 

#4 2009-07-01 15:17:15

I agree, there is no excuse for what she blurted out. SHe did issue a public apology and stated it was wrong, but I think there needs to be a public statement made at the next BOS meeting.

Offline

 

#5 2009-07-01 15:22:46

II AGREE THERE NEEDS TO BE A PUBLIC APOLGY ATBTHE NEXT MEETING BY BRENDA ALSO SLAGER SAYS THIS YOUNG LADY SAID SOMETHING ABOUT BRUCE , THE TAPE IS CLEAR I HEARD NO REMARK S FROM THE YOUNG LADY

Offline

 

#6 2009-07-01 15:27:11

Following Cara Pillsbury’s departure, selectman Brenda Eckstrom asked an audience member if the woman who left was the one whose husband has been cheating on her.


    Eckstrom told the Observer that she didn’t realize the woman was Cara Pillsbury.


    “I would like to apologize to her,” Eckstrom said. “I didn’t know it was her. I ha d spoken to somebody who was in the audience earlier in the day. I thought it was somebody else."

I see Brenda.  If it "WAS" the "PERSON" you "THOUGHT" you were referring to, then it would have been okay to make such a statement?!

You are pathetic, slimy, piece of trash!  I can believe people put you in office. 

Pack it up and save yourself future embarrassment and financial damage.

If any town employee had said such a thing while on the clock, the BOS would be calling for their head.

Call for their heads Wareham..... but be prepared for them to shit on you, your family, husband/wife, girlfriend/boyfriend, life mate, etc.....

Offline

 

#7 2009-07-01 15:27:48

Well again we have the facts to deal with, and the "Liarbservber"  has done it yet again. Foolish Mr Slager watch the tape and then print a retraction.

I am not defending Bill, he should issue an apolopgy, but he did not accuse Bruce of beating his wife. He asked if he cared to comment on recent reports that there may have been domestic complaints at his address.

2cnd Brenda's comment was Are you the woman that her's husband is out screing around? Very different than Slager's take.

Again review the tape for accuracy.....Bill please issue the apology.

Offline

 

#8 2009-07-01 15:43:40

I am new to this site after being a subscriber to the Wareham Observer. I am a former Police Officer, teacher,  and Selectman in Wareham. I have heard many terrible things about this site, how obnoxious you all are and the agenda that the owner of the site supposedly has. Nonsense!! I love this site. This is the type of site that I would have hosted when I was a Selectman. I only, in the beginning, as a "newbee", ask that all of you be civil. But, working on the history of the site, you are the future of the Town of Wareham. I hope that you learn to be polite, and understand that you may, on occasion , disagree with people. But, let's agree to disagree, and not be disagreeable.
I will be sending more soon, but, I am no longer an anti-Bill Whitehouse person. I believe that if we have discussion we will never be enemies.
Let's talk facts and experience and the ability to educate. I look forward to this forum.

Last edited by danoconnell (2009-07-01 15:47:41)

Offline

 

#9 2009-07-01 15:55:21

Welcome Dan.  Glad that you have seen the light.  The "obnoxiousness" and "agenda" has obviously been greatly exaggerated.  While I agree that some comments can be attributed as "nasty," I feel that comes out of anger and frustration by those hurt by the BOS & Slager.  Some have been hurt unjustifiably more than others.

Offline

 

#10 2009-07-01 18:06:39

AGAIN BROCKTON BRENDA YOUR STORY MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER. YOU EXPECT US TO BELIEVE THAT YOU WERE TALKING WITH A WOMAN IN THE AUDIENCE. WAS THIS ON TAPE? WHAT WAS HER NAME? WHAT CLOTHING DID SHE HAVE ON? AND THEN YOU BASH ANOTHER WOMAN THAT GOT UP AND LEFT??? WHAT WAS THE TIME SPAN ON THE SPEAKING OF THE OTHER WOMAN MAYBE A COUPLE OF MINUTES??? YOUR FULL OF SHIT. IVE WATCHED THIS TAPE ON MY DVR SEVERAL TIMES TODAY. THE WOMAN THAT GOT BASHED SAID NOTHING. IT APPEARED SHE LEFT BECAUSE BRUCE STARTED SCREAMING AT BILL WHITEHOUSE. THE WOMAN SAID NOTHING AND JUST SAT IN THE AUDIENCE. A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO SLAGER SAYS IT WAS OK FOR WAREHAMPROPHETES TO SAY MJP SHOULD BE CONDEMNED TO HELL AND LIVER CANCER AND YET BILL WHITEHOUSE CANT ASK ABOUT REPORTS THAT HE HAS COLLECTED ABOUT A PUBLIC OFFICIAL?

Offline

 

#11 2009-07-01 18:38:41

Shame on Brenda, regardess of who she thought she was talking to, it is entirely inappropriate to make a comment such as that during a public meeting which is being recorded for public broadcast.
Mrs. C. Pillsbury is an up-standing citizen, and a mother. Why anyone would attempt to defame this woman and call her husbands charector into question is beyond me. This family experienced a great tragedy last summer. Watching a loved one suffer and pass away from a dreadful disease such as cancer is horrible. To make matters worse the entire family had to suffer public humiliation after public humiliation prior to and following MJP's death. From Charles being called a gutless coward (and no Bruce never sent that written apology) to the rag printing the lawsuit story in MJP's obituary (and no an apology in the rag isn't a public apology), it never ends for them. They deserve some peace.
Brenda, go back to Brockton, stop bring your trash here.

Offline

 

#12 2009-07-01 20:42:15

I don't know which is worse - than we have a selectwoman who has demonstrated that she has ZERO impulse control, or that the reporter that claims to be the toughest hard hitting journalist around is buying (or pretending to) buy that "Oh sorry I meant to defame someone else!" bullshit excuse.

These people's hatred of the late Mrs. P is pathological.  She passed away.  What more could they possibly want?  To take their hatred out on her daughter because she attended a public meeting?  Why are they so messed up they take vendettas out on people's children?

And keep in mind, yesterday morning, right before this incident, Ragman did chastize this site because a blogger was prevented from repeating claims that God speaks through her and told her that Mrs P was struck with a fatal illness for disagreeing with the BOS, and that we all will be similarly struck by God if we disagree with the BOS.

She knows because God told her.  And Ragman wants her to be able to keep saying that.

These are the lunatics that run our town, people.  As I said before, this town doesn't need a recall  - it needs a looney bin paddy wagon with the men in the white lab coats and nets.

Offline

 

#13 2009-07-01 20:46:29

And I'd add that comment was posted last July - apparently it's been stuck in Ragman's craw for a whole year that God-speaks-through-me lady can't keep sharing her transmissions from the man upstairs.

Offline

 

#14 2009-07-01 21:21:22

GUESS WHO ARE BEST BUDDIES AND HAVE BEEN SEEN SEVERAL  TIMES  TOGETHER AT TEMPEST KNOB BEACH  BROCTON BRENDA  AND THE CAT LADY  LIZ PEZOLI , WOW HOW SICK THEY HAVE NO FREINDS AND HAVE TO VISIT EACH OTHER TO HAVE SOMEONE TO TALK TO, I KNOW THEY USED TO GET TOGETHER  OFTEN TO GIVE LIZ SECRET INFO FROM THE EXECUTIVE SESSTIONS SO THE RAG WOULD PRINT THEM FIRST AND GET THE SCOOP.

Offline

 

#15 2009-07-01 21:29:41

And the beat goes on.  and the beat goes on.  slander mud slinging and liable.   Look what we have come to.   
I hope you all have a safe holiday weekend.  Happy 4th.

Offline

 

#16 2009-07-02 07:20:32

I checked out the tape again and really, there's just no excuse for Brenda's boorish behavior.  She's lost it and she should resign.

Mrs Pillsbury's daughter sat in the back, never spoke a word, she made no disparaging remarks about Bruce.   For a master bullshit artist like the Ragman, it is really surprising that he'd lie about something that was caught on tape.  I guess his bullshit skills are slipping.

Here's a bullshit refresher course for you Ragman - don't lie about things that are on tape.

You know what's funny?  This board and the Ragman, they always say, we want to work with everyone, we embrace everyone, we care about everyone!  We're not partisan!

Yeah right, unless you are related to someone whose guts they hate then they rip you to shreds on camera from a selectman's seat.

Don't take my word for it.  Look at your tape yourself.  The woman did nothing to warrant this brutal attack.

I've said it before, I'll say it again - this BOS isn't a board for the whole town.  They're only a board for those who kiss their ass.  Everyone else be damned.

Offline

 

#17 2009-07-02 08:10:01

WATCH THE TAPE TODAY AT NOON AND IF YOU MISSED IT I HAVE A COPY. WATCH IT AND DEMAND A RETRACTION FROM RAGBOY. DEMAND A RESIGNATION FROM BRENDA

Offline

 

#18 2009-07-02 08:19:43

Two times we have seen Selectmen make statements that were completely unacceptable. In both cases, the Selectmen were way out of line. Bruce's comments about the officer and the racial bias of the department, and Brenda's off the wall comment about a private citizen that suggested her husband was "sleeping around". Is this the type of people we want to represent our best interests? I said it before and I will say it again. The Selectmen are embarrasing the town. This is not a one time occurrence! There is nothing that makes this acceptable.

Ham is right, this group of Selectdorks don't care about anyone but themselves and their friends. They continue to get away with things that would get a normal person fired or banned. Now I have to question the people who support them? What are you thinking? Do they really represent your best interests?

Offline

 

#19 2009-07-02 09:17:48

MapleMan,
I think that " They continue to get away with things that would get a normal person fired or banned" may be exactly why all this has come about.   It's not right what is going on.  But every action has a reaction.  They the BOS have had to deal with people begging for assistance because there were so many people doing exactly what they wanted at the expense of others.  Can't you try to see that?  Even if nothing comes of the audit.  Which I find hard to believe it will go down that way, but even if nothing is found.  It at least got people talking thinking acting.

Offline

 

#20 2009-07-02 09:36:42

What ever happened to Eliz P?  Is that light still on?  Is she around?

Offline

 

#21 2009-07-02 10:42:24

Are you saying the BOS is not doing exactly what they want? If you are, then you are not paying attention. They are no different than the former Selectmen you are chastising. it's time to stop whining about how they are trying to undo decades of wrong doing by doing wrong. I'm not buying it. What they are doing are making Wareham the laughing stock of the Commonwealth.

I have personally heard comments from certain Selectmen and the interim TA that would send chills up your spine. This is like watching 5 year olds play in a sandbox.

I'm not sure why you put all your cookies on the audit. Does it matter that someone is blogging from work? How about if they find (gasp!) that someone actually wrote a personal email to one of the so called "hate blogger"? Does that seem like the kind of thing that would warrant a major expenditure? Unless someone is stealing money or committing a crime (child pornography), it will go down as a witch hunt by 6 very insecure fiscally inept fools. I would rather be talking about the progress Wareham is making to stem the bleeding from the economic crisis or discussing the future of Wareham. Discussing how much more this group can do to bring Wareham down is not something I enjoy!

Offline

 

#22 2009-07-07 21:28:03

Mr. O'connell,  I have a question for you as I recognized your name from the title on record as a member of the Board of Selectmen from back in 1977.  As you likely recall, the Selectmen then voted and recorded the order of taking to condition any future development to include a "school, municipal buildings, and/or recreational, playground or park purposes".  I'm not sure if you are aware but the current BOS want to develop the site with affordable housing and they've never acquired a vote of town meeting to modify the condition within the title to do so.  My question is, how might you suggest to our leaders the proper way to proceed ?

Offline

 

#23 2009-07-08 08:10:38

The only way to rescind a previous vote or edict  by a former BOS is to have the curent BOS vote to rescind, and bring it to Town Meeting for approval. The BOS have no right to arbitrarily overturn a previous BOS ruling without clear input from the Town Meeting members, the ultimate authority.
Low income housing is not going to resolve the problems that Wareham faces now. It will only impact services far beyond what can be repaid by taxpayers monies and will eventually result in a short fall because the need for infrastructure and maintaining roads, etc. will far exceeed what can be brought in with tax money. Very bad idea.

Offline

 

Board footer

warehamwater.cruelery.com