Sorry, I answered the question in the previous posting.

I agree with you Mr. O'Connell (can I call you Dan ?) but this current "compliment" (pun intended) of leaders doesn't care to listen to the authority of our community and instead think that they are the ultimate authority and that they have a mandate by the people to undo all the "corruption" that exists in Wareham.  Their leadership is the worse corruption I've seen since the Charter was adopted.  This Westfield project has been a complete waste of time and money that could be well better spent on legitimate agenda items.

Last edited by bbrady (2009-07-08 09:25:07)

I follow in the footsteps of bbrady regarding proficiency in computers.
I urge everyone to please call me Dan.
I appreciate your e-mail bbrady, and for the benefit of everyone who visits this site, bbrady knows what he is talking about, and without divulging any information he doesn't wish to disclose, he has served Wareham in many capacities for many years and is devoted to the Town and concerned for Wareham's future.
I have no doubt that the people who visit this site, as I have stated before, can and will change things. It must be done the right way and you can accomplish it better than you even know.

Dan,  It would appear the lines of communication have much improved upon your arrival at this site.  That is a good thing. 
I figure it this way.  Many of us have had time to vent and express our frustrations regarding many issues.
This town is a wonderful place that I feel was in desperate need of a few welcome changes and many are grateful.

I'm bringing this thread back as the Westfield matter needs to stay on the front burner.  Since Sweet Brucey's Q & A, I'm still awed that he, in his infinite
wisdom, is of the mindset that the BOS, back in 1977, did something inappropriate in an attept to justify his wrongful actions in proposing any development on the Westfield site without the approval of a town meeting vote to modify the conditioned use on record at the registry.  I've heard both
Jane D. and now B.S. state that they can simply undo the action, taken by the
BOS back in 1977, on their own.  I've also heard it stated that the message heard by the voters at TM was "to come back with a difinitive plan".  I can share that voters discussed a whole host of issues, first and foremost that the location was not ideal for senior living AND that it was the Fin Com's (and only the Fin Com's) recommendation to "defer action...until there is a difinitive project".
The proposed development of this site has changed a number of times now over the last two years while there still has NOT been a vote of TM to change the allowed uses.
The town owns sites that are in a much better location than the Carver town line.  I would urge that we consider them, like Map 41 - Lot P-1 (25 Ac.+).  Its located between Brandy Hill and Great Neck Rd.  OR, why not add on to the units at Agawam ?  Second floors ?  Already on municipal sewer...
Like Sweet Brucey has suggested, "we need to have an open mind" so let's consider alternative sites.

On another thread I read that by not appointing Housing Trust Authority Trustees to handle the trust fund, the bos were violating a MGL. If this is so, does anyone know if this has been reported? Is something being done about this?

If so, then the whole project may go down the tubes.

I don't think you can easily "undo" a previous town meeting vote.  That land was taken with certain intentions. If those intentions are violated, it would seem like citizens of the town could take legal action.

Now that I've said this, I realize that the only people who really benefit from more legal action are K and P and the town's insurance company lawyers. Imagine---if this bos resigned immediately, we could save so much money in legal fees that maybe we could hire back a few employees that were let go. My understanding (at least in the past) is that we have a $10,000 deductible on the town's indemnity insurance policy. I don't think that is annual. I think it is by the case.

Municipal Maintenance and the Library staff are still working their back sides off because they lost so many people or hours were cut down so that the services to the town, through no fault of those employees, are adversely affected. We pay taxes for those services, not to pay K and P to do the bos's bidding or to represent them in their legal shenanigans. This, of course, is just my opinion.

Last edited by Molly (2009-08-29 16:18:51)

He tries to discredit Bob at every turn, because they see him as a threat, politically. They'll do the same to ANY oppostion that comes forward. Kill it before it grows-Bob Marley

PShooter