I wonder if "ANNOUNCEMENT" means announcement of the new TA?  Will they listen to the people and choose a good candidate or will they go with the clown with two arrests on his record?  Anyone's guess at this point.  If they do go with DUI Guy though, they should at least have the guts to call in members of MADD and SADD to explain such a ridiculous decision.

Any selectman who votes for DUI Guy should be recalled.

I see under 9a, they do have "Town administrator announcement," so this will definitely be a meeting to keep an eye on.  No doubt they needed some time to scramble and decide whether to listen to the people and go with a more respectable TA candidate or to listen only to their own egos and go with the candidate that will do their bidding because their job prospects are otherwise limited.

I could see them going either way on the TA decision.  Bobo said he would be "stunned" if the selectmen chose DUI Guy, making me think the selectmen realized they were caught and would not be able to slip this one under the rug.  But then again, Bobo would backpeddle on his words if the selectmen decide they really want this guy.  If they pick him, they'll probably have him come in and do some kind of phoney baloney mea culpa and Bobo will spin it for them, saying the phoney mea culpa made it alright.

It will be an interesting meeting.  I do hope they listen to the people.  They should be ashamed of themselves for even allowing this candidate to make it to the top three.  They owe the public an apology just for that.  But if they choose this guy, then they need to resign immediately or be recalled.

All I know is, this site is the last refuge for the truth in Wareham.  Had it not been for this site, the public would never have been made aware of the background of one of their TA candidates. 

For some odd reason, even the non-Bobo media (Courier and S-T) gave the BOS/Candidate a pass on this.  I just don't agree with the argument that because it was reported in the Mattapoisett media when this was a Mattapoisett issue several months ago, that means Wareham voters are fully informed on this now.  This was information that the press had a duty to make the public aware of and they blew it.

I hope the public will keep an eye on this meeting and voice their outrage if they pick this lousy candidate.  Any selectman who chooses him should be recalled or voted out of office.

By the way, a TA hiring decision should be made in public, not private.  It shouldn't be "announcement" it should be on the agenda to openly decide who the candidate is.  They got in trouble with the DA the last time for making the hiring decision behind closed doors and it looks like they're getting ready to make it again. 

Public input should be sought on this.  The hiring decision should be made in public and the public should be given an opportunity to weigh in on it.  The selectmen really are trying to sweep this under the rug.

Nota, it is a new hire.  The library director, like the town administrator, has been hired in secret.  The decisions for Library Director and TA apparently have already been made, and Tuesday night is just for announcing the decision for the edification of us taxpaying chumps.

I do hope they have hired a good library director and assuming they have, that will be someone that the public will be able to work with and respect (assuming they have hired someone who will be willing to reach out and work with the public).

Their top candidate for TA, on the other hand, given his background (assuming they go with this guy), that's going to be a person who is unfortunately not going to command alot of respect, leaving a leadership vaccuum in this town.

All I know is....April can't come soon enough.

So, if they had made these decisions on the new TA and Library Director when was it done?  Was there an executive session since the interviews to make this decision?  Or are we continuing to break the law?

ham  - thanks for the info on the new hire.

Now, I would contrast the wording of Item # 3 with Item # 9a

Item # 3 states that there will be an INTRODUCTION (my emphasis), which implies that a PERSON will be present and will be seen.

Item 9a, however, only mentions an "announcement", which to me means that there will be verbiage, but no corpus delecti. Otherwise, why wouldn't the two items have the same wording?

This could mean that one or more have withdrawn their application(s). Or, that the BoS is informing the Town as to when & where a vote on the candidates will occur. Or, that they are dumping these finalists and starting over (search committee, anyone?). Lotsa options.

We all need to tune in.
Same bat-time
Same bat-channel
right, robin?