#1 2009-12-15 13:14:07
Apparently our Selectmen haven't learned anything from the rebuke they received recently. Tonight they have an executive session scheduled for 6:30pm. Now, unless someone can show me where they had an open meeting and requested the executive session and reasons for the session, HERE WE GO AGAIN.
Folks, it just doesn't get any better than this. Our Selectmen continue to throw us, the citizens, the middle finger. April cannot come soon enough!
Offline
#2 2009-12-15 13:32:16
This seems like a golden opportunity for someone from the DA's office to actually attend the meeting - see this taking place first hand. . ..
Offline
#3 2009-12-15 13:47:43
The meeting is posted in the clerk's office.
Offline
#4 2009-12-15 14:01:39
Its amazing that they haven't learned that there is no way to legally hold an executive session prior to the start time for the regularly posted meeting. It violates the spirit of the Open Meeting Law as well as the "letter" of the Open Meeting Law.
Offline
#5 2009-12-15 14:43:28
Wouldn't it just be beautiful if/when they violate the Open Meeting Law IMMEDIATELY following them being admonished, and instructed to NOT DO IT again..and THEN have the announcement required by the DA office's letter? Taunting the DA was Bobo's game I thought.
Must be the "hatebloggers" fault.
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Last edited by P-SPAN (2009-12-15 14:43:56)
Offline
#6 2009-12-15 14:50:19
Shame on us for actually knowing the laws and hoping the BOS would adhere to them. We keep forgetting this is BRUCEY's world and it doesn't matter what the DA says.
Offline
#7 2009-12-16 17:46:44
That Open Meeting Law - such a pain to control freaks like Sweet Brucie.
1. Larry - if the ES was posted with the Town Clerk, the key point is WHEN was it posted. There would still be a 48-hour requirement for posting in advance of the meeting, wouldn't there?
2. During the meeting of 12/15/2009, I did NOT notice any reference to the DA's letter admonishing them for their violations. Did I miss it?
3. Brucie: practice the following - Mea Culpa, Mea Culpa, Mea Maxima Culpa.
Please work on the sincerity bit. control the facial contortions. Adapt the proper body language. You know, ACT as tho you actually realize that you fucked up.
Offline
#8 2009-12-16 17:49:49
It doesn't really matter if it was posted. They need to open a public meeting first and then announce that they are going into executive session and for what purpose. They're working on open meeting law violation number 4.
Offline
#9 2009-12-16 18:11:16
Ham - of course you are correct.
My point was slightly different. If you are going to commence an ES, it MUST be from a properly posted OPEN meeting, no question. but if you are going to POST an ES, must it not meet the 48-hour requirement?
I don't think that you can merely piggy-back the ES on the posting of the Open Meeting, after the fact.
My experience has been that people are so concerned that an improper posting of a meeting can INVALIDATE any action(s) taken in that meeting, or even prevent the meeting, that they take pains to ensure that the posting is proper.
The current BoS seems to take a view that is 180 degrees the opposite. To wit: Screw the Open Meeting Law. Screw the DA. Screw the citizens & taxpayers of Wareham. We RULE!
Offline
#10 2009-12-16 19:54:29
As I understand it, an ES does not, and in fact has no place, being posted. It is not meeting the guidelines of the law, even if it is posted. I don't know of a 48 hour rule in this situation as an ES is NOT ALLOWED until an open session is opened. Therefore, the posted open meeting should (except in Wareham I guess) cover the ES, since the ES can't start until the open meeting is started..... phew. That is ALOT for the BOS to understand. I mean it is a couple sentences in MGL Chapter 39 Section 23B.
From MGL ch39 sec 23B:
"No executive session shall be held until the governmental body has first convened in an open session for which notice has been given, a majority of the members have voted to go into executive session and the vote of each member is recorded on a roll call vote and entered into the minutes, the presiding officer has cited the purpose for an executive session, and the presiding officer has stated before the executive session if the governmental body will reconvene after the executive session."
Offline
#11 2009-12-16 20:11:22
Now, I hope that someone can explain this to me. Here is my question:
IF the BOS votes to go into ES at the END of their scheduled open meeting on Tuesday and they vote to not come back to open meeting on that night, does this ES vote essentially carry over until the next scheduled open meeting? In other words, does that vote for an ES basically count for the next 7 days?
I hope I am explaining myself properly here. I think that the understanding is that the ES is only effective until the BOS goes home for the evening on the day that it is voted for. However, do their ES meeting notes actually show that they have voted to close the meeting on that night? If not, does it "continue" until the next open meeting is started?
Offline
#12 2009-12-16 20:34:19
Let's see if I can explain what happened last night. We arrived at 6:25pm. The doors were locked and 3 Selectmen, the new TA, and the ITA were behind locked doors. Walter Cruz arrived at almost the same time as we did. He let himself in with a key. Alan Slavin came in and entered through the back door, and Chris Riley was "let" in. Saguinet came out a couple times and made the statement that "they" were going over papers and getting signatures. Around 6:40pm, the door was opened.Liz and another person went inside. It was at that point that Bruce called the meeting to order and Brenda called for an executive session for criminal charges and litigation. Everyone exited accept the Selectmen, the TA, and ITA. The Selectmen's meeting started about 7:09pm.
So, first there was an illegal Exec session behind locked doors, then they opened a meeting, called for an exec session and had exec session two.
IMO, the first session was clearly illegal. The second session was also illegal because the meeting they opened at 6:42pm was not announced in advance. That makes the second exec session illegal too.
This needs to be discussed and then reported. There were witnesses.
Any thoughts?
Offline
#13 2009-12-16 20:37:41
Frankly I'm tired of this BS. The Selectmen do not care what rules they violate and make no apologies for their actions.
In general, if you have this many executive session and legal expenses, there is clearly an agenda and it needs to stop.
Another example of poor management practices is when you interview a candidate for the CRC and not one of the Selectmen are even curious if this person has read the charter.
April cannot come soon enough! Take Back Wareham!
Offline
#14 2009-12-16 20:42:32
It'd be worth it to report it to the DA if some courageous citizen is willing to. The DA only investigates open meeting law violations if they are reported with a signed letter to the DA.
Offline
#15 2009-12-16 20:44:37
I can put it in writing and actually give names of the people that were there. I think either Liz or I can hand it off to the DA.
Offline
#16 2009-12-17 09:35:26
I will finish writing up the complaint today. I spoke with someone who says that based on the information, they Selectmen did indeed violate open meeting law once again.
My biggest complaint is that there is very little beyond a stern ear pull that can be done. I think it will be very interesting come election time! When the question comes up about fiscal responsibility, professional behavior, and accountablity (which all the Selectmen preach) how do they dodge the repeated violations of Open Meeting law.
Offline
#17 2009-12-17 09:48:32
Larry, you're a courageous dude if you write a complaint letter. There really should be a change in the open meeting law to allow punishment for repeat violations.
Offline
#18 2009-12-17 09:52:40
Larry McDonald wrote:
...come election time...how do they dodge the repeated violations of Open Meeting law?
They've already laid the groundwork (haven't you heard?)...It's a Republican conspiracy (including the DA, Mrs. Gifford, "hatebloggers", WFL, CBW, TBW, CBS, NBC, TNT, TBS, CNBC, CNN, IRS, DEA..you get the idea)
P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM
April 6, 2010
Last edited by P-SPAN (2009-12-17 09:53:36)
Offline
#19 2009-12-17 10:34:39
Facts are facts. This is something they try to avoid. Case and Point is Bobo the Coward Fabricator. He continues to change his stories, but in the end, he has NO facts, only speculation and un-named sources. You can't win an election with that type of behavior. We have facts and continue to gather more information every day.
We will Take Back Wareham!
Offline
#20 2009-12-17 12:30:06
HAVE THE BOS ACKNOWLEDGED THEIR PREVIOUS OPEN MTG VIOLATION OR IS BRUCEY STILL GOING TO TAKE IT BEFORE A JUDGE WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS?
Offline
#21 2009-12-17 12:32:19
The letter is signed, seal and in the mail. I am not sure of the time frame for this type of thing, but hopefully it won't take months.
Offline
#22 2009-12-17 12:42:58
Larry's the man, Larry's the man, Larry's the man.
Offline
#23 2009-12-17 13:44:37
Larry IS the man!!
Offline
#24 2009-12-17 20:31:34
danoconnell wrote:
Larry IS the man!!
DITTO !!!
Offline
