#2 2009-11-07 02:04:09

O' Sweet Brucey please..my head. The "flaw" it exposes isn't the Charter.
Do you have short term (and long term) memory loss?
...your actions, all of you.

P-SPAN
TAKEBACKWAREHAM

Offline

 

#3 2009-11-07 07:05:55

"We as a board had no legal authority to rescind this hiring decision because the time had run out," he said. "We had 15 days from the time of notice (to the hire). We did receive an e-mail but didn't have the background information of knowledge until the night he was introduced. The clock had literally run out," Sauvageau said.

It's called GOOGLE and it is a marvelous invention. At a previous selectmen's meeting both Brenda and Bruce said they were going to be in on the interviews of the final candidates for director. Were they there? Did they do their jobs? Where was super woman Marcia Griswold? Wasn't she in on the interviews? Doesn't she have some responsibility in this fiasco? Hasn't she ever heard of the word GOOGLE???  She stood up at the last bos meeting after Bruce fell over himself saying what a great job she is doing as acting director of the library--even though he didn't recognize her when she stood up.

Blame it on the charter Bruce (do I hear more fodder for the charter review committee?). But don't take any responsibility yourself for another screw-up. If the bos had done their jobs, they would have GOOGLED the guy at the very least.

I think 15 days is plenty of time to do your due diligence in the hiring process for a major department head position.  SHAME ON THIS BOARD OF SELECTMEN. The town is humiliated once again because of these self-important, ego-driven, worthless board of selectmen. Just my opinion, of course, and the opinion of every sane person I know in town.

Offline

 

#4 2009-11-07 07:09:53

BILLW HAD THE INFORMATION UP ON THIS BLOG WHILE THE MEETING WAS STILL GOING ON! BOBO LIES ONCE AGAIN AND REPORTS HE BROKE THE STORY. HEY LIAR THESE POSTS ARE TIME STAMPED!

Offline

 

#5 2009-11-07 07:12:59

Seriously,
They continue to blame their poor personnel choices and every mistake they make on the charter. What Bruce meant to say was, "make me mayor, take away people's voice at town meeting and I will run this town FURTHER into the ground while you pay me."

C'mon people, we truly need these people to resign. They continue to make mistake after mistake and cannot take the responsibility for their actions.

Enough is enough.

Offline

 

#6 2009-11-07 07:26:35

GWB

Did anyone else notice.... Mr. Savengeau quouted in the S-T on this. Mrs. Donahue Quoted in the Courier on this. No quote from anyone in the Observer. Hmmm interesting don't cha think. Could this be the dawn of a new day? Perhaps on the advice of leagal council after the off the wall story on the Library that Mr. Slager just printed. Juat wondering out loud I guess. We shall see.

Offline

 

#7 2009-11-07 07:27:02

Well, I am going to take a different side on this.  Personally, I don't think that 15 days is an adequate amount of time to truly vet someone, especially if as a Selectman you have a day job, and even if you didn't how would you go about evaluating someone-sit in their office for two weeks?

No, it is the process that is flawed-though I understand Bruce's point- what we need perhaps is an appointed committee that evaluates all potential hires and reports back to both the administration and the Selectmen.  And the committee would have to  be viewed as bi-partisan-I may not like you and you may not like me, but those differences have to be put aside as we deal with what is on our plate.

I have suggested in other venues and will again here, that perhaps some management jobs be shared with other communities and libraries might lend themselves to that possibility.  North Middlesex and Quabbin just started to share a school superintendent, so the thought is not that original.

Offline

 

#8 2009-11-07 07:36:31

Molly wrote:

"We as a board had no legal authority to rescind this hiring decision because the time had run out," he said. "We had 15 days from the time of notice (to the hire). We did receive an e-mail but didn't have the background information of knowledge until the night he was introduced. The clock had literally run out," Sauvageau said.

Blame it on the charter Bruce (do I hear more fodder for the charter review committee?).

I think 15 days is plenty of time to do your due diligence in the hiring process for a major department head position.  SHAME ON THIS BOARD OF SELECTMEN.

Dear Sweet Brucey,  This debacle has absolutely NOTHING (emphasis) to do with the Charter except where the BOS under your "leadership" has shurked it's responsibility in hiring a COMPETENT TA.  It has become increasingly evident that the ITA has no skills whatsoever.  In fact, What does he do all day ?  At the Board's command he has aided in turning OUR town upside down.  There is no excuse for the incompetence right across the board.

You fired Mr. McAuliffe for not reducing the sewer admin fee by your schedule yet the ITA has effectively accomplished EXACTLY what Mr. McAuliffe proposed as a solution ($200,K each year for three years).  Instead you wanted $300,K over two years and because he refused, knowing it would further devastate the budget, you fired him.  Please.  I suppose that's a flaw in the Charter too ?  Mr. Chairman, you are pathetic.  You need to step down and let someone with leadership skills sit as chairman.  I move to promote Mr. Cruz as Chairman of the BOS.  All in favor ?  AYE!  I also move to accept Mr. Sauvageau's resignation.  All in favor ?  AYE!

Please weigh in.

Offline

 

#9 2009-11-07 08:40:25

Dick Paulsen wrote:

Well, I am going to take a different side on this.  Personally, I don't think that 15 days is an adequate amount of time to truly vet someone, especially if as a Selectman you have a day job, and even if you didn't how would you go about evaluating someone-sit in their office for two weeks?

I have to disagree Mr. Paulsen. First, the research should be done BEFORE you reach the point of making an offer. Most businesses have a comprehensive process. Credit checks, legal checks, resume review and more than not a GOOGLE Search. It's not the 15 days that gets you in trouble, it is the period leading up to that. If we had competent people, such as hiring committee (which you suggested), we would not continue to have these problems. Clearly, the Selectmen have allowed this underqualified ITA to take the lead. Even when it is directly in the hands of the Selectmen (Hiring a new TA), they do not allow the town to get involved. It's about control.

I can't speak for the quality of candidates without seeing the resumes, but I would suspect that well qualified people are shunning this town.

Offline

 

#10 2009-11-07 09:45:55

AGAIN BILLW HAD AN ANSWER WITHIN MINUTES OF THE ANNOUNCEMENT. HE HAD IT POSTED AS THE MTG WAS STILL TAKING PLACE.

Offline

 

#11 2009-11-07 10:02:17

So Slager is saying HE broke the story? How pathetic is that. We know he reads this blog like the bible. Of course, his few adoring fans will continue to think he is some sort of reporter. But what kind of journalistic ethics is it that says you can claim you broke a story that was already out there? Disgusting.

Just remember--ragboy also had 15 days to GOOGLE this guy since he is so close to his bos buds he had to have had access to this hire. And he "broke" the story only AFTER it was googled by Bill W who had it up on this blog already. Wow.

Is there any wonder why no one with a brain believes anything he says?

Offline

 

#12 2009-11-07 10:16:07

Sweet Brucey says he needs more than 15 days to find the information out?  Because it actually takes 15 seconds, between the time spent typing the guy's name in and hitting enter on google...

Offline

 

#13 2009-11-07 12:07:19

THANKS BILLW FOR BREAKING THAT STORY.

BOBO THANKS FOR READING THIS BLOG TO WRITE YOUR STORY.

Offline

 

#14 2009-11-07 13:13:26

I agree with LarryM, regarding the 15 days. That is not the time to be vetting a candidate, that should have been done prior to an offer. The fifteen days, as I see it, is a time of offer and/or acceptance, perhaps some negotiation to terms of employment, with certain rights to rescind.

I do agree with Dick Paulsen that there should be screening committees for hiring at certain levels, say department head. Whether there should be a permanent committee, or ad hoc committees? I would tend to favor ad hoc committees with at least some members with well-established credentials in a given field. Like police chiefs, to select one totally at random.

Offline

 

#15 2009-11-07 19:29:53

"We as a board had no legal authority to rescind this hiring decision because the time had run out," he said. "We had 15 days from the time of notice (to the hire). We did receive an e-mail but didn't have the background information of knowledge until the night he was introduced. The clock had literally run out," Sauvageau said.

I had another thought. We all saw the agenda for Tuesday's meeting. The bos knew in advance they were introducing the new library director since it was an agenda item. Couldn't ONE of them have said--hey, what's this? We don't have any background information on a position as important as a department head. Let's get that info before the 15 days runs out.

OR, hey, we just got an email about this new hire. We don't know a thing about him. We'd better find out before the 15 days runs out.

Oh what a tangled web Brucie.

Offline

 

#16 2009-11-08 09:14:56

And hasn't Brucie said on more than one occasion that the AGENDA is his and he puts what he wants on it?

So doesn't that mean he put INTRODUCTION OF LIBRARY DIRECTOR on the agenda last Tuesday? And still no--hey, who is this guy? What do we know about him? What's his background?

Be a man Bruce, take responsibility for yet another bone-headed blunder.

Offline

 

#17 2009-11-08 11:20:50

I have an email from Bruce and he states that it is HIS meeting and he sets the agenda. So, the answer is...yes....

Offline

 

Board footer

warehamwater.com