A group of citizens has submitted articles for consideration by Town Meeting that seek to censure five town officials for making "false and/or misleading statements" at various Town Meetings and public meetings.

The Selectmen, meeting in a workshop on Saturday morning, said they were checking with town counsel and the district attorney's office to be sure that the articles' inclusion on the Warrant, the agenda for Town Meeting that they must sign, would not make them potentially liable for civil rights' violations.

The proposed articles, provided to Wareham Week by a proponent, name five individuals for censure including Alan Slavin, the chair of the Charter Review Committee; John Donahue, former Town Moderator; his wife and Chair of the Board of Selectmen Jane Donahue, Selectmen Brenda Eckstrom, and Community Preservation Committee Chair Nancy Miller.

The petition was prepared and submitted by Peter Baum, a citizen who has repeatedly argued in favor of retaining Town Meeting rather than shifting to a mayoral form of government. Baum insisted that the motive for the article was not political, and acknowledged that it was often difficult to distinguish between lies and honest mistakes, but the article was necessary to "defend the integrity of Town Meeting."

"There are commonly situations where one is unable to determine if someone deliberately lied or simply made an honest mistake," Baum said. "This fact should not paralyze us into complete inaction. Sometimes it is necessary to take action to discourage people from making certain statements regardless of their intent."

He said that naming individuals was necessary for the article to be effective.

The petition consists of seven articles. The first is an explanatory article that argues that censure is a necessary tool for "the truth" and "saving our legislative process from those who would render it dysfunctional," and lists the rules used in selecting individuals for censure. The second would add a censure provision to Town Meeting bylaws which stipulates that individuals censured by town meeting within 750 days of the current date can only speak at Town Meeting if they first say they have been censured and provide the date and reason for the censure.  The remaining five each propose censure of a specific individual.

Most of the charges to support the censure concern statements about the Charter Review process and the town-owned Swifts Beach property.

Baum had applied for the Charter Review Committee, but was not selected to be a member.  He has written to local papers, including Wareham Week, criticizing the committee numerous times for its recommendation to replace Town Meeting with a mayor-and-town-council legislative system before reviewing the existing Town Charter.  The proposal was soundly defeated at Town Meeting, and the committee has now focused on making changes to the existing charter.

Baum also criticized Donahue's actions as moderator, which he alleged was to blame for dissatisfaction with Town Meeting.

Slavin is cited in three instances including recommending that the May 11, 2009 Town Meeting that several articles concerning the Charter Review Committee be bundled together and voted 'for further study' because they were currently being addressed by the committee.  The article claims this was false or misleading (the standard for censure) based on a review of minutes from the committees' meeting which "record no instance" of either Slavin given the authority to make the motions or that the articles were considered by the committee.

John Donahue is cited for six instances in reference to three Town Meetings.  He is charged with improperly allowing a motion to dissolve Town meeting on November 17, 2008 before all warrant articles were considered, and then failing to call for a Special Town Meeting after admitting to miscounting the vote to dissolve the meeting.

On May 11, 2009 Town Meeting, he is cited for failing to recuse himself from moderating the proceedings for an article that, if passed, would have prevented him and his wife from serving as moderator and selectmen at the same time. He is also cited for allegedly preventing debate on several articles by calling for a vote to send these articles for further study, and ignoring the article's sponsor as he allegedly rushed to the microphone to speak against this motion.

He is also cited for comments made as a public citizen concerning a citizen's petition presented at last spring's Town Meeting.  The petition sought to establish a committee to research potential uses and long-term leasing of the 5.35-acre Swifts Beach property, which was taken by the town by eminent domain in 2003 and has since been the source of controversy.

The land, located at Swifts Beach Road and Wankinco Avenue, was taken for "general municipal purposes," according to the Order of Taking. The Board of Selectmen at the time cited the desire to expand access to the public beach that is adjacent to the land.

The town offered $450,000 to property owner Barbara Deighton Haupt, which she accepted whilst reserving her right to challenge the amount. She subsequently sued, alleging that she was inadequately compensated for the land, and was awarded $1.1 million.

Proponents of the proposed study committee expressed frustration that the town has not made improvements to the beach since acquiring the land as well as with the existence of a locked gate on the property.  The article failed by three votes.

Selectmen Jane Donahue and Eckstrom as well as Community Preservation Committee Chairman Miller are all charged with making statements in reference to this article.  The censure article does not explain why, simply identifying the points which are allegedly false or misleading.  Most of these statements reference the contents of an environmental study for the Swifts Beach property and the progress of a conservation easement on the property.  The study became controversial as it was not released to the public until a year after it had been completed and right before Town Meeting began.

Selectman Donahue said she and her husband could not comment on the article until it was reviewed by Town Council.

Selectmen Eckstrom said that she couldn't speak about her involvement, but she said her main concern was that, since the suit named individuals who were not elected to their positions but were private volunteers, the town may be held liable for disseminating a document that may contain defamatory or libelous charges.

Miller was distraught about the article and its impact on her reputation but was waiting to hear from lawyers before offering a statement.

Slavin likewise said that he could not comment on the article as it was as of yet not officially part of the warrant.

We will update this story as more information becomes available.