If you weren't paying attention, the Wareham Board of Selectmen effectively announced that your vote doesn't count unless you favor their agenda. During the Feb. 16 Selectmen meeting, the Selectmen voted to include a non-binding referendum on the April ballot for the Westfield senior housing project. This is the very same Westfield article that was voted down 261-204 at Fall Town Meeting in October 2009.  On October 29, 2009, a local newspaper quoted Chairman Bruce Sauvageau calling all those who voted against Westfield "ugly and black hearted". A Westfield article has been on the warrant for the last three Town Meetings. It was saved twice by a motion for further study, but finally went down after the third attempt. Last Tuesday, Selectmen Donahue commented on the "sunk cost" as part of the rationale for the referendum. Sunk cost refers to the fees paid to Dick Heaton as a consultant and advisor. Chairman Sauvageau stated, "My personal opinion is that 50 votes is not representative of a community's opinion. It's representative of a vote of Town Meeting. ... It is in no way, in my opinion, disrespectful to Town Meeting to request the opinion of the larger electorate."

I disagree! I believe the voters would have welcomed a well thought out plan to attack affordable senior housing that included all available properties in and around Wareham. It wasn't a vote against affordable senior housing! The Westfield Article was defeated because deed restrictions on the property did not allow a housing development and because there were serious problems with how much and how an outside consultant was paid to work on the project.

The problem with the Chairman's comment is it is disrespectful to the citizens who do attend Town Meeting.   There is nothing more insulting than an elected official telling the citizens he has no regard for the legislative branch of our government.  To hell with democracy!  If you consider the current Selectmen were elected to their seats with low voter turnout, should we request a non-binding referendum on whether their election should be voided?  Simply stated, shouldn't we request the opinion of a larger electorate?

As stated in the Charter, Section 2-1 (Town Meeting), "The legislative powers of the town shall continue to be exercised by a town meeting open to all voters."  The Charter does not exclude any registered voters from attending and clearly states that attendees of the town meeting are the legislative body. It does not state that "voters who choose not to attend or cannot attend can have another opportunity to cast their opinion on an article because the Board of Selectmen did not like the outcome". I wonder if the Selectmen would be asking for a non-binding referendum if Westfield had passed by the same 50 votes. If they thought there was significant opposition, would they be as eager to request a non-binding referendum? This is just one more reason we need a leadership change. Democracy in Wareham has taken some serious blows! The very same leaders who say, "let the voters decide" are now saying we only mean that if the voters agree with us. That isn't democracy! Shouldn't we elect leaders who believe that our vote counts? If not, should they also challenge their own election results because of low voter turnout? It is time to put a stop to this madness. PLEASE VOTE APRIL 6, 2010.