In response to the Herald’s glowing editorial this weekend about the amazing Alderman Sherwood, I have the following editorial comment to offer:

FRANKSMITHSAYSNB EDITORIAL:

---

The Herald’s ravings about how wonderful he is, comes just a few days after it was made public that Sherwood’s recent campaign for re-election is the subject of a pending complaint before the state Elections Enforcement Commission for his campaign’s alleged failure to report an estimated $1055 in campaign donations on his campaign reports—some champion of ethics!

It also comes just a short time after Alderman Sherwood announced plans to mandate through a city resolution that the city continue to pay advertising fees to the Herald for advertising public notices that no one ever reads--despite Governor Rell’s efforts to end this requirement at the state level as a way to save municipalities the funds spent on advertising these notices in print newspapers.

Governor Rell’s solution to preserve open government is to require the towns to post these notices online, but Sherwood insists that the city still be required to continue advertising in the Herald, in what has been touted by some as saving the Herald from failure—at city expense. In my view, this special editorial about Sherwood, the first one ever done on an Alderman who is simply one of fifteen Aldermen, is little more than the Herald repaying the favor for his efforts to save this floundering newspaper from failure with your tax dollars.

Then we have Sherwood’s recent comments opposing the pending contract agreement with local 992, the city firefighter’s union. Sherwood’s reason for opposing this contract, simply stated is that the mayor, who was once a firefighter, participated in the negotiations. Hopefully at election time, these firefighters will remember his opposition to their contract.

Perhaps Alderman Sherwood should consult the city charter before spouting off on a subject that he obviously knows little about? Section 5-3 of the charter identifies one of the mayor’s required duties as “to participate in negotiations with the unions representing city employees,” so if the mayor failed to perform these duties, I have little doubt that Sherwood would then be spouting off about the mayor’s failure to perform his sworn duties.

Just about a month ago, Alderman Sherwood opposed using a state grant for replacing the lights at Beehive Field. Sherwood said he didn’t think that all the money should be spent by just one department, and felt that the money should be spread around evenly among all departments, in what is easily described as a socialist “spreading of the wealth.” After there was a large outcry from the public, Sherwood recanted and supported replacing the lights.

Then there is Sherwood’s failed attempts to replace the city audit firm. Sherwood offered some wild accusations about the firm’s performance, but never offered any evidence to support his claims. The only thing that seemed clear was that Sherwood did not like this particular firm for unknown reasons, and wanted them replaced. In the end, even some members of his own party broke ranks with him and voted to continue the city’s relationship with the existing firm.

Let us not forget the controversy over the reappointment of William Candelori to be Chairman of the Mattabassett District. When it was brought to the mayor’s attention that this individual was a convicted felon, the mayor felt strongly enough about this person’s background to veto the appointment. Sherwood was quoted as saying that in his opinion, Candelori’s federal conviction for tax evasion was in the past and shouldn’t matter, despite the fact that Candelori would be in a position to manage a $10 million annual budget and an estimated $100 million expansion of the plant—all of it taxpayer funds.

It should also be noted that when the appointment was originally made by the council Democrats, Candelori was several months delinquent paying his own property taxes to the City of New Britain and that he was approximately one year delinquent in paying his 2008 property taxes—but if you believe Alderman Sherwood, Dr. Candelori’s tax problems are all in the past. Alderman Sherwood and his Democratic majority on the council overrode the mayor’s veto, like on most votes that occur on our council, on a straight partisan vote. Ironically, Candelori paid his delinquent taxes just a few days before the vote to override the mayor was held.

Also don’t forget Sherwood’s childish behavior in dealing with the proposed developers of Pinnacle Heights. When the developer, who was planning to invest $5 to $6 million in our city, was unable to identify what tenants he was planning to negotiate with, the developer even offered the explanation that he was unable to offer such information until the city turned over control of the property to him, Sherwood went on to insult him by asking “Where’s the Beef?” Sherwood’s comments were so childish, that Mayor Stewart said it was an embarrassment to the city to have someone like Sherwood representing the city.

Of course this was the second meeting to be held on the subject, because even though Sherwood had prior knowledge that the developer was going to be away on vacation and would not be able to attend his July Planning & Zoning Committee Meeting, Sherwood went ahead and held the meeting anyway. When the developer was not in attendance, as was common knowledge at least a week in advance that he wouldn’t be, Sherwood went on in his condescending way, criticizing someone who can afford to invest in a project of this magnitude, and not be able to pay someone to represent his interests at the meeting. Sherwood even suggested that the mayor should have spoke on behalf of the developer. I can only imagine the conflict Sherwood would have dreamt up on that one!

Finally let us not forget Sherwood’s comments criticizing Walmart for not employing Hispanic supervisors, and his participation with other radicals in forming protests outside their store. Who can believe the company’s claims when they deny that the radical pickets outside their store had nothing to do with their decision to abandon New Britain and layoff an estimated 120 city workers?

Does this sound like an Alderman worthy of being elevated about the other 14 Aldermen, especially with such glowing praise as bestowed upon him by the editorial board of the Herald?

You decide.