Trueworthy's Glass House

FRANKSMITHSAYSNB EDITORIAL:

---

Most people still remember Alderman Trueworthy's latest lunacy with his attacking the mayor for so-called "no-bid" contracts.

The trouble is that the mayor has absolutely nothing to do with city purchasing, and even after the city purchasing director not only testified that the mayor did in fact have nothing to do with purchasing decisions, and also testified at great length about how every purchase that was made was the result of his office soliciting quotes from as many as 16 vendors, and that any purchases awarded to businesses owned by city aldermen was the result of them offering the best prices, Trueworthy continued with his craziness by attempting to pass a resolution instituting a 90 day moratorium against purchasing any products from businesses owned by elected officials.

Some of the problems with Trueworthy's resolution were that it would punish city business owners who have apparently done nothing wrong simply because they are civic minded and choose to serve the city, and in the process his resolution would in many cases force the city to buy goods or services from out of town businesses, instead of from New Britain businesses that pay taxes and employ people in New Britain.

I can only guess that these reasons are why some of his fellow Democrats voted against the resolution, creating a tie vote which allowed the mayor to cast his tie breaking vote to end Trueworthy's latest crusade.

Throughout the recent Senate campaign between the mayor and Theresa Gerratana, Trueworthy was one of several Democrats who attempted to slander the mayor with accusations regarding what they termed as "no bid contracts" but is this the ultimate in hypocrisy?

Many of you may recall last July when the mayor vetoed a budget and even the city attorney who is already being paid by the taxpayers to render such advice, gave his opinion that the mayor was within his authority to veto that budget.

Trueworthy and his former cohort, Phil Sherwood, went on a crusade to hire New Haven attorney Steven Mednick, who has been described as a "life long Democrat" for a retainer of $20,000 to supposedly sue the mayor for vetoing their budget. This was once again some craziness that failed because Trueworthy and Sherwood once again failed to get enough support from their fellow Democrats to approve the hiring of this attorney that would have ultimately produced the effect of the taxpayers paying for the city to sue itself, however:

A campaign finance report for Trueworthy's campaign has surfaced. In that report his campaign disclosed that Trueworthy received donations of $250.00 from Steven Mednick, and another $250.00 donation from Marlene Mednick--apparently Steven's wife, since they both reside at the same Hamden address.

So now I am left with the question of whether when Truewothy was so ambitious in trying to ram through a resolution for the city to hire Attorney Mednick, was he supposedly looking out for the best interests of the city, or was he attempting to give a lucrative contract to someone who Trueworthy knew would fill his campaign coffers with generous contributions?

Perhaps we really do need a new resolution, but that resolution might need to prohibit Aldermen from voting to give $20,000 "no-bid" contracts to people who give the maximum allowed donations to their campaign funds.