Lou Salvio said... Frank: Trueworthy has been play-acting for years as an attorney, financial expert or simply, the omniscient expert du jour. He can't dazzle anyone with brilliance so he tries to baffle with b@*&^%$t. Such was the case at the July Council meeting. As he has done constatntly since he was first elected, he ignored a ruling of the Corporation Counsel and voted while serving as Mayor Pro Tem of the 7/13 meeting. Mayor Stewart is correct, it was a childish display of hubris reminiscent of Nancy Pelosi - " ... we won so we can do what we want."
The bigger sin on this issue that night? The other ten Democrats supported his decision to be childish! Now just suppose Mayor Stewart were to try voting on an issue at any meeting; can you hear the objections?
Trueworthy forgets a situation where, years ago, a Democrat vacancy existed on the Council; the candidate SUPPORTED BY THE GOP MEMBERS WAS, THE LATE, ED KIREJCZYK (D). At the time, Suzanne Bielinski was Mayor ProTem . A vote was taken and a tie resulted, 7 to 7. Mayor Stewart left the Chair ( Mayor did not want to be involved); Bielinski took over, then she left the Chair because she didn't want to cast the tie breaking vote, so, I became Mayor for about 1 minute, voted to break the tie and Ed Kirejczyk became the alderman. Stewart wouldn't vote, Bieliski wouldn't vote so I did. Now according to Trueworthy's interpretation of the rules, Stewart and Bielinski could have chaired the meeting and voted! Can you guess what Mike would have said?
As Walter Cronkite would have said, " ... And that's the way it is" - with NB Council Democrats, anyway.
We have reviewed Robert's Rules, and Mr. Trueworthy is correct in that he is allowed to cast a vote while presiding because he normally is a voting member of the New Britain Common Council...
...But, what Mr. Trueworthy DIDN'T read is the next paragraph which says that he should decline voting in order to maintain the impartiality of the chair.
And, as another poster said, Mr. Trueworthy is choosing what laws to follow and what not, just like when he jeopardized the city's funding with HUD by voting on grants for HRA .
Trueworthy should be brought before the Ethics committee. If they find Trueworthy in violation of the rules, he should be publicly reprimanded.
ReplyDeleteAugust 3, 2011 6:15 AM
Trueworthy should be brought before the Ethics committee. If they find Trueworthy in violation of the rules, he should be publicly reprimanded.
ReplyDeleteAugust 3, 2011 6:16 AM
Lou Salvio said...
ReplyDeleteFrank:
Trueworthy has been play-acting for years as an attorney, financial expert or simply, the omniscient expert du jour. He can't dazzle anyone with brilliance so he tries to baffle with b@*&^%$t. Such was the case at the July Council meeting. As he has done constatntly since he was first elected, he ignored a ruling of the Corporation Counsel and voted while serving as Mayor Pro Tem of the 7/13 meeting. Mayor Stewart is correct, it was a childish display of hubris reminiscent of Nancy Pelosi - " ... we won so we can do what we want."
The bigger sin on this issue that night? The other ten Democrats supported his decision to be childish! Now just suppose Mayor Stewart were to try voting on an issue at any meeting; can you hear the objections?
Trueworthy forgets a situation where, years ago, a Democrat vacancy existed on the Council; the candidate SUPPORTED BY THE GOP MEMBERS WAS, THE LATE, ED KIREJCZYK (D). At the time, Suzanne Bielinski was Mayor ProTem . A vote was taken and a tie resulted, 7 to 7. Mayor Stewart left the Chair ( Mayor did not want to be involved); Bielinski took over, then she left the Chair because she didn't want to cast the tie breaking vote, so, I became Mayor for about 1 minute, voted to break the tie and Ed Kirejczyk became the alderman.
Stewart wouldn't vote, Bieliski wouldn't vote so I did. Now according to Trueworthy's interpretation of the rules, Stewart and Bielinski could have chaired the meeting and voted! Can you guess what Mike would have said?
As Walter Cronkite would have said, " ... And that's the way it is" - with NB Council Democrats, anyway.
We have reviewed Robert's Rules, and Mr. Trueworthy is correct in that he is allowed to cast a vote while presiding because he normally is a voting member of the New Britain Common Council...
ReplyDelete...But, what Mr. Trueworthy DIDN'T read is the next paragraph which says that he should decline voting in order to maintain the impartiality of the chair.
And, as another poster said, Mr. Trueworthy is choosing what laws to follow and what not, just like when he jeopardized the city's funding with HUD by voting on grants for HRA .