Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Sunday, July 4, 2010
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Tim O'Brien's disingenuous comments
In yesterday’s edition of the The Harford Courant Representative Tim O’Brien was quoted as offering to broker a meeting between Phil Sherwood, Mayor Stewart, and School board President Sharon Beloin-Saavedra. He went on to say “The people of our city expect and deserve leadership that brings people together to overcome disagreements and move our city forward with as much unity as possible.” However, the recent FOI request that was conducted by the New Britain Republican Town Committee reveals that Tim O’Brien would hardly be an objective mediator in this dispute.
In a series of emails written on June 23, 2010 between Phil Sherwood, Michael Trueworthy, and Tim O’Brien, State Representative O’Brien wrote a letter stating that the Mayor’s veto was illegal. The letter then goes on to recommend that the Board of Education “should act to restore $1.5 million to their budget.” This exact letter was reproduced almost exactly verbatim by Aldermen Trueworthy and Sherwood. One of the only noticeable differences is the deletion of a line that makes it painfully obvious that Tim O’Brien was the author of the letter.
In fact, in the email dialog between Sherwood, O’Brien and Trueworthy, Phil Sherwood at one point stated “You said I could use this (but from me) as base for letter to press, commissioner of ed and School board right?” to which Tim O’Brien replied, “Well, there some things you should change to make it a letter, but yes, absolutely.” This letter became the basis for a great deal of the conflict now plaguing our city. This letter attempts to incite the Board of Education into pursuing legal action.
Furthermore, on his Facebook Page, in another disclosed document, Representative O’Brien stated “It is becoming clear that Mayor Stewart’s attempt to revoke the $1.5 million education funding restoration was not a legal use of his line-item veto power. So the education budget is as it was approved by the City Council.” This was that same Wednesday afternoon as the email communication with Sherwood and Trueworthy. Clearly Representative O’Brien is not as unbiased as he would like to present himself to be. If he truly wished to be unbiased he could seen a true neutral party rather than attempt to play the role of Solomon the Wise.
What is still unclear is how Aldermen Trueworthy and Sherwood came to seek out Attorney Mednick. We know that O’Brien and Mednick were both involved in the Charter revisions. We also know that on virtually every email between Aldermen Trueworthy and Sherwood regarding the decision to seek hiring Attorney Mednick and their subsequent letter to Corporation Counsel about their decision to retain Attorney Mednick. Even before the resolution was voted on O’Brien, Sherwood, and Trueworthy were in contact with Attorney Mednick and sending him letters to review and asking him for help in writing up the letter to Corporation Counsel. It makes one wonder if Attorney Mednick was doing that work for free or if perhaps he plans on attempting to bill the city for that time.
It is almost sad to read the series of emails leading up to the letter sent to Attorney Bizzarro. All the discussion about occurred between just Attorney Mednick, Phil Sherwood, Michael Trueworthy, and Tim O’Brien. Only once a final draft of the letter had been written were the other Democrats brought into the discussion with an email from Michael Trueworthy with a four-point clarification on the original letter. It makes it quite clear who is doing the thinking for the Democratic party. Hopefully the remaining Democrats on the council will take a stand against their runaway leadership and refuse to overturn the Mayor’s veto at the next Common Council meeting.
Friday, July 2, 2010
To The editor:
July 2, 2010
Threats. I am attempting with this letter to put a little different perspective on this issue that is dominating New Britain news these days.
What kinds of threats have you experienced? Real, those acted on that become reality to a victim. Implied, if you do this, I hope you rot in Hell – more about this one later. Frivolous, you should hope that I don’t face you in the batter’s box. To make a point, you should be tarred and feathered for what you did – this person had to have read, “Skipper Ireson’s Ride” in junior high school. These are just a few of the variations.
I use my second example to try to make a point. A couple of years ago the Common Council was going to vote on distribution of Federal Funds from HUD, referred to as CDBG Funds. The Council went back and forth on which of those organizations that had made application should/would receive the funds. There were conflicts of interest galore with the Council members who were voting on the funding. Most of the outcome as to which organizations eventually were awarded funds was as predicted, purely political. I felt that many worthy organizations were being denied to satisfy patronage obligations to those less worthy.
Thus, I made a statement to the Council that I hoped that all of those Council members that voted a certain way, i.e. contrary to my feelings, would “ROT IN HELL”! SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS STIIL PRESENT ON THE COUNCIL HAVE NEVER ALLOWED ME TO FORGET THAT STATEMENT.
One would have thought that someone actually believed that I had some special relationship with a supreme being who would grant my request. The inanity of that situation is this; while I feel that I am currently in good standing in the religion I practice, I have no special powers. But some on the Council that wish to make political hay out of my statement. They would have you believe I am just one step removed from Simon Legree.
Such is the case with Alderman Sherwood’s current claim against Mayor Stewart. You be the judge. And do it by yourself without relying on the sensationalism spewed by some members of the media.
Lou Salvio, Alderman, City of New Britain
103 Russwin Rd. New Britain 860-225-9992
Threats. I am attempting with this letter to put a little different perspective on this issue that is dominating New Britain news these days.
What kinds of threats have you experienced? Real, those acted on that become reality to a victim. Implied, if you do this, I hope you rot in Hell – more about this one later. Frivolous, you should hope that I don’t face you in the batter’s box. To make a point, you should be tarred and feathered for what you did – this person had to have read, “Skipper Ireson’s Ride” in junior high school. These are just a few of the variations.
I use my second example to try to make a point. A couple of years ago the Common Council was going to vote on distribution of Federal Funds from HUD, referred to as CDBG Funds. The Council went back and forth on which of those organizations that had made application should/would receive the funds. There were conflicts of interest galore with the Council members who were voting on the funding. Most of the outcome as to which organizations eventually were awarded funds was as predicted, purely political. I felt that many worthy organizations were being denied to satisfy patronage obligations to those less worthy.
Thus, I made a statement to the Council that I hoped that all of those Council members that voted a certain way, i.e. contrary to my feelings, would “ROT IN HELL”! SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS STIIL PRESENT ON THE COUNCIL HAVE NEVER ALLOWED ME TO FORGET THAT STATEMENT.
One would have thought that someone actually believed that I had some special relationship with a supreme being who would grant my request. The inanity of that situation is this; while I feel that I am currently in good standing in the religion I practice, I have no special powers. But some on the Council that wish to make political hay out of my statement. They would have you believe I am just one step removed from Simon Legree.
Such is the case with Alderman Sherwood’s current claim against Mayor Stewart. You be the judge. And do it by yourself without relying on the sensationalism spewed by some members of the media.
Lou Salvio, Alderman, City of New Britain
103 Russwin Rd. New Britain 860-225-9992
Correction:
July 2, 2010
Statement from Dwight Blint, New Britain Republican Town Committee
Chairman:
I find it utterly incredulous that State Representative Tim O'Brien would
make an offer to broker a meeting between Mayor Timothy Stewart, Council
Majority Leader Phil Sherwood and Board of Education President Sharon
Beloin-Saavedra.
Having Rep. O’Brien serve as a mediator in this dispute is like having George
Steinbrenner serve as the umpire in an important game between the Yankees
and the Red Sox.
After the Common Council voted to hire attorney Steven Mednick to
potentially sue Mayor Stewart, the Republican Town Committee issued an FOI
request to Aldermen Michael Trueworthy and Phil Sherwood and Rep. O’Brien.
We received a number of documents. What they show is that Rep. O’Brien was
clearly the catalyst for our ongoing budget dispute. He first suggested
that Mayor Stewart’s veto was “illegal” and he encouraged the Council
Democrats to hire an attorney. Rep. O’Brien even drafted a letter disputing
the validity of the mayor’s veto. That letter was submitted to the mayor’s
office by Sherwood who simply replaced Rep. O’Brien’s name with his own.
In cooperation with attorney Mednick, who has yet to be retained, Sherwood,
Trueworthy and Rep. O’Brien wrote the resolution that called for the hiring
of Mednick.
It is clear that Rep. O’Brien is more than a casual observer or a disinterested party. Some have suggested that, as part of his effort to run
for mayor again, he purposely stirred up this hornet’s nest. Instead of
being applauded, he should be held accountable by the voters and by the
Common Council members who were clearly left out of the initial
discussions.
Therefore, I ask those Council members not to override the veto. Residents don’t want
more spending and politically-motivated lawsuits that get us no where. What
they want is an end to this dysfunction and for the Council to work with
the mayor for the betterment of the city’s taxpayers.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Mayor Stewart's Veto Message
City of New Britain
Office of Mayor Timothy Stewart
MEDIA RELEASE
July 1, 2010
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
STEWART VETOS HIRING OF OUTSIDE COUNSEL CLAIMING CITY OF NEW BRITAIN CANNOT AFFORD COSTS OF POLITICAL GAMES
New Britain Mayor Timothy Stewart today exercised the authority granted the mayor in the City of New Britain charter by vetoing a recent Common Council resolution authorizing the Council to hire an attorney to review the Mayor’s line item veto of the FY 2011 budget.
In a veto message sent to Town and City Clerk Peter Denuzze, Stewart elaborated on his reasons for the veto: “In addition to the actual cost of the $20,000 appropriated for an attorney, there is the cost of uncertainty and the cost of continuing this mentality of dueling branches of government. We cannot afford either type of costs when we are literally watching every dollar in the current tight fiscal circumstances.”
Stewart had hoped that the bickering and political partisanship would cease given that the Board of Education had set its budget and the tax bills have been mailed out, but “most members of the Common Council have succumbed to the temptation that many in our society do today: If an outcome is not to your liking, sue. Unfortunately, this attempt to manipulate democracy to suit political agendas can have disastrous consequences for our City.”
The Mayor feels strongly that taxpayers should not pay the costs for political agendas, particularly when the Council had the authority and duty to act in a timely fashion. “If the Council felt so strongly about education funding, they should have acted earlier and made sure that they built in time in the budget process to override any mayoral veto.” Stewart added. “It is not my problem, nor should it be the taxpayers problem or cost, that the Council did not exercise all the authority and powers given to them under City Charter and ordinances. Is the Council willing to issue additional tax bills to plug the resulting $2 million hole in the budget? This is not an academic exercise; the outcome has real consequences for residents and businesses that need to be considered before proceeding.”
The Mayor concluded his message with a plea to members of the Democratic caucus to reconsider the hiring of outside counsel, “By picking and choosing what parts of the Charter they agree with, the Council is playing with fire that could bring local government to a standstill. I implore the other nine members of the Democratic caucus to carefully weigh their decision to override this veto. The citizens need to hear your voices and opinions, not just those of your President Pro Temp and Majority Leader. This is an important vote that should be made by personal conscience, not by political party.”
-30-
Note: A copy of the Mayor’s veto message is attached, including a copy of a letter from Aldermen Sherwood and Trueworthy that is referenced in the message.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
