A Made-Up Controversy to Distract From the Practice of ‘Double-Dipping’

Share

TwitterFacebookCopy LinkPrintEmail

To the Editor:

Megan Cottrell’s letter to the editor, A Safe Place for Civil Discourse in Stamford, accuses me of bullying by calling her and other members of the Stamford Board of Representatives “pigs.”  I did no such thing. My op-ed criticized the practice of double-dipping, i.e., individuals serving on both the Democratic City Committee and the Board of Representatives.

Serving one’s district in both capacities almost always ensures that the individual will receive the Democratic Party endorsement for the Board of Reps, and all the benefits that go along with it. There’s no such assurance when a citywide officeholder is also a DCC member, because they don’t control their own nomination.

If elected on March 5th, fourteen of the 34 DCC candidates on the “Stamford Dems for Responsive Government” will be double-dippers, including Ms. Cottrell. My op-ed included several quotes from leaders of this faction (including one from Ms. Cottrell), attacking double-dipping back in 2017 and 2020. Now that this faction has gained power, its leaders have apparently changed their minds about double-dipping.

Regarding Ms. Cottrell’s “pig” accusation, here is what I wrote:

“Reform Stamford’s double-dipping hypocrisy reminds me of the great George Orwell fable, Animal Farm.  The pigs on the farm lead a revolution and expel their human overseers. By the end of the book, the ruling pigs have adopted all of the human behaviors that they had pledged to eliminate. It looks like Reform Stamford has decided to emulate the ruling pigs in Animal Farm.”

In my view, labeling this literary analogy “bullying” is a made-up controversy, intended to divert attention from the gap between Ms. CottrelI’s (and others’) words in 2017 and 2020 and their actions in 2024.

Carl Weinberg
Stamford, CT

Weinberg represents District 20 on the Stamford Board of Representatives