RG 003, Hartford Housing Authority Investigation, Hartford Superior Court, One-man Grand Jury, Judge William Maltbie

Inventory of Records

Finding aid prepared by Henry A. Arneth.

Copyright © 2007 by the Connecticut State Library

Historical Note

“In April 1951, Hartford City manager Carlton F. Sharpe appointed a board of inquiry to look into the affairs of the Authority and report their findings to him... The specific details and outcomes of this study have never been found.”¹ ...David Radcliffe, 1998

What can be called the case to end discrimination and segregation in Hartford's public housing began in the summer of 1951 when the Superior Court for Hartford County initiated an investigation into the practices of the Hartford Housing Authority (HHA) amid charges of favoritism, corruption, and abuse of power. Former State Supreme Court Judge William Maltbie came out of retirement to preside over the case as a one-man grand jury.² In the opening of his report on this investigation, he states, "…acting under the provisions of Sec. 8777 of the General Statutes ordered an inquiry into the affairs of the Hartford Housing Authority to be conducted by me, as a state referee…" According to Maltbie, the one-man grand jury allowed by the statute, "…substitutes for the cumbersome and very expensive procedure of investigation by a Grand Jury the simpler and less costly method of an inquiry by a single magistrate…" He then comments that "…the end to be attained is just the same."³

One of the main characters in the scandal, Gerard Goulet's plight at first seemed normal. Goulet sought an apartment in one of the city's housing projects for veterans but was told that there were 800 other applicants on the waiting list. Despondent, he told his brother Lucian of his predicament. Lucian suggested that Gerard follow the path that he did to secure his apartment in Charter Oak Terrace Housing Project, that being a visit to the South Green Furniture Store. Lucian accompanied Gerard there and they saw the same salesman, Leo Weinberg, who is also the owner of the store. Gerard described his situation and then promised to buy all four rooms of furniture at the store. He picked out the desired pieces and after placing a small deposit on the merchandise, he was contacted through the store and told to go the Charter Oak Terrace and "pick up his key".⁴ Goulet's problems began when the furniture arrived. It was weak and flimsy, certainly not what he thought he had paid for. When he complained, he was basically told that he had nowhere to turn and to accept the situation. He didn't, and that is when his story came out when he filed a complaint with Sen. Raymond Baldwin's office. But that is just one aspect of the events leading up to the investigation.

Another aspect is the case of Mrs. Fazzino, a widow seeking a home for herself and her children. She had applied to the HHA for an apartment after being evicted in 1947 from the one her family occupied in East Hartford. She was still seeking housing in 1951 in spite of efforts by social workers to place her and guarantees of rent payments by the State Welfare Department. After her eviction from her East Hartford apartment, four of her children were placed in the New Britain Polish Orphanage while the remaining two lived with her in two cramped rooms. Fearing stress-related poor health would force her to give up her remaining children and wanting to bring her family back together, Mrs. Fazzino visited the HHA office and refused to leave until she had secured an apartment for her family. The employees of the HHA called the police who escorted Mrs. Fazzino out of the building but refused to arrest her despite her demand that they do so. Mrs. Fazzino accused the HHA of using stalling tactics in finding her an apartment.⁵

Problems existed even before the two described above. While the investigation occurred in 1951, as far back as 1948, Carlton Sharpe, then City Manager knew that there was a problem with the HHA. In September of that year he asked private investigator Harold Fleige to conduct his own investigation and offer some hints as to how to rectify the problem. Fliege wrote in his report, "After a two-day stay in Hartford my worst fears were confirmed for I found one of the most undesirable situations that could possibly exist in a business organization - (1) a complete lack of harmony and cooperation between the Commissioners, (2) and Executive Director completely without authority to run the program, (3) dissident elements among employees in the central and project offices refusing to take orders…(5) lack of personnel policy, (6) bad budgeting…(8) violations of FHA tenant selection policies."⁶ None of his recommendations were ever implemented.

Once the investigation was underway, an estimated 400 witnesses were seen in the three month period. Of these interviews, only a relative handful were determined to be germane to the case and saved. Unfortunately, there is no record that has been found to date that will tell how many people were ultimately seen, nor is there a record of their names. In fact, the entire process was kept covert, to the point of almost excluding the general public. However, there is the exception of a few names leaked to the press here and there, but generally the public was kept in the dark about the entire process. Only the people involved with the case were aware of what was happening and when. Not only that, but at an unusual point in the investigation, Lt. George Remer, State's Attorney Albert Bill, Assistant State's Attorney Joseph Fay, and Chief Justice Maltbie all concurred in the outcome of the investigation. In the words of Lt. Remer; "I believe that the investigation will result with a finding of mismanagement, back-scratching, inflated egos, political maneuvers, use of prestige, and without any crime."⁷ This quote is from a letter that Remer wrote to the police commissioner before all the witnesses had been interviewed. The timing of the letter was strange, for it just takes one person mentioning one incident to break a difficult or monotonous case. While the answer as to why these men agreed with Lt. Remer isn't simple to define, the implication is clear-possibly a bribe or a payoff to keep things under control and quiet. One thing is clear, however, that there were neither indictments nor follow-up of any kind to the one-man grand jury investigation conducted by Judge Maltbie.

Return to the Table of Contents

Scope and Content

The records consist of interviews; summonses; police material including reports and notebooks; correspondence; Hartford Housing Authority material; financial records including bank statements and cancelled checks, incorporation papers and tax returns; and newspaper clippings.

Return to the Table of Contents

Arrangement

Series 1. Interviews, 1951. Arranged chronologically.

Series 2. Summonses, 1951. Arranged chronologically.

Series 3. Police Material, circa 1950-1951.

Series 4. Correspondence, circa 1940-1951. Arranged alphabetically

Series 5. Hartford Housing Authority, circa 1948-1951.

Series 6. Financial Records, circa 1940-1951.

Series 7. Newspaper Clippings, circa 1940-1951.

Return to the Table of Contents

Restrictions

Restrictions on Access

These records are stored at an off-site facility and therefore may not be available on a same-day basis.

See the Rules and Procedures for Researchers Using Archival Records and Secured Collections policy.

Restrictions on Use

See the Reproduction and Publications of State Library Collections policy.

Return to the Table of Contents

Related Material

RG005:032 John Davis Lodge Gubernatorial Records, box 577, Folder: Hartford Housing Authority.

Newspaper Clipping Files, 1932-1992, for the years 1950-1951.

Daniel Radcliffe, Charter Oak Terrace: Life, Death and Rebirth of a Housing Project”, 1998.

Return to the Table of Contents

Index Terms

Organizations:

Persons:

Places:

Subjects:

Document Types:

Return to the Table of Contents

Container List