When he was the mayor of Fresno, Alan Autry often said, “The truth will set you free, but first it will make you miserable.”

As applied to politics, this meant that it was best to practice transparency and let the chips fall where they may.

The Fresno City Council is facing such a crucible over the awarding of no-bid contracts and using taxpayer dollars in support of election campaigns.

Getting to the truth is complicated, however, by the fact the seven councilmembers are clients of the City Attorney’s Office.

Thus, attorney-client privilege shields the public from knowing what discussions, if any, Fresno City Attorney Andrew Janz has had with councilmembers about no-bid contracts and paying taxpayer money to political consultants to engage in so-called “constituent outreach.”

This is pertinent because former councilmember and current county supervisor Luis Chavez — one of the central figures in this foul-smelling affair — tried, in an interview with Fresnoland, to leave the public with the impression that Janz signed off on the contracts that Chavez brought forward.

Council Should Waive Attorney-Client Privilege

However, the City Attorney’s Office doesn’t approve contracts. It reviews them to see if they comply with the law and to ensure that the t’s are crossed and the i’s dotted. The office might also advise councilmembers on how to structure a contract so that the best interests of Fresno taxpayers are protected.

Approving contracts is the city council’s responsibility. Don’t ever forget that.

So, how do taxpayers get to the bottom of this mess?

The city council can vote to waive attorney-client confidentiality, thus enabling the public to see the email discussions that took place before political campaign consultant Alex Tavlian received more than a half-million dollars in contracts to perform constituent outreach for two councilmembers, and to promote voter approval of establishing a veterans memorial district.

I’ve never heard a councilmember publicly oppose transparency — not even those who try and sometimes succeed at keeping their sausage-making buried in the deepest recesses of City Hall.

Thus, taxpayers have the right to expect that the council allow Janz to make everything public on a 7-0 vote.

Another Consultant’s Contract on the Agenda

Interestingly, another consultant’s contract is on Thursday’s agenda. Council president Mike Karbassi and councilmember Miguel Arias want to expand consultant Blong Xiong’s contract from $48,000 to $110,000. As originally agreed upon, Xiong is providing outreach services, particularly to the Hmong community, and developing a municipal urban garden.

Now, the scope of services would expand to include representing the city council on the future of the city-owned Riverside Golf Course in Karbassi’s district.

The only complication I see is that Xiong, a former city councilmember, is contemplating running for the Fresno County Supervisor District 1 seat. The current representative, Brian Pacheco, opted to run for the state Assembly instead of seeking re-election. Karbassi, it should be noted, already is among the crowded field seeking the supervisor seat.

If the contract expansion is approved and Xiong runs for the seat, whose interests will be his priority? Taxpayers’ or his own?

And has anyone on the city council contemplated the potential harm to city-county relationships that could arise from a city consultant running for supervisor? Politics, I don’t need to remind you, is nasty business in which all scorecards are preserved to the participants’ memories.

During the discussion before today’s contract vote, Xiong should tell one and all whether he’s running for supervisor.

If he doesn’t, the council must table the contract addendum until he answers the question.