That's not what it says. It says that as long as the logic is rich enough (first-order isn't enough) and consistent there are statements where neither the statement nor its negation is provable. You may choose to create a new logic by adding either the statement or its negation as an additional axiom, and it will (obviously?) remain consistent.

Truth is some sort of value judgment that is outside the scope of formal systems. And looking at how bizarre Gödel statements are, it's unclear if there's any particular justification for declaring them to be true or false.