2011 Municipal Election for City Council and School Board

[shrory]

She is joining the race, she will win the race, she is the one with integrity, honesty, and principles, she is the one with her pulse on local issues, she is the one who people trust in the city, she is the one who should (will) be on city council, and she is coming and she will win.

Do not create multiple copies of the same thread or post.

[grammafreddy]

Other Lower Mainland mayors' salaries:
Vancouver: $140,000.
Coquitlam: $118,945.
Surrey: $115,178.
Burnaby: $114,031.
Richmond: $106,967.
Delta: $100,525.
City of North Vancouver: $100,004.
Port Coquitlam: $85,418.
Port Moody: $69,114.
West Vancouver: $65,000
All the above deal with a hell of a lot more issues and are responsible for a hell of a lot more people than Kelowna has , and the mayor her makes $90,000 + per year , discussing Bunnies and Dog Parks . Councillors make in the $30,ooo range and the mayors wages should go back by atleast 30% for having to deal with way less populous than the above mayors

There are two components to what municipal elected reps are "paid". Have you researched both components and what do these figures you posted represent?

Your statement, "discussing Bunnies and Dog Parks" is just plain ignorant.

[dudlee]

Other Lower Mainland mayors' salaries:
Vancouver: $140,000.
Coquitlam: $118,945.
Surrey: $115,178.
Burnaby: $114,031.
Richmond: $106,967.
Delta: $100,525.
City of North Vancouver: $100,004.
Port Coquitlam: $85,418.
Port Moody: $69,114.
West Vancouver: $65,000
All the above deal with a hell of a lot more issues and are responsible for a hell of a lot more people than Kelowna has , and the mayor her makes $90,000 + per year , discussing Bunnies and Dog Parks . Councillors make in the $30,ooo range and the mayors wages should go back by atleast 30% for having to deal with way less populous than the above mayors

[hereiamagain]

As a Christian he is to "love your neighbour as yourself". He is to put others before himself.

As a Christian, he has already said LGBT is sinful - if others are to be believed.

Those kinds of opinions and judgements on our fellow man are not welcome in the political sphere. Would he be able to hold himself back? Would he have been able to make the proclamation for Pride Day with no problem?

As a Christian - if you want to label him so, and it appears you do, in your post you were exemplify his being Christian as hugely valuable and a benefit to Kelowna - he has already made judgements on what is right and what is wrong... and while that is just fine in a church setting, and imho expected, again it has no place in politics.

In politics, he will have no option but to be objective and withhold his opinions, how would his congregation feel about that....?

imho He should stay in his pulpit. He does a terrific job in his sphere - to step out of that would be disastrous for all. And if he does want to run for council, he should do councilor first, to see if he can even handle a chair in the room.

I still suspect those who run for mayor before having a seat on council and I don't think they take the mayor chair very seriously, that they can walk in to the top job without any ...."on the job training."

[grammafreddy]

@ Dayleen and montainmama ... I thought you guys liked me Thanks for the votes, though *hugz* It isn't about to happen. Besides, if I was mayor, I couldn't come on here and whack anyone with my rolling pin.

[Lady tehMa]

:127: People sure love to throw that whole "church and state" thing out there. I wonder how many actually know the context for it?

The concept of separation of church and state refers to the distance in the relationship between organized religion and the nation state. The term is an offshoot of the phrase, "wall of separation between church and state," as written in Thomas Jefferson's letter to the Danbury Baptists Association in 1802. The original text reads: "...I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."

It was originally stated in order to protect religion, not the other way around. After all, America was populated by people who didn't want to be told how they had to worship . . .

Anyway. I would vote for Shroeder because he is successfully running one of the largest churches in Kelowna. Their outreaches are many, and not pushy at all. I would rather have a person in office who actually has a known set of values, and can be held accountable to them, than an unknown quantity. As a Christian he is to "love your neighbour as yourself". He is to put others before himself. He is voluntarily holding himself to a higher code of behaviour than most of secular society. I believe he is successful because he isn't like the televangelists who "do as I say, and not as I do". If he is actually walking the walk, then I'd vote for him.

I think to not vote for him based on the fact he is a Christian, is to be as discriminatory as to not vote for someone because they were Muslim or Jewish; or because they were ethnic or female or homosexual. People are people. We need to look at the quality of character, and go from there.

Edit: I hate spelling errors >.<

[mountainmama]

:nyah: I'd vote for Gramma Freddy. I would not consider voting for the preacher. He has his calling, and it conflicts with politics. With GF we see some thought, honesty and integrity put into the design and workings of this city. :rate10:

[Dayleen]

Gramma Freddy for Mayor!! Seriously..if you haven't considered it, maybe you should.

[grammafreddy]

If he were president of something like UNICEF, I suspect you would have no problem accepting his candidacy.

You would be wrong - if he was president of UNICEF I would actively campaign against him. As it is, right now I am only just stating my opinion that religions and politics shouldn't climb into bed together - married or not!

That's how we end up with oppressing women's rights, anti-abortion legislation, denying equality to gays and lesbians and spending too much money on warm and cozy feel-good social programs.

I'm not against the pastor running - he has that right if he meets the requirements - but there is no way I would ever vote for a candidate who listed a religious affiliation amongst his/her credentials for holding public office, just as I would not vote for a zealot of any cause.

[bornhere63]

Whoever we elect is going to have a personal value system, be it humanism, secularism, or faith-based. Each candidate is the sum of his/her experiences.

To prejudge a pastor with a solid record of leading and inspiring people across the community is to waste a proven resource. He has a record of public service, period. Unless he deliberately expresses a desire to use the office as an evanglelistic platform, it is unbecoming to load him with our baggage. He runs an effective non-profit organization. He has a skill set. If he were president of something like UNICEF, I suspect you would have no problem accepting his candidacy. The pastor has served this city with candour and integrity for a long time. It is unlikely he will run with a secret agenda at this stage, so you will be able to make an informed decision with the same weight as other voters.

To prejudge the pastor is also to be a pot calling a kettle black. Hold off on your assumptions and wait for evidence. You sound as alarmist as the right wing Christian population afraid to elect an asian because Seikhs, Muslims, Buddists, etc. also want to take over the world. Prejudice is prejudice.

Marginalizing the man for what he might do is immature and irresponsible. Wait and ask him, then decide.

[BoyWondering]

I suspect anyone who goes right for the mayor's chair without doing a stint on council. That experience I believe is important.

Tend to agree. I watched in horror what Larry O'Brien did as Mayor in Ottawa: elected because of his supposed business background, he was a disaster as Mayor and set the city back several years. He had no concept as to how a council & city run and his bull-headed tactics antagonized all sides.

Some experience on a council is necessary although no guarantee; witness Ford in Toronto!

[hereiamagain]

Walter Gray is considering running for Mayor again.

Over the past six years, Gray says some things council has done he would have done differently, but adds he's not passing judgement on the job done by Shepherd.

I hope not. SS was an excellent change. If I could vote in Kelowna, I would vote for her again if the choice was
Gray, Shepard and the Baptist preacher.

Church does not belong in politics - I don't care how good of a guy and how much he helped the community. The preacher does good things where he is. Gray was forced out because people were fed up with his methods. SS listens and really does appear to do her best.

I suspect anyone who goes right for the mayor's chair without doing a stint on council. That experience I believe is important.

[Theorem]

Gray mulls return to politics
by Wayne Moore - Story: 64032
Aug 25, 2011 / 9:30 am

It would be a battle for the ages - one UFC President Dana White would surely like to promote.

Walter Gray is contemplating a return to politics and another crack at the Kelowna mayor's chair.

Gray, 70, was a Kelowna alderman for four years (1986-1990) before serving as mayor for nine years (1996-2005).

His bid for a fourth term was derailed by Sharon Shepherd, who upset Gray in 2005 by nearly 2,300 votes.

Gray says he is being encouraged to run for mayor but admits he has not made a decision one way or another.

"Pressure isn't the right word for it. I'm getting enthusiastic encouragement," says Gray.

"People are telling me they hope I run, they wish I would run, or 'please consider it'. I guess I'm being influenced by that to the extent that I am saying I better give this one some final thought."

"I will have done that, I would think, in the next week."

Gray says he is not leaning one way or another.

"I'm just analyzing the opportunity. You make a list: 'what are the reasons not to do it' would be personal, and the reasons to do it would be because I think I could do a job."

Over the past six years, Gray says some things council has done he would have done differently, but adds he's not passing judgement on the job done by Shepherd.

"That doesn't mean I would be right and she would be wrong," says Gray.

"We have a different style of leadership. I'm probably more about the process. That's not to say I'm good and she's bad or I'm bad and she's good, we're just different."

Gray was a supporter of downtown revitalization and the CD21 Zone. Prior to final debate, Gray implored council to give fourth and final reading to the document in an open letter to council.

Council instead rescinded first three readings.

Gray says former Councillor Carol Gran, who has recently returned to Kelowna after spending several years with her family in Arizona, is also contemplating a return to civic politics.

If Gray decides against running, Gray says Gran will consider making a run.

Gray says if he does decide to run against Shepherd, Gran is expected to run again for council.

Prospective candidates for mayor, council or school board can pick up nomination packages at City Hall.

Nomination forms must be returned to City Hall between October 4 and 14.

, Castanet News Article

NOW WE'RE TALKING!

[CJT84]

Really? I'd vote for him.

Lady - I have a great deal of respect for Rev. Schroeder: his record of service to this community is exceptional.

However, I have a concern about the intermingling of church and state, particularly if it is part of a theosophy know as Dominionism.

"Dominionism is therefore a tendency among Protestant Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists that encourages them to not only be active political participants in civic society, but also seek to dominate the political process as part of a mandate from God.

This highly politicized concept of dominionism is based on the Bible's text in Genesis 1:26:

• "And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth." (King James Version).

• "Then God said, 'Let us make man in our image, in our likeness and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth and over all the creatures that move along the ground.'" (New International Version).

The vast majority of Christians read this text and conclude that God has appointed them stewards and caretakers of Earth. As Sara Diamond explains, however, some Christian read the text and believe, "that Christians alone are Biblically mandated to occupy all secular institutions until Christ returns--and there is no consensus on when that might be." That, in a nutshell, is the idea of "dominionism."

Should Rev. Schroeder run, my support would be very contingent on his motives for wanting the big chair. I get very concerned when I see the like of Perry & Bachmann seeking to become POTUS with their toxic brew of Old Testament fundamentalism and politics and feel we need to be on guard against similar attempts in Canada. From what I know of Rev. Schroeder I do not think he is anything like these US examples; but I would need reassurance this is so.

And thy say us Catholics control the world :127:

[grammafreddy]

GF - did you find you could really effect change? My impression is that the Mayor & Council in Kelowna are very much run by the City and not vice versa. I'm not sure if this is true elsewhere & would appreciate your perspective.

In some things, yes. You win some, you lose some. I was the first female elected in my former city and was the only female on an "old boys network" council. It was a huge challenge and needed to be tackled head on or be walked on.

For the most part, I would concur with your assessment of this city council. When I see some of the reports and study results staff gives to council, I can see there is a definite slant to certain biases and leanings toward a certain result. That tells me somebody is pulling some strings behind the scenes or directing issues along certain lines and in directions only from one perspective. In very few cases, individual councillors do any of their own homework. They rely on staff or consultants who work with staff and not council. Findings are presented to council after the work is done and for some reason, they seem to accept those for the most part. Some may question bits of them but seldom has an elected person actually done any research or talked to the public about issues on their own. If they do, it sure is not obvious.

I would also be wary of "one issue" candidates. If elected, they will work on their issue to try to get the changes they want but all other issues will have them voting with the crowd because they just don't care about anything else. There's a few of them on council now.