Sharon Shepherd - Mayoral Candidate

[Jo]

A thread for Sharon Shepherd, mayoral candidate.

[leroibrown]

Do not be fooled by Sharon Shepherd. When she was first elected she went on a trip to Holland on the taxpayers dime to investigate some sort of power source. I never heard her report on her findings. What was she researching windmills? That could have been done on the internet. She took a free trip on our money. Let's show her that she does not get any more free rides. She also tried to stick her nose in where it didn't belong by meddling in the Westside amalgamation / incorporation issue. *deleted/Jo* That' why there are booths at polling stations. Mayor Shepherd always says which way she voted and blames her council. Council is a team and she is not a team player. Let's show her who the real boss is , WE THE PEOPLE. So long Sharon, Don't let the door hit you on your way out.

[nellietheelephant]

Problem is -
On the one hand you have Sharon Shepherd,
and on the other hand you have . . . exactly what?


In a one competitor race,
there is only one winner.
There isn't a choice number two

Nellie

[Chmmr]

Problem is -
On the one hand you have Sharon Shepherd,
and on the other hand you have . . . exactly what?


In a one competitor race,
there is only one winner.
There isn't a choice number two

Nellie

I completely agree Nellie, I am very disappointed in Sharon Sheperd for declaring the Right to Life week that we discussed on the forum a couple of months ago, and just can not get past her putting her personal beliefs into her role as mayor. That said, i also can't set the city on a path to destruction by voting for someone that has nothing to show and nothing to prove herself.

[RJ7]

The 'right to life' proclamation was taken out of context- it doesn't make her 'pro-life' re. abortion- the way the document was worded it was based on the right to life for everyone, primarily those with disabilities.

If you think you can't trust Sharon, then you definitely don't know her. She's one of the most dedicated, 'honest', approachable, and knowledgable people you will meet. She wasn't elected to go with the old boys club that was already in council, she was elected for 'change'- if you keep the same council, how does she implement change with a single vote? This time around will 'hopefully' be much different as there's finally a chance for a council to be voted in that can actually create some sort of change.

[Chmmr]

Can you explain to me then why she continues to appeal the Simpson Covenant even though it has been upheld in the Supreme Courts.
My tax dollars (and yours) are being wasted to fight something that the courts have already decided on. That in itself tells me that I can't trust her to look after our best interests.

[onestop67]

Can you explain to me then why she continues to appeal the Simpson Covenant even though it has been upheld in the Supreme Courts.

Because she continues to get bad legal advice from city attorneys. And despite the situation being so logically simple to understand, she would rather follow the advice given to her and have an out clause to why she is doing it.

"Well I was only following the advice of the attorneys...hyuk hyuk".

[Chmmr]

Not seeing how that is a good reason

[TheBro]

Right! Why would we want the Mayor to follow legal advice? hmmmm.

[omisimaw]

Know this woman personally for many many years.
Will not be voting for her, even though I know it is a throw vote not to.
Like her as a person, think she is way, way over her head as a Mayor.
Can not believe this position only garnered her and one other as choices.
To me this says people have given up and it will not surprise me to see that the turn out for the election follows the federal election and is the lowest recorded turn out ever.


NO VOTE FOR HER AND JUST MAYBE A BLANK X IN EITHER SQUARE FOR MAYOR

[Chmmr]

Right! Why would we want the Mayor to follow legal advice? hmmmm.

Oh come on seriously. It was not the lawyers that decided to fight this thing in the first place , it was council. Then they went to the lawyers and they advise them on how to go about it and if it is winnable. Once they lost, it was yet again up to city council to decide whether this is really something they need to grind their axes on before telling the lawyers they want to appeal.

Calling her actions "following laywers advice" is BS pure and simple. A lawyer doesn't say, we know what is best for the city and here is what you should do. A lawyer acts on their behalf and advises them as to legalities of the case, and whether they feel an appeal would be successful etc. THEY DO NOT TELL CITY COUNCIL TO APPEAL THE CONVENANT.

That aside, if i have a mayor who can't think for herself and can only make decisions based on what others tell her to do, with no good reasoning of her own, and no thoughts towards what is good for the city, and what the people in it want, then why would i want that person as mayor?

[Timi]

...I agree, but what if there are no other choices (for mayor)...then what do you do?

[Chmmr]

...I agree, but what if there are no other choices (for mayor)...then what do you do?

Honestly i feel torn. I have never been one to throw my vote, but part of me hopes that if i just leave it blank, a substantially lower number of votes could indeed send a message to mayor shepherd. If not, my other choice is to vote for her (which is likely what i will do given that i am truly worried about what would happen with the other woman voted in), and send emails and post publicly as we are now, and continue to hound her for the rest of her new position to ensure that she does as we expect her to. I really really wish anyone else that was experienced or worthwhile was running now.

[RJ7]

This is what scares me... She did NOT "NOT" NOT!!! vote to appeal the decision by the courts re. the simpson convenant. I'll repeat: SHE DID [b]NOT[b] VOTE TO APPEAL THE COURT DECISION. The council did, but her statement the following day was to urge that there be a NEW COUNCIL elected in so that the appeal could be defeated. It scares me how confused people are on this issue... The majority of council (and why it got passed) voted to appeal, that DOES NOT mean everyone did. Please look at the voting records of these candidates and their background as it's SO CLEAR who is on which side of the fence. (hint: shepherd,hobson,rule on one side) I'll say it once more- shepherd DID NOT vote to appeal the court decision.

[Chmmr]

This is what scares me... She did NOT "NOT" NOT!!! vote to appeal the decision by the courts re. the simpson convenant. I'll repeat: SHE DID [b]NOT[b] VOTE TO APPEAL THE COURT DECISION. The council did, but her statement the following day was to urge that there be a NEW COUNCIL elected in so that the appeal could be defeated. It scares me how confused people are on this issue... The majority of council (and why it got passed) voted to appeal, that DOES NOT mean everyone did. Please look at the voting records of these candidates and their background as it's SO CLEAR who is on which side of the fence. (hint: shepherd,hobson,rule on one side) I'll say it once more- shepherd DID NOT vote to appeal the court decision.

Well i was unaware of that fact if it is true (i believe those were closed door proceedings technically so no one knows for a fact correct?) but she certainly pushed for the opposition to the covenant originally which is good enough for me.