What a laugh. Municipal taxes have increased greatly under Kelly.

What does he stand for? Nothing, he won't tell us.

Nice try Peter.

Regardless who chaired (and I am unsure if you are accurate) she sat on a committee that recommended a half way house, Her role is to represents the citizens, but did not object on the selection committee. She did not consult with those she represented while on this committee. Once she saw citizens opposition, (and it was tough for citizens to kill it at that point) she tried to make it seem that she was on the residents side. (Start a fire and be publically be seen putting it out) I see this as her trademark on many issues.

My point is she palys her cards so she can take whatever side of an issue suites her political career. To me, this type of political camelion is worse than what Kelly brings to the office. Likely why she has never came out against secret meetings, and has comfortably sit in on all (or most) during her career.

We need new blood as mayor, not just another one of the old gang. Sure, she is a female. But, that does not bring the change needed.

You say**I would gladly see her have a chance at the mayor's seat. Sheila is passionate, bright and in tune with the citizens"".

Comment
Bob,
You obviously are misinformed. I have lived in this gals district since she came. I have not seen any bright light, except...the gal has as many faces as smiles. I agree that she is indeed passonate about her political career. Certainly not in tune with the citizens, more in tune with HRM staff....and secret meetings (just as much as Kelly)..

I say we need new blood, not another Kelly in a skirt,
I would not vote for any of the current Counci, and yes unfortunately Kelly again (since the only good one is Gloria and she seems out of it)

Citizen K wrote:
When I read the article "New website publishes negative news about mayor" I could not believe what I was reading. For what are we going to dump Peter Kelly? Sheila "Simply Lost" Fougere, "Stuck in the South End" Uteck? Come on now folks. Lets get back to reality. These ladies simply do not have the skills to manage HRM

Neither does PK.

Second, we need people who understand reality and are willing to challenge those who think more can be simply done by increasing taxes to pay for this and that, which not everyone is HRM will be able to use or even can afford. We are an aging population with shrinking wallets. We need someone who can stand up to unions, etc.


During Kelly's tenure we have seen HRM rape and pillage the taxpayer at an unprecedented rate. Every year at tax time he trumpets the fact that the tax RATE has either stayed the same or gone down a fraction. Every year he fails to tell the truth in the matter, in that with assessment increases averaging close to 10% annually, the TAXES PAID by the average property owner are skyrocketing because HRM cannot stop spending money on useless bylaws, studies, and the expansion of the civic bureaucracy.

Mayor Doofus must go.

KeithP makes a very important point. Taxes have increased at an alawming rate in the HRM.

The smoke and mirror issue of holding the tax rate steady or even dropping it may fool some of the people some of the time, but it's not going to fool all of the people all of the time.

Taxes have risen consistantly since Kelly took the mayor's chair in 2000.

Add that to the shifting of taxes, another smoke and mirrors tactic, which has certain water and sewer typ fees removed from property taxes and shifted to the water bill.

It gives the illusion of lowering taxes, but only acts to infuriate people.

well said eddie...she's a snake

I would vote Sheila if it means we getting rid of anti-development-concert killer Peter Kelly. Its time for him to go. He is doing this city no good.

eddie wrote:
Regardless who chaired (and I am unsure if you are accurate) she sat on a committee that recommended a half way house, Her role is to represents the citizens, but did not object on the selection committee. She did not consult with those she represented while on this committee. Once she saw citizens opposition, (and it was tough for citizens to kill it at that point) she tried to make it seem that she was on the residents side. (Start a fire and be publically be seen putting it out) I see this as her trademark on many issues.

My point is she palys her cards so she can take whatever side of an issue suites her political career. To me, this type of political camelion is worse than what Kelly brings to the office. Likely why she has never came out against secret meetings, and has comfortably sit in on all (or most) during her career.

We need new blood as mayor, not just another one of the old gang. Sure, she is a female. But, that does not bring the change needed.

You should make your point without fabricating your evidence to support it. The committee she sat on reviewed a number of properties identified by the CSC people as potential halfway house sites. The number one pick by CSC was the Windsor and Young site. The committee Sheila sat on was a bit of a sham by the feds as they had already decided which site they preferred.

Sheila knew that as soon as the site was chosen there would be public consultation, and that CSC would not proceed in the face of public opposition. (In Saint John the community didn't make a single objection). As the project proceeded with newspaper notices, public meetings and open discussion Sheila brought to the project committee that her and Blumenthal's constituents were up in arms about it.

If she was innocent, (which I doubt because it seemslike she was nominated by her liberal federal friends at the time) she shows no leadership skills to see it and reject a post that conflicted with her job as councillor. She surely showed no mayor skills in that case, I fear what would happen if she got any more power.

Fougere is hopelessly unqualified. Anyone on the current council is unfit to be mayor as they are a total and complete bunch of ass-clowns. One only has to watch the televised council meetings to determine that they are all hopelessly over their heads. In addtion, far too many of them have close connection to the city bureaucracy as current or retired city employees.