« Rumor Mill | Main | Shameless »

September 05, 2011

Comments

Hoffman is not the only candidate who wrote more than yes/no on those questions that you added the editor's notes to. I checked, because I didn't remember you adding that before. You may want to go back to those and add the editor's notes to them, as well. Personally, I appreciate the expanded comments. I think it gives a better sense of their positions.

Interesting responses. Land use planning is highly socialistic. Some of the other responses seem to be also.

Lost my attention & support when answered SuperJamz.....

After reading this post on Nancy Hoffman I immediately intrigued as to just who this woman is. I found her facebook page and viewed her "fan page" http://www.facebook.com/votehoffmann and is it just me or does she not have a photo shopped resemblence to State House Rep. D- Maggie Jeffus?

I don't like her response to questions, 1,4,5,6,9,10,16,19.
If she is the individual I'm thinking of, I didn't like what she had to say as a speaker from the floor at council meetings.

Michele, the questionnaire requested a yes/no answer for certain questions; and the cover letter specifically requested that the question be answered yes/no. However, I further advised that they were welcome to offer additional comments as well.

Some candidates will try to avoid having to answer "yes/no" to certain questions by obfuscating behind a bunch of verbiage; and that is what I was trying to prevent. I will go back over the other questionnaires to be sure that I handled them the same way when I posted them-- but I think that I did. If not, I will fix it when I can.

In addition, Hoffman is demonstrably wrong here, in regard to the porn in the library issue when she says "This is currently being done...."

No, it is NOT currently being filtered out.

Furthermore, he her statement "...and I trust our Greensboro Libraries Director Sandy Neerman to direct and monitor that program" shows that her judgement is just as questionable as Neerman's is.

This is clearly someone whose election would not be in the best interests of good government in our city.

Look at her response to Yes Weakly's "strong city manager" survey question:

"I support a “strong manager” form of city government in which the council role is to provide vision, long-term strategy, and policy determination. Professional city staff is charged with the day to day operation of city government, making appropriate recommendations to council, as well as undertaking the study and evaluation of policy decisions to develop options and implementation details for council to review and adopt. This model has been effective in Greensboro for decades, and it was under this system that the city experienced strong, steady growth, prosperity, and a reputation for being a progressive city with good quality."

http://www.yesweekly.com/triad/article-12371-nancy-hoffmann.html

This lady has all the earmarks of another "progressive" agenda troublemaker.

Vote for Mary Rakestraw!

After reading Hoffmann's answers.
Vote for Mary Rakestraw.

After a walk in the neighborhood and seeing election signs I came home and checked online info on candidates. Nancy's responses seem forthright and sensible. I will consider her candidacy.

Which of her answers to Joe's survey questions suits you, Mr. Cooke?

Which of her answers to Joe's survey questions suits you, Mr. Cooke?

"Will you seek or accept the endorsement of TREBIC-affiliated organizations? No."

Why not?

The comments to this entry are closed.