Thursday, March 17, 2011
Some have wondered why Councilman Sharp made the second zone so large. It happens to extend to the east side of Blue Ridge Boulevard north of Bannister Road, including the gas station that he is so proud of bringing to an intersection already serviced by two other stations. So now with three gas stations at one intersection, one might also wonder if Sharp has ever heard of peak oil, supply and demand, or if he thinks we can go back to the 1960s.
Ten new jobs are supposed to be created by placing another gas station there, and that will allow Mr. Sharp to truthfully state that he has brought jobs to south KC.
The owner of the new station intends to sell liquor at that location, which they can do thanks to Sharp's ordinance passed just two months ago.
And while "synthetic cannabinoids" and "bath salts" are already showing up at gas station convenience stores in the area, the owner of the new Bannister gas station has been found selling crack pipes at their station in the Old Northeast section of KC.
A friend of mine was driving down Blue Ridge Boulevard and saw a Sharp-for-council sign in front of yet another liquor store, and started to wonder what's going on in this area that already has plenty of liquor stores.
She was reminded of the city council redistricting issue where Mr. Sharp was fighting to keep all of his voting base in the sixth district. Gwen Grant, President and CEO of the Urban League, roasted him on Channel 19's "Ruckus" saying that he was all in favor of helping Blacks drink in the Power and Light District, but didn't mind if they couldn't vote.
She might have found an emerging pattern there, and it could lead to harder stuff.
Monday, March 14, 2011
There were two candidate forums in SKC last week and I attended both. I found it extremely interesting that at both John Sharp complimented the mayoral candidates, saying they’re running a campaign the way a campaign should be run - civilly. Then he turned right around and implied that his opponent wasn’t running a real campaign because he was opposed to the current monster of a bridge and it’s the ‘supposed’ Friends of Red Bridge that are his top advisors.
No matter where you stand on the bridge project, it’s remarkable that Mr. Sharp feels the need to continue marginalizing 500-600 of his constituents. The bridge is being built. The project is moving right along. It should not be brought up as if it’s still a point of contention, and the people who were opposing it shouldn’t be denigrated, even by implication.
Mr. Sharp likes to brag about his years of service and talk about his knowledge and ability to support SKC; but if that were really the case, why can’t he find a more effective and appropriate argument to build his case? Perhaps it’s a guilty conscience. After all, he went to city hall prior to his election and testified that the huge bridge should not be built. He led the Friends of Red Bridge to believe he supported their stance. Then after his election he changed his tune.
Again, it isn’t important which side of the issue a person was on. The issue is that Mr. Sharp apparently can’t be trusted. Maybe that’s why he can’t seem to put it behind him when others have moved on. It would be laughable if it weren’t so scary. If Mr. Sharp couldn’t be trusted over the last four years, what’s he going to be like as a lame duck?