Could Sanders' vote on the Central Presbyterian Church affect his bid for supervisor?
 |
Submitted by creilly on Tue, 2008-06-10 15:19. |
Jim Sanders, a Merced city councilman now vying for a seat on the county Board of Supervisors, thinks his recent vote to declare the Central Presbyterian Church a local historic resource may be among the reasons he won fewer votes than his opponent, Hub Walsh.
On June 3, Sanders and Walsh beat out three other candidates running for the county's District 2 Board of Supervisors seat. Walsh won 39 percent of the votes cast. Sanders took in 26 percent. That means both men will advance to a November runoff.
In an interview on election night, Sanders said he thinks the CPC vote may have been partly to blame for his second-place finish. While many District 2 voters championed Sanders' vote, many others probably disagreed with it, Sanders said.
"I think it was fresh in a lot of people's minds, and that may have impacted their vote," he said.
The question now is, will the issue still be fresh enough to have any affect in November?
Sanders said he's not sure. "I certainly hope it won't," he said. "But I'm not letting myself worry about that. I've never made a vote on the council just to win votes, and this issue was no different. I voted the way I thought was right."
What do you think? Any District 2 voters out there who voted for or against Sanders based on his call on the CPC? If so, will you do the same in November? Leave a post here and share your thoughts.
Jim Sanders
|
Submitted by Trotaker on Sun, 2008-06-15 16:55.
|
When you have over 200 community residents/congregants from CPC wanting to further the vision of their church vs. the handful of opponents present at the City Council meetings, Mr. Sanders might want to consider the wishes of the people rather his personal opinion. I did not vote for Jim Sanders and will not vote for Jim Sanders in November.
The Herd
|
Submitted by Lune on Tue, 2008-06-17 09:34.
|
It's a lot easier to organize and herd an established congregation than independent community members. As one speaker at a City Council meeting put it, members of the community are, like cats, much more difficult to herd. We must remember that most members of the community go to the polls and vote independently.
Jim Sanders
|
Submitted by justanothervoice on Fri, 2008-06-13 21:59.
|
His vote to declare CPC an historic building is exactly why he didn't and will not get my vote!
Syndicate
A number of Jim Sanders'
A number of Jim Sanders' supporters voted for Hub Walsh because they wanted to keep Sanders on the City Council. He still has two years to go. Who would replace him?
He gave a well-reasoned explanation for his decision on the historic resource designation which showed he had done his homework. Most reasonable voters respect him for that, and many of the voters I know thought the designation was a wise decision.
The anti-historic resource group from the church has some very vocal members who do vote, but most of them voted for John Price who was "their" man. These voters are unlikely to switch their vote to Sanders in the November election, though. They are much too conservative, and there are only a couple dozen who feel strongly enough to base their vote solely on the historic decision anyway.
I think the question of "Who would replace Jim Sanders on the City Council" is far more important. His position on the historic designation can only help him in the November election when many more voters will be casting ballots.