Sharon Anderson

Sharon Anderson

Saturday, October 29, 2011

ElectSharon4Seniors Ward2_CitySt.Paul_MN Sharon mustChallenge Constitutionality of City St.Paul's Ponzi Scheme to Assessments to Steal your Property's


Sharon Anderson · St. Paul Central

Shame on Schanno , who Affiant VA Widow Sharon Scarrella Anderson aka Peterson_Chergosky alleges Ms Schanno is making FALSE Statement to Ruin Sharons Credit and to malign Sharons Reputation etc. File no 495722 1988 When the Lesbian Judge KIathleen Gearin "kicked out the Disabled Anderson" Silver StarMarine suffering from Major PSTD and then trying to force $110,000.00 hundred and ten thousand dollars to cover up Major RealEstate Ponzi Schemes by the City St.Paul, County Ramsey. Sharon alleges that Ms. Schanno who has a Daughter apparantly never Married?
request that Ms Schanno disclose if Schanno ever Married. Sharon verily alleges that Ms. Schanno has never Voted in St.Paul Has never attended a Council Hearing and is a Mole_Wringer for the REpublican Party. Currently Sharon4Seniors is duly concerned for Property Homeowners... and must Challenge certain Statutes as Unconstitutionally Vague, Arbitrary re: Canvass Board and Assessments

that the St.Paul City Council has illegally for years used to Condemn and "take" our propertys Ms. Schanno put your 400 hundred thousand Condo at 256 Spring St. purschased from Rottlund Inc (sp) and your JC Aviation in the Flood Plaine Downtown St.Paul, and legally file your Distorted Ramblings now published re: Times vs. Sullivan to Force a Grand Jury to investigate. Sharon is challanging Constitutionality to force the State Attorney General to defend the Law's


Cynthia Schanno · · Top Commenter · Saint Paul, Minnesota

In your never ending effort to distort or should I say misinterpreted the facts...
The statute reads a city council candidate must live within the ward. It is common knowledge Ms. Anderson (a perpetual candidate) DOES NOT. The shame here is when you talk with county and/or city officials “they” state it is not their responsibility to verify or enforce the rules. My question then was “Well who is responsible?”.
The irony here is it is up to a challenging candidate and/or citizen to file a formal complaint, meaning the burden once again falls to the tax payers and/or a candidate who must to incur the time and cost to bring forward a formal complaint. This seems utterly asinine and frankly it is outrageous to me and I am simply pointing out the facts so the public is aware.
Our city council representatives state it is important to hold a fair race. Mr. Thune knows Sharon does not live in the ward, most everyone knows that… allowing Sharon to stay on the ballot makes a mockery of our system and our “new” electoral process, which “everyone” voted for but nobody knows how it works.
You are questioning my motive rather than bring light to the facts… If you had bothered to pick up the phone and ask me direct the motive behind the press release maybe then you would have write the story or communicated the effort correctly. Sorry Pioneer Press you did it again. Now, I dare ask, who is playing politics?

  • Sharon Anderson · St. Paul Central

    Put your Money where your Mouth is and if your such a concern citizen file with the OAH or Ramsey Co. Attorney re: Criminal Charges mandate Grand Jury Proceeings. Ms Schanno your wilful neglience to investigate re: exploiting Seniors, Disabled,Vunerable Adults is pervase/fatal

Subscribe! Feed RSS Subscribe Feed



Schanno wants Sharon Anderson off the ballot

Now is when things get rough, tough and … and … (dare we say it? yes we dare) … even snippy in St. Paul City Council races. And by rough, tough and snippy, the Scoop doesn’t just mean, “Don’t vote for my competitor.”

The Scoop means… “don’t allow my competitor on the ballot.”

That’s the tactic in the downtown / West End corner known as Ward 2, where one candidate is trying to get a second candidate booted out of the election even before Election Day, and blaming a third candidate — the incumbent city council member — that she’s even made it this far.

Confused? Here’s how it works:

Perennial candidate Sharon Anderson is running for election to the City Council in Ward 2, which would lead one to surmise that she actually lives in or around downtown or somewhere near West Seventh Street. Wrong, says fellow Ward 2 candidate Cynthia Schanno.

Anderson uses both her Summit Avenue address and a P.O. Box in her election filings, notes Schanno, even though Anderson lost her home in a tax dispute in 1988. Anderson apparently lives on the East Side, or did so when she videotaped this YouTube message in 2009:

Of the video, Anderson said: “That doesn’t prove anything. I’ve got 13 pieces of property.”

“My legal residence is 1058 Summit Avenue,” Anderson told the Scoop on Friday. “She’s trying to make a name for herself. She emailed me. She has published this on her website saying I’m not a viable candidate. Well, then make a complaint. If she’s going to be publishing false statements, the election law is you have to file a complaint with the office of administrative hearings. … Why doesn’t she sue me? Why doesn’t she file a legal complaint?”

The Scoop asked Anderson: “Where do you live, Sharon?”

To which Anderson responded: “It doesn’t matter. I have properties up in Itasca, I have properties up in Aitkin … ”

To which the Scoop interrupted: “Do you have property in Ward 2?”

To which Anderson responded: “I own 1058 Summit Avenue, with my dead tenants in common. … I’m not going to let a house go. The house was paid for. … Until she’s filed a valid complaint, I’m going to ignore her. … I could be living in my car, for all she knows.”

Anderson, who maintains she has been “reduced to poverty,” previously told the Scoop that she has to ask for rides from friends to the Dorothy Day Center in downtown St. Paul for meals. It stands to reason she might not rest her head at night in downtown proper. But could she really live… outside the ward? (Cue suspenseful music here…)

So, if Schanno’s allegations are true, who’s fault is it that Anderson’s name remains on the ballot? Clearly, it’s Council Member’s Dave Thune’s fault.

Wait. Hold up. Remind the tape. What?!

Schanno writes on her website, referring to herself in the third person: “Schanno alleged that incumbent Dave Thune knows Anderson is not eligible to be on the ballot but has said and done nothing because the situation benefits him.”

How could that be? Schanno’s press release doesn’t explain that point in detail, but hey, the Scoop surmises, it could be like this: Schanno and Anderson are the only women on the Ward 2 ballot. Together, they’d split the female vote faster than you can say “Bachmann vs. Palin.”

Furthermore, Anderson is a self-described Republican (though judging by previous GOP attempts to get her booted from previous elections, the party has no deep affection for her.) Schanno is at least a bit right of center, so the two appear to share some political space, at least on paper.

Schanno writes: “Anderson can siphon off a few hundred votes when voters mistake her for a more well known woman by the same name.”

Well, well. Let the battle be unjoined!

No comments: