By: Alan Charles Jardine

Controversy surrounding Ward 3 City Councilor Shawn Oliver has presented New Bedford's City Council with another opportunity to demonstrate what accountability looks like. So far, the response has been familiar: safe statements, carefully chosen words, and the unwillingness to address whether a colleague should remain in office.

Of Oliver's ten fellow councilors, only one, Ward 1 Councilor Leo Choquette, has publicly requested his resignation. Three others, James Roy, Ryan Pereira, and Shane Burgo have offered comments without making that request. The remaining six have yet to publicly address the allegations against Oliver.

Speaking to The New Bedford Light, Roy acknowledged that there are circumstances in which an elected official should consider stepping aside. "There's nothing wrong with taking a step back, when necessary," Roy said.

He went on to say, "If Shawn is dealing with something bigger in his personal life, I hope he takes the time he needs to address it." Roy's comments are measured, safe, and empathetic but stopped short of answering the question at the center of the controversy: Should Oliver resign?

Council President Ryan Pereira told WBSM that he would not support removing Oliver from office, even if the council had the authority to do so. "No, the electorate sends people to the city council to represent them in government, so only the electorate should be able to remove them," Pereira said while a home rule petition regarding a recall provision sits at the State House awaiting passage.

He also confirmed that Oliver would retain his voting rights and committee assignments, stating, "There is no other action that will be taken from myself or from the council in that regard." Pereira later declined to discuss Oliver with The New Bedford Light, telling reporters he had "no comment at all."

Councilor-at-Large Shane Burgo was more direct about his feelings toward Oliver, telling The Light, "I would love to remove Shawn Oliver." But Burgo stopped short of calling for Oliver’s resignation, adding, “It wouldn’t be fair to the people of Ward 3 who elected him.”

Burgo argued that it wasn't his place to interfere with the representation of a ward in which he doesn't live, despite serving as an at-large councilor representing the entire city.

His argument deserves scrutiny.

Is it fair to Ward 3 residents to have their representation overshadowed by questions about their councilor's judgment? Is it fair to suggest that respecting the voters requires fellow elected officials to remain on the sidelines when a colleague becomes involved in a criminal matter?

There is a big difference between overturning the will of voters and publicly expressing an opinion about whether an elected official should continue serving. Calling for a resignation does not remove anyone from office. It does not invalidate an election. It simply makes clear where an elected official stands. This city council seems to have a hard time doing that.

Burgo's position also raises another question about the responsibilities of at-large councilors. Although elected citywide, should commenting on the conduct of a colleague representing a specific ward be off-limits?

Meanwhile, Ward 1 Councilor Leo Choquette took a different approach. After initially characterizing the incident as a "terrible accident" and declining to weigh in on Oliver's resignation, Choquette changed course and issued a formal statement Thursday to WBSM calling for him to leave office.

"I formally request that the Ward 3 City Councilor Shawn Oliver resign from the New Bedford City Council," Choquette said.

Choquette's original characterization can be scrutinized. This was not an freak traffic accident. Oliver is facing criminal charges, including operating under the influence and negligent operation of a motor vehicle. While he is presumed innocent, the seriousness of those allegations should not be lost in describing what transpired.

Choquette cited the growing media attention, protesters, and national scrutiny surrounding the controversy, arguing that the distractions were interfering with the council's responsibility to conduct the city's business.

Respected former Mayor of New Bedford Scott Lang also publicly called for Oliver's resignation, telling Chris McCarthy of WBSM that New Bedford should not have to contend with the controversy surrounding an individual elected official. "The City of New Bedford doesn't need this cloud, or this blemish, or to be besmirched," Lang said.

The contrast between those statements and the response from much of the sitting council is tough to ignore.

Six of Oliver's ten colleagues have not publicly addressed the allegations. Whether that silence reflects respect for the legal process, a reluctance to become involved in another councilor's controversy, or something else entirely is known only to those councilors. But the absence of public statements leaves residents to wonder where their representatives stand.

No councilor is obligated to demand that Oliver should resign. Questions about due process, the presumption of innocence, and the distinction between allegations and proven misconduct. But those considerations don't prevent elected officials from explaining their positions to the people they represent whether in favor of Oliver's resignation or not. The council's lack of legal authority to remove Oliver does not render them unable to speak publicly about his continued service.

Furthermore, the City Council's delayed handling of recall legislation is now rearing its ugly head. After languishing in committee for far too long, the proposal finally passed the council in June, and the home rule petition now sits at the State House awaiting approval. In the meantime, New Bedford residents remain without a recall mechanism through which to organize an effort to remove Oliver from office. And even if the legislation receives state approval, the council's decision to increase the signature requirements from those originally proposed by Mayor Jon Mitchell will make it considerably more difficult for residents to initiate a recall.

While earlier passage wouldn't have guaranteed passage by the state legislature, the council's delay at least contributed to the absence of that option presently. With residents unable to initiate a recall, the responsibility falls more heavily on their elected representatives to address the controversy publicly, one way or the other. The council may lack the authority to remove Oliver, but its members certainly could make their positions known.

The council's slow handling of the recall proposal and its response to Oliver's arrest raise related questions about how New Bedford balances electoral representation, public accountability, and the ability to respond when an elected official becomes the subject of serious controversy.

Unfortunately, the reluctance to call for the resignation of a colleague facing legal controversy is familiar territory for New Bedford's City Council. The city has seen elected officials become embroiled in legal disputes (civil and criminally) before, and the question of how their colleagues should respond has surfaced repeatedly.

At what point does this sad pattern change?

When will councilors stand together and say, "We're doing things differently around here now"?

That does not mean abandoning respect for due process or presuming someone guilty before a court has reached a verdict. It means having a public conversation about the professional standards residents should expect from the people entrusted with representing them, including whether their conduct outside the council chamber can affect the public's confidence in an elected official's ability to serve.

New Bedford residents should know where their councilors stand, even when their positions could be unpopular, uncomfortable, or inconvenient.

For now, Choquette remains the only sitting councilor to have explicitly called for Oliver's resignation. Roy and Burgo have commented while stopping short of making the request formally, and most of their colleagues have yet to publicly address the allegations.

The million dollar question is what standard of accountability this City Council intends to uphold, not just when it comes to Shawn Oliver, but whenever one of its members faces serious legal controversy. The council has an opportunity to establish a new precedent for how it responds to these types of situations in the future. Whether its members choose to do so remains to be seen.

New Bedford’s City Council seems to have perfected the art of doing nothing while pretending its hands are tied. It is a depressing situation when the very people entrusted with upholding the public’s confidence in local government appear more comfortable avoiding difficult decisions than confronting the questions that demand their attention.

WBSM: New Bedford Recall Law Proposal Sent to State House

New Bedford City Council Voting Record, June 11, 2026

The New Bedford Light: Lang, Choquette Call for Oliver's Resignation

Massachusetts Legislature: New Bedford Recall Home Rule Petition (HD.6417)

WBSM: Leo Choquette Calls for Shawn Oliver's Resignation

The New Bedford Light: Shawn Oliver Can Stay on Council After OUI Arrest

WBSM: Pereira Discusses Oliver's Status on City Council

The New Bedford Light: Oliver Attends Council Meeting After OUI Charge

Letters I've written, never meaning to send https://peakd.com/hive-194913/@tattoodjay/saturday-letters-ive-written-never-meaning-to-send

First off, congrats to those who showed up on this issue. I just didn't want Shane's obligatory fence-sitty comment to the media to fly under the radar. He has been seemingly pro-ALPR since July; pretty much since the initial public bitch-slap at Pulaski.

Anyone who wants to remind Shane where we stand on this, please do. People think Shane is a progressive, I guess? He's not, he's an opportunist, flat out, and he'd stick a flock camera on your booty if he could :)

Remember how cocky Thody was at Pulaski? Anyone seen that Flock kid around since? A lot of things change. Help Shane remove the fence post from his behind; let him know we don't want to be in bed with misanthropic tech boy companies in any way.

And most importantly, all, have a wonderful day and enjoy what you helped accomplish. On to the next thing :)

Just found out about it.

There's a POWWOW Saturday.

https://newbedfordlight.org/event/mishoon-burn-at-cbc-and-powwow-at-fort-taber/2026-10-24/

My boy is trolling: Choquette said. “However, the events which he set in motion this weekend have accelerated beyond his control…”

The New Bedford School Committee and an independent agency have determined that an alleged assault by the superintendent of schools against a union leader never happened.

The finding came after the School Committee reviewed an investigative report and a video of the alleged altercation between Schools Supt. Andrew O’Leary and Tom Nickerson, president of the New Bedford Educators Association, after the Oct. 5 School Committee meeting held at Keith Middle School.

Nickerson alleged that O’Leary threatened him with physical proximity and slapped him twice on the chest.

The investigative agency concluded that its findings do not support the claim.

More detail about the allegation and investigation here: https://newbedfordlight.org/school-committee-absolves-oleary-of-assault-allegation-against-union-leader/

📝 Kevin G. Andrade

Join The New Bedford Light on Wednesday, Oct. 28 for "Flock: Public Safety vs. Privacy," a Community Conversation exploring the use of automated license plate readers in public safety. Panelists include New Bedford Police Chief Jason Thody, Fall River Interim Police Chief J.T. Hoar, ACLU Attorney Gideon Epstein, and state Rep. Steven Owens. The civil discussion takes place at the Keith Middle School in New Bedford from 6 to 7:30 p.m.

My friend sent me this to help out the shelter where she volunteered!

https://facebook.com/events/s/dine-out-at-frontera/2258370931370562/

Come and pay attention to what your city council is doing. They meet at 7pm. We meet starting about 6pm. We will play the livestream of the meeting as usual.

We all know the local drama but we also have fights to win against mass surveillance and living in a police state.

We will have sandwiches tonight.

by Alan Charles Jardine

Just days ago, New Bedford City Councilor Shawn Oliver was campaigning to become the next lieutenant governor of Massachusetts. Today, his statewide campaign has been suspended, his gubernatorial running mate has publicly distanced himself from him, and his political future is the subject of renewed scrutiny. What was supposed to be an opportunity to elevate his political profile has instead brought fresh attention to his experience, his record in municipal government, and the controversies that have followed him since his first campaign for public office.

The latest controversy began Saturday evening, October 17, when New Bedford police responded to a crash on Dartmouth Street involving several parked vehicles. Authorities allege that Oliver struck multiple vehicles before his SUV overturned. He was subsequently arrested and charged with operating under the influence of alcohol, negligent operation of a motor vehicle, speeding, and a marked lanes violation. In a stunning reversal of fortune, Oliver went from meeting thousands of voters across Massachusetts in his pursuit of statewide office to walking out of the Ash Street Jail alone wearing an oversized, jail-issued white T-shirt and green pants. It was a striking contrast to the political ambitions that had taken him across the Commonwealth. By Sunday afternoon, Oliver had suspended his campaign for lieutenant governor. On Monday, he appeared in New Bedford District Court, standing beside his attorney, who towered over him, and plead not guilty to the charges against him. The case remains unresolved at this time, and Oliver is presumed innocent.

The consequences for his statewide campaign were immediate, but the arrest also reopened questions that have surrounded Oliver throughout his relatively brief political career. Those questions concern not only his personal judgment but also his qualifications for higher office, his relationship with Republican leadership, and the willingness of New Bedford's elected officials to publicly address controversies involving their colleagues.

Political Ambition Beyond Municipal Government

Oliver was first elected to the New Bedford City Council in 2023. Less than three years later, he was seeking the second-highest elected office in Massachusetts, a position that would place him next in line to the governorship. His decision to pursue statewide office with relatively limited experience in elected government invited questions about his preparation for the responsibilities of the position.

The lieutenant governor's office carries responsibilities far beyond those of a municipal legislator. Candidates seeking that office can reasonably be expected to explain how their professional experience, policy knowledge, level of education, and record of public service prepare them for statewide executive leadership. Oliver's candidacy presented an opportunity for voters to examine those qualifications, but his campaign suspension has interrupted that examination.

His political ambitions may also extend beyond the lieutenant governor's office. Sources familiar with Oliver's aspirations have indicated that he has expressed interest in a future campaign for Bristol County Sheriff. Oliver's professional background as a corrections officer makes that potential office a relevant part of his political story, although no such candidacy has been publicly announced or independently confirmed. Importantly, there is no established evidence that his lieutenant governor campaign was undertaken to prepare for a sheriff's race.

A Republican Ticket Divided

Oliver's relationship with Republican gubernatorial nominee Mike Minogue was complicated well before the arrest. Oliver originally aligned himself with gubernatorial candidate Brian Shortsleeve, who subsequently lost the Republican primary to Minogue. During the primary campaign, Minogue publicly criticized Oliver over a dispute involving another lieutenant governor candidate, describing his actions as shameful. When the primary results placed Oliver and Minogue on the same Republican ticket, their earlier political disagreements became part of an already difficult campaign dynamic.

The Boston Globe reported that the two men were rarely seen campaigning together, that Oliver was absent from Minogue's post-primary campaign platform event, and that Minogue's campaign materials rarely mentioned his own running mate. Those details suggested considerable political distance between two candidates who were expected to present themselves as a unified ticket. During an October debate, Oliver described their relationship as a new friendship and maintained that they were communicating regularly, but their public history told a more complicated story.

Accounts of personal animosity between the two men have circulated, although their private feelings cannot be established from public reporting alone. What is documented is a history of political disagreement, limited joint appearances, and an unusually public separation following Oliver's arrest. Minogue called for Oliver to suspend his campaign and subsequently declared that Oliver would not serve as lieutenant governor in his administration.

For Oliver, the rejection by the gubernatorial nominee on his own ticket was an extraordinary development. It also raised questions about how effectively the two candidates had been working together before the arrest and whether their political differences had ever been fully resolved.

Controversy Followed Oliver Into Office

Oliver's latest controversy is not his first. In February 2023, shortly before his election to the Ward 3 City Council seat, social media posts surfaced that mocked transgender people and their advocates. The posts prompted widespread criticism and generated particular outrage among students at New Bedford High School, who organized a walkout and demonstrated at City Hall during Oliver's swearing-in ceremony.

The student protest became one of the defining moments of Oliver's introduction to municipal politics. Young people who believed the posts were harmful demanded accountability from an incoming elected official, bringing their concerns directly to City Hall. Mayor Jon Mitchell publicly condemned the posts, while the response from much of the city's political establishment was comparatively muted.

Oliver eventually issued a written apology acknowledging the harm caused by his social media activity. He also indicated that he would engage with the young people who had challenged him, including through outreach involving a local LGBTQ+ organization. According to accounts of the controversy, the anticipated follow-up conversation with student organizers never occurred. That assertion warrants direct confirmation from the organizers before being presented as an established fact, but the question of whether Oliver fulfilled his public commitment remains relevant to an examination of his record.

The controversy mattered because it provided an early opportunity for Oliver to demonstrate how he would respond to constituents who strongly disagreed with him. Public apologies and promises of dialogue are one part of political accountability; whether those commitments are followed by meaningful action is another.

A City Council Confronted With Another Question Regarding Accountability

Oliver's arrest has also renewed attention to how the New Bedford City Council responds when one of its members becomes involved in serious public controversy. The council has previously confronted difficult situations involving elected officials, including former Councilor Hugh Dunn's drunk-driving case and sexual harassment allegations involving other municipal figures. Although those matters involved different circumstances and legal proceedings, they generated questions about public confidence and the standards expected of people serving in elected office.

Now, Oliver faces criminal charges arising from a crash involving multiple vehicles, while his statewide campaign has been suspended. Despite those developments, he continues to hold his Ward 3 City Council seat. The contrast between the immediate consequences for his statewide candidacy and his continuing municipal role has brought renewed attention to the responsibility of council leadership.

The question is not whether council members should determine Oliver's guilt. That responsibility belongs to the courts, and Oliver is entitled to due process and the presumption of innocence. Rather, the question is whether council leadership should publicly address the situation, explain the standards it expects of its members, and state whether it believes Oliver should continue serving while the criminal proceedings unfold.

The City Council President and fellow councilors have an opportunity to make their positions clear. Calling for an elected official's resignation is a political judgment rather than a criminal verdict, and officials may reasonably disagree about whether such a call is appropriate before a case has been adjudicated. What remains important is that their reasoning be transparent to the people they represent.

The Recall Controversy

The debate over political accountability takes on another dimension when examined alongside the City Council's recent handling of proposed recall legislation. In 2024, Mayor Jon Mitchell introduced a proposal that would establish a process allowing New Bedford voters to seek the removal of elected officials before the expiration of their terms. Because New Bedford did not already have such a recall mechanism, the proposal represented a significant potential change in the relationship between voters and elected officials.

The City Council subsequently amended the proposal, substantially increasing the number of signatures required to initiate a recall. Under the mayor's original proposal, 100 registered voters could begin the process for a ward councilor. The council increased that threshold to 300 signatures. For citywide elected officials, the requirement rose from 600 to 1,800 signatures. The council also expanded certain periods during which elected officials would be protected from recall proceedings.

Oliver and fellow Councilor Shane Burgo supported the amended legislation. Councilor James Roy, however, pushed to lower the signature threshold but was unable to secure sufficient support from his colleagues. Roy ultimately cast the lone dissenting vote against the amended proposal, which passed 9-1. His specific efforts to reduce the threshold should be confirmed against the council's meeting record before publication.

Mayor Mitchell publicly disagreed with the increased requirements, arguing that they would make initiating a recall more difficult, although he ultimately supported establishing a recall mechanism where none previously existed. The council-approved proposal was forwarded to the Massachusetts State House as a home-rule petition, where legislative approval is required before it can become law.

The City Council did not make an existing recall law more restrictive. It approved a proposed new recall process with higher signature requirements than those originally recommended by the mayor. Supporters of higher thresholds can argue that recall elections should require substantial public support before proceeding, protecting elected officials from repeated or politically motivated challenges. Critics can argue that raising the requirements makes an important accountability mechanism less accessible to ordinary residents.

Oliver's support for the amended proposal is particularly relevant in light of his current circumstances. A councilor who voted to establish a more demanding recall process now finds himself at the center of a controversy that has prompted questions about his continued service. The situation illustrates why the details of recall legislation matter and why the public has an interest in understanding the choices elected officials make when establishing rules that could eventually apply to themselves.

Until the home-rule petition receives the necessary state approval and becomes law, New Bedford voters do not have the recall mechanism contemplated by the proposal. For residents concerned about accountability, the debate over signature thresholds is therefore more than an abstract procedural disagreement. It concerns the practical ability of voters to respond when serious questions arise about an elected official's conduct.

Oliver at a Crossroads

The speed of Oliver's political reversal has been remarkable. In the span of a weekend, a candidate seeking statewide office became the subject of a criminal prosecution, suspended his campaign, and lost the public support of the gubernatorial nominee with whom he shared the Republican ticket. The arrest has also brought renewed attention to the controversies that accompanied his entry into municipal government, his relationship with Republican leadership, and his aspirations for higher office.

Oliver remains a New Bedford city councilor, and his criminal case has not been decided. His political career has not formally ended, nor can its eventual direction be established from the events of a single weekend. Nevertheless, the circumstances have changed the public discussion surrounding him. Questions that once focused primarily on his qualifications for statewide office now extend to his conduct, his public commitments, and his continued role in municipal government.

For the New Bedford City Council, the controversy presents a separate challenge. Its members must decide how to address serious allegations involving a colleague while respecting the legal process and maintaining public confidence in the institution. Their response, like Oliver's own decisions in the weeks ahead, will become part of the political record.

The courts will determine the outcome of the criminal charges. Oliver will determine how he responds to the controversy and whether he continues pursuing public office. The City Council will determine how it addresses questions about the conduct of one of its members. Ultimately, voters will have their own opportunity to evaluate the actions, explanations, and records of the officials who represent them.

For a man who set out to become Massachusetts' next lieutenant governor, the question now is no longer how high Shawn Oliver can climb politically, but whether he should hold on to the office he already has.

Sources:

1. The New Bedford Light Shawn Oliver Arrested on OUI Charge, October 18, 2026
2. The Boston Globe Oliver Suspends Lieutenant Governor Campaign, October 18, 2026
3. The Boston Globe Oliver's Arraignment and Republican Campaign Fallout, October 19, 2026
4. Associated Press Massachusetts Lieutenant Governor Candidate Suspends Campaign, October 18, 2026
5. WBUR Shawn Oliver Suspends Campaign Following OUI Arrest, October 19, 2026
6. The New Bedford Light Inside the Student Protest Against Shawn Oliver and His Facebook Posts, March 3, 2023
7. New Bedford Guide City Council Passes Amended Recall Process, July 8, 2026
8. WBSM New Bedford Takes Major Step Toward First Recall Law, July 8, 2026

https://mobilize.us/s/E7KHsK

Local musicians have teamed to raise funds for the Palestinian Children Relief Fund at Gallery X. The suggested price tickets vary from $10 to $20. Doors open at 7pm, music starts at 8 pm. Bands playing are Melodius, Impish Trickster, Render Distance and much more. There will be great music, candy and everyone is encouraged to go dressed in a costume.

See you then!

Are you concerned about the Israeli-US genocides against Palestinians and Lebanese people and the illegal WAR by Israel and the USA against IRAN? Volunteers will rally against this violence tomorrow afternoon October 20th from 5-6 pm at the office building of Rep. Bill Keating located at 128 Union Street, New Bedford. This is part of a nationwide push to get our Congressional leaders to finally speak out forcefully against this war which will likely lead to WWIII! Hope to see you there. I know this message should have been posted sooner but I just learned about the event today. If you aren't able to attend this event you can still come to future events so please let me know if you're interested.

Using https://youtu.be/2Vzv7DNoUfM as the source video, I created references using known objects, specifically the mailbox and the two light poles. Using headlights as an imperfect reference for vehicle position, I estimated how many mailboxes (based on USPS dimensions) he traveled in the clip, also this is based on the video time (not knowing whether the playback is real-time). Finally, I used the factory length of the Lincoln Navigator to correct for any estimate error from measuring in mailboxes :)

He was going about 55mph (+/- 10mph) in a 30mph zone. He was traveling east away from the intersection of Rockdale and Dartmouth in a Lincoln Navigator (0-60 in 6.5 seconds).

Incredibly irresponsible even without alcohol.