Reply to a comment

Shadow: I agree with you. Responsible citizens should never permit an incumbent to hold elected office for more than one term without undergoing a complete review by the media as to their positives and negatives. As for hideaway granting beach access to boaters - thanks for nothing, I don't own a boat. I do not want one cent of my taxes to go to any beach renourishment that that does not include full, free and improved access to me and my fellow taxpayers. The only reason I commented on this story is that the record implies one candidate is Hideaway's candidate. Hideaway is a closed gated community that enjoys special utility cost considerations and inhibits our access to what is ours (the beach). I think that candidate should promise to look out for all of us and not treat the condos and hotels as exceptional citizens deserving lower utility assessments and special considerations (the city should resolve to force these special citizens to fund an access trail for the rest of us. Your candidate should promise all residents that pay City taxes that he will work for granting access to our beach, including that fronting Hideway. Is 9,000 dollars too much to run a campaign on this small island, who knows? Popoff was also pretty well funded when he ran. The amount of money that is donated to any candidate will not assure the citizens that the candidate will not tell a big lie to get elected or that he is personally financialy responsible. Financial donations although a form of free speech does not translate into honest service. It does say the candidate is a good begger and likely has a likable personality, but then so do successful used car salesmen and other unsavory folks looking to sepearte you from your hard earned cash.