Reply to a comment

ITS PERSONAL

As homeowners deal with financial issues by assessing their personal revenue stream, given the current state, national and global economic conditions, why does Marco Island continue on this path to maintain a purported "taxpayer neutral" position? Is this the goal of budgetary review?

I do not believe this city and representatives can distinguish a need from a want. Evidence: Ask the city what is the cost to operate and maintain essential services on this island. I suspect the response would include the phrase, "it depends on how you define essential".

Keep in mind, most departments will make the announcement that safety and lives are at stake along with with the obligatory, "its for the kids" or "its for the retirees", or "its for the parents", or "its for the enhancement of our community", "or for the gifted", for the specific benefit of one at the expense of the many.

Remember, there was a proposal for a community center with a teaching kitchen to address the "needs" of whom at the expense of .......

When will we truly understand the role of government? Its NOT to meet every citizens individual "needs" but to provide COMMON and basic services for citizens. Imagine, the city simply wants to maintain taxpayer neutrality. This is quite a goal, only understandable if the perspective is to protect the budget.

Qualitatively, its about what we spend money on, and again, I believe we spend too much time, effort and money on defining the "needs" of the numerator and little on "needs" of the denominator. Sorry for the fraction metaphor, but in the end it is about numbers.

Which leads me to say, if one cannot personally manage their own finances I strongly recommend they should NOT seek elective office. Why? The bulk of council decisions require a keen sense of fiscal issues, and if one cannot go home to deal with personal fiscal issues in a prudent manner, why should I assume you can as a representative.

Would you hire a financial planner to manage your retirement funds if he declared bankruptcy, irregardless of his personal circumstance? Then, why would you elect a representative to deal with city decisions that impact citizens.

So to return to my theme, its always personal, so I will NOT vote for those who cannot reduce spending given this financial climate. In the end, I like money in the citizens hands to make improvements to their personal property, NOT yours as a representative dealing with our collective taxes and defining "needs".

Note: Needs and wants are yet to be defined by this city.