Reply to a comment

When we hold incumbents to their record and performance! And to call them as you see them. I can understand if we have different visions, or a different approach to solve a situation, BUT what Mr. Magel just demonstrated is a nasty, nasty side that I personally saw in past city directors. This nastiness every now and then shows itself for what it really is contempt. If you raise a point that is considered "not POSITIVE", you are labeled as a naysayer, then misinformed, to eventually being targeted as a threat that must to be dealt with divide and conquer campaign. Well this approach by Mr. Magel, as a citizen, protected as free speech, is somewhat creepy, since he could have also made the same statement in public to all voters, as chairman but chose NOT. Until confronted and exposed, brought to the public view by citizens who wish the best for Marco Island.

I apologize for being so lengthy in my comments, but I AM SO upset! And this incident should NOT be allowed to go away, because most citizens do not see this pettiness especially from a chairman and some incumbents who approach some citizens they label as naysayers to be dismissed. And this happens over and over, butit took me years before I recognized it, and now all I want to do is SCREAM.

Ironically, there is a slate of candidates with incumbents that have gotten together on a platform of POSITIVE contribution endorsed by Mr. Magel. All I can ask: Why is fiscal restraint and transparency as a platform which binds the alternate slate of Mr. Petricca, Mr. Honecker and Mr. Sacher, such a bad concept or threat?

Think about it!!!!!