Top Marco vote-getters were top money-getters too

With one exception, the candidates who were successful Tuesday in their bids for seats on the Marco Island City Council were also the candidates who were most effective at the money game.

All eight candidates turned in finance reports Jan. 25, just four days before the election. They have 90 days to file final reports.

Councilor-elect Frank Recker, who grabbed the most votes at 15.71 percent, also raised and spent the most money with $16,520 in and $14,659 out of his campaign account. He loaned himself a total of $7,000 throughout the campaign, but was still in first for cash and checks raised when those loans are subtracted out.

Roger Hall, who was the sixth vote-getter, with 9.75 percent of the vote, managed to raise the second highest sum of the campaign, with $12,001. However, his total was achieved partly through a $5,000 loan to himself, and he spent just $4,065 of that.

Councilor-elect Wayne Waldack, the fourth vote-getter, with 14.7 percent, raised the third largest sum, with $7,731 in contributions, but spent the smallest amount, with $2,729 in expenditures.

Councilor-elect Jerry Gibson, who earned 14.87 percent of the vote and came in third, was fourth in fund-raising with $7,725 brought in and $5,802 spent.

Incumbent Councilor Bill Trotter, who earned 15.19 percent of the vote, the second-highest total, raised a total of $7,320 as of Jan. 25.

Neylon raised $6,210 and spent $4,399; Batte raised $4,325 and spent $3,599; and Guidry raised $2,745 and spent $3,200.

The majority of candidates’ expenses were consumed by print advertising in area newspapers.

Candidates with remaining funds can purchase thank you advertising, return the money pro rata to supporters or donate it to a charitable organization.

© 2008 marconews.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Related Stories

Related Links

Comments » 2

gl1800 writes:

It makes sense to me - If people believe in your ideas they will support your campaign

d_a_t_a_m_a_n writes:

Some final analysis of the election by Precinct

Overall 72% of the registered voters (8,916) cast ballots. This was the highest turnout ever (the 1997 city-hood election had a 71% turnout). The average ballot voted for 3.8 candidates.

By Precincts:

Precinct 190 (First Presbyterian) - 66% voted. This area consists of all sewered homes and the recently constructed North Marco sewer district. The pro-sewer candidates received 67% of the vote.

Precinct 191 (St Marks) - 77% voted. This area consists of Hideaway Beach, the recently connected Tigertail sewer district and the 2009 Kendall district. The pro-sewer candidates received 69% of the vote.

Precinct 192 (Mackle Park)- 60% voted. This area consists of about half sewered homes and the 2010 Gulfport and 2011 Goldenrod sewer districts. The pro-sewer candidates received 52% of the vote.

Precinct 193 (United Church) - 72% voted. This area consists of about half sewered or recently constructed sewer homes and the 2012 Estates and 2008 Sheffield sewer districts. The pro-sewer candidates received 52% of the vote.

Precinct 194 (Marco Lutheran) - 76% voted. This area consists of condos and mostly homes in the 2008 Lamplighter and 2011 Copperfield sewer districts. The pro-sewer candidates received 58% of the vote.

Precinct 195 (Jewish Congregation Temple) - 79% voted. This area consists of condos and single family homes with recently constructed sewers. The pro-sewer candidates received 75% of the vote.

Precinct 196 (Mackle Park) - 71% voted. This area consists of about 20% homes on sewer and 80% in the 2010 East Winterberry and 2009 Mackle Park sewer districts. The pro-sewer candidates received 44% of the votes - this is the only district the pro-sewer candidates failed to win.

Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.

Features