Tradewinds Resort | Tortuga Inn Beach Resort
Chile Group Restaurants Island Real Estate Island Vacation Properties A Paradise RealtyFran Maxon Real Estate, Inc. Anna Maria Island Accommodations Sato Real Estate Head Quarters Salon - Your Head Quarters for WeddingsBoyd Realty A Island Place Realty

Your Comments

The purpose of this site is to encourage comments by Sun readers on topics of the day, especially those affecting Anna Maria Island. We welcome any and all viewpoints and hope to stimulate intelligent discussions. Personal attacks and abusive or vulgar language, however, will not be tolerated. Such comments will be determined by Sun management, then pulled from the site and the posters may be blocked from further use.

Name: Patricia Parker
Date: 2014-10-05 21:07:11
Subject: reply to Mr. Roelof:
Comments: With all due respect, we have NOT visited and rented from realtors of the MANY prolific multi-family dwellings that appear to be changing what we perceived to be the original appeal charm of AMI.
Rather, we have vacationed over the years in one of your smaller single story Inn's. Very Quaint,not terribly fancy, but we relished the simple natural beauty that AMI offered.
Granted, as an "outsider" I can only attest to what I've observed. The not so subtle change to your beautiful island in the the last few years is alarming and cause for concern. My fear is the dynamic and original appeal will change if your advertising and building continue in the direction it has taken. I read with disdain the plans to advertise for Brazillion shoppers. I can only hope the long term effects of such advertising were carefully considered before making such a decision. I hope your Chamber of Commerce has given serious consideration to such ramificatios. How many visitors to the island are you adequately able to accomodate without becoming the very place people try to get away from. I would hate to see AMI loose the original appeal. While I don't pretend to have the answers, I do know that one needs to be very careful what they wish for. We've lived that ourselves here on Long Island. I don't want to see it happen to AMI. I wish Anna Maria residents the best of luck and God's guidence to all those in authority to do what's best it's for residents, and visitors a like.

Name: John Roelof
Date: 2014-10-05 12:43:55
Subject: Patricia Parker
Comments: "Wait a minute" scense 2005 you have
been renting from the same people
you now condemn.You will fit in just
fine on crazy island.This problem started
30yrs.ago, and the fault lays completely
on the shoulders of the islanders.If I
were you I would look elsewhere,Anna Maria Island has slid down the slippery
slope, past the point of no return.

Name: Patricia Parker
Date: 2014-10-03 10:51:04
Subject: Advertising aimed at Brazillion shoppers! - Seriously..?
Comments: Seriously?..My family and I have been
AMI visitors since 2005. We actually "had" plans to relocate to the area within the next 5 years. Last couple of visits (we visit twice a year)have given us pause, and reason to reconsider. It is disheartening to see the changes brought about with multi family dwellings and development. Reading in The SUN about new marketing aimed at Brazillion Shoppers for the Septemeber..?! Talk about icing on the cake. Be CAREFUL folks what you wish for. Has anyone in AMI ever lived the Brazillion tour groups that visit Disney World? You only get caught up in that once. Then again, the many new multi family dwellings
we've seen would easily accomodate the changes such advertising will likely generate.
What was once a former tropical paradise, with a low keyed, laid back appeal is quickling disappearing.
Marketing aimed at Brazillion shoppers, just tells me that the island is headed in a direction that we no longer would enjoy. AMI was once FL's best kept secret. In past couple of years it appears there hasn't been a balance
between sharing the secret and increasing revenues for
real estate moguls intent on sucking every last penny out of your beautiful community.
Quality of life, which we found to be the original lure of AMI, is quickly
dwindling. I don't care to visit a congested vacation spot with nice beaches. I can stay in NY on Long Island for that. Sadly, AMI is becoming exactly what we wanted to get away from.
I hope you folks can get an handle on what's going on there in regards to your advertising and real estate issues before you too become exactly what it is people try to get away from.

Name: eric davison
Date: 2014-10-01 14:18:24
Subject: building moratorium
Comments: Don't we have an ordinance that says there should be one parking place per bedroom? It is hard to imagine an 8 bedrrom house with 8 off street parking spaces

Additionally since you ran a recent poll that showed a great many people no longer think that this is a good place to live, even the most jaded hotel builder should think about killing the goose that layed the proverbial golden egg.

Name: Abby Whitenack
Date: 2014-10-01 08:44:58
Subject: Skip Speer's Ltr to the Ed on "There's No Plan B" - right on!
Comments: Right on, Skip Speer!

I saw the same Charlie Rose program on climate change with the French Ambassador to the U.N., who was superb. Here's more on that original comment on "No Plan B" - [Sun Staff: I can't figure out how to attach an image of the UN Secretary General in the recent NYC Climate March - please email me and I'll attach it there. Or see notes at end and google it to find yourselves if you prefer?]

"I have made sustainable development the leading priority of the United Nations. Let me tell you why. In the next twenty years, the world will need at least 50 per cent more food … 45 per cent more energy … and 30 per cent more water. At the current rate, we will soon need two planet earths. But we have only one planet. Both science and economics tell us that we need to change course – and soon.

There can be no Plan B because there is no planet B."

United Nations' Secy GenrlBan Ki Moon's remarks at Stanford University January 17, 2013. Image shown is the Secretary-General joining others for the climate action march in New York, NY on September 22, 2014.

Name: Gary McMullen
Date: 2014-10-01 05:58:50
Subject: Moratorium and taxes
Comments: As a resident that lives next to a "big box house",I feel I know the issues they bring to the neighborhood. Having said that, Commissioner Dale Woodland wanting to make it illegal to rent to more than one familt is ludicrous. Commissioner Webb is agreeing because he lives on the street in question that prompted this moratorium. What happened to the rights of property owners? My property was a rental property at one time and we welcomed friends and families without discrimination. The city is being sued now under the Bert Harris act. I guess these Commissioners want additional lawsuits. I would sue if some overreaching and overreacting officials wanted to tell me who I could have in my property also. Next it will be how many people you can invite to stay at your home. This sparring match etween the city and developers must stop for the good of all. The present regulations are sufficient.
The City of Anna Maria and SueLynn are insisting that the tax increase is minimal to residents. I don't consider 10% minimal. What about all the non homesteaded property ownerd? There are more of them in Anna Maria than homesteaded properties. The City is getting much more revenue from the cell tower and still wants to take money out of your pocket. Even a 1.9% increase is dtill a tax increase. Say stop to the money-grubbing officials at election time.

Name: David Johnson
Date: 2014-10-01 02:46:08
Subject: Vice Mayor Clarke
Comments: Per Clarke:
“I also believe the mayor has exceeded the authority granted him by our city charter on many occasions"
These are talking points. Have many times do we have to hear this? This is his and others involved in this garbage strategy. Repeat untruths over and over and over till many outside City Hall finally believe what they are saying. Then take those untruths to this paper and they will be glad to print it. This goes for the harassment claims also against the Mayor.
Clarke agrees with public sentiment regarding the serious nature of a commission attempting to remove an elected official from office.
If anyone should be considering forfeiture of office it should be Clarke. Based on his documented collusion with the Ed Chiles restaurant group his ability to be influenced by private business has been shown. What possible improprieties will take place in the future?
In regard to Shearon being elected, while he ran unopposed, Clarke said, “If no one else ran, the citizens must have felt I offered the best possible representation.
What planet does this guy live on? Citizens can not decide he was the best representation if no one ran against him.
“I want the citizen’s to know that time is of the essence. Prolonging this action will further demoralize the city, its employees and the city’s interaction with other agencies. In addition, it is unfair to the mayor to have this action hanging over his head for an extended period of time.
Why don't YOU drop this then? It's time for Jack to submit his resignation.

Name: Charmaine Engelsman-Robins
Date: 2014-09-30 16:56:24
Subject: unruly dog at the dog park
Comments: I'm writing about this police report: "9/18, 7:55 a.m., assault, 6100 Flotilla Drive, Holmes Beach Dog Park. The complainant said she was at the dog park when a woman’s dog came up and jumped on her." I was on the Sarasota County Animal Welfare Advisory Council 1992-2012, the group that got dog parks down here in SRQ. If you go to ANY dog park you need to knowthat this isn't like obedience class. This is a place for dogs to be DOGS, to rub off steam, to exercise and play and BE DOGS and yes, if they LIKE YOU, that may include jumping up to include you. Please, if you are too old & frail to tolerate that, don't go to the one place where dogs are allowed to be what for them is normal. Easy peasey: just stay away. If as reported you threatened to kick the dog, I sure hope you don't own one. If you do, you shouldn't. Is there an ASPCA office up there that could check on this ? Thanks.

Name: Leah
Date: 2014-09-30 04:57:41
Subject: Wow
Comments: Karen Hodges "personal friends and colleagues" SHE IS "circulating a petition to show citizen support for moving the forfeiture forward. If you would like to sign it let me know".

From: Caryn Hodge <>
Date: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 19:09:30 -0400
To: Dorothy Blum <>, Kim Davis <>, Deborah Wing <>, Diane Phinney <>, "" <>, Darcie Duncan <>, Tracey Dell <>, David Teitelbaum <>, Billi Gartman <>, Debbie Miller <>, Diana Bogan <>, Deborah Webster <>, Dorothy Burkhalter <>, Judy and Dave Stephens <>, Gina Spicer <>, Joan Voyles <>, Kate Atkin <>, Kenny_Heidt <>, Richard Bergere <>, SAMANTHA BRUNO <>, Toni Lyon <>, "C. Melissa Williams" <>, Kim Darnell <>, Katy Demick <>, Kelli Gray <>
Subject: Fwd: AMI Sun poll

Name: Tammy Johnson
Date: 2014-09-29 16:49:50
Subject: Bradenton Beach Mayor
Comments: So let me get this straight. . . Ed Chiles’ minion asks for his blessing in sending out an email endorsing the removal of Bradenton Beach Mayor Shearon from office. He gives his support with the caveat that she removes her “corporate” affiliations from the signature. She carelessly sends it out with not only her corporate tag in place, but also Chiles’ approval attached. Wow, talk about being caught with your pants down! We are supposed to believe that there hasn’t been any illicit cooperation or communications between Vice Mayor Clarke (or other malcontents in the City) and representatives of The Chiles Group, yet Caryn Hodge is circulating a petition in support of Vice Mayor Clarke’s efforts to pursue forfeiture of office? Really!!!
Caryn Hodge’s email contains blatant, egregious lies and exaggerations. There is no harassment suit. There have only been complaints, which have yet to be substantiated. Mayor Shearon has never made any email records requests of any Commissioner or staff member, nor hired a lawyer to investigate them. That is an absolute fabrication.
Don’t believe everything you hear.

Name: Jo Ann Meilner
Date: 2014-09-29 10:09:00
Subject: survey
Comments: WOW !!! That shows the validity of this survey, Chiles group telling people to vote every day. NICE.

Name: Jo Ann Meilner
Date: 2014-09-29 08:44:16
Subject: mayor
Comments: This "process" you seem to be encouraging will take THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of taxpayer dollars to complete and many months of continued mudslinging. This will be a misuse of City's money when the citizens have not called for this.... only 3 commissioners. There has not been a citizen's petition, a number citizen's public comments at meetings asking for this, no letters to the editor calling for this, no warning of this coming, just 3 commissioners trying to change the results of a true election process and waste lots of our money.

Name: Leah
Date: 2014-09-29 08:12:57
Subject: How do you spell deceit? Looks like Commission Has Already Decided I wonder where the Jack Clarke letter is?
Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Ed Chiles <>
> Date: September 28, 2014 at 11:15:29 AM EDT
> To: Caryn Hodge <>
> Subject: Re: AMI Sun poll
> Yes. Just use your name at the bottom and not all the corporate info.
> Sent from my iPhone
> On Sep 27, 2014, at 5:32 PM, "Caryn Hodge" <> wrote:
>> Can I send this without getting in trouble?
>> I am sending it to personal friends and colleagues.
>> Hello everyone,
>> I encourage you to please visit <> and vote yes to help move the forfeiture of Bradenton Beach Mayor Bill Shearon forward. Bradenton Beach cannot afford the damage he is and continues to do to the city. I have attached a letter from Commissioner Jack Clarke which is supported by commissioners Jan Vosburgh and Ed Straight. In addition to the fact that his girlfriend is running for a commission seat on the commission he presides over, he has put unnecessary strain on city staff and caused the public works department to bring a harassment suit against his bullying tactics. He requested email records from every commissioner and staff personnel and then hired a lawyer, on city money, to investigate the records. Bradenton Beach has come too far to let him ruin everyone’s hard work.
>> You can vote once a day until Monday. Please share with your friends. We are also circulating a petition to show citizen support for moving the forfeiture forward. If you would like to sign it let me know.
>> Thank you.
>> Caryn V. Hodge
>> Marketing Director
>> Chiles Restaurant Group
>> PO Box 1478
>> Anna Maria, FL 34216
>> 941.778.8705(office)
>> 941.713.3105 (cell)
>> 941.778.3997 (fax)
>> <>

Name: B. Wortman
Date: 2014-09-29 08:11:07
Subject: BB Mayor
Comments: Why not let the VOTERS who elected the mayor to do this. I am a voter and I am afraid that other voters will be upset and sue the city and we cannot afford that because we need the money for IMPORTANT things.

Name: David Johnson
Date: 2014-09-29 02:35:49
Subject: BB Response
Comments: I just want to make sure this response remains there to be seen since this paper does not even see fit to publish Mayor Shearon's response to this nonsense.

On point
In reviewing Bradenton Beach Vice Mayor Jack Clarke’s agenda back up for the Sept. 22 meeting, which was called with the sole purpose of initiating the process to remove a duly elected mayor from office, I was struck by the fact that his diatribe was long on personal opinion and short on facts.
As someone with more than a little insight into the situation, I feel compelled to comment.
In the fashion of Clarke, I would like to do a point-by-point review of his assertions:
First of all, Clarke’s Sept. 16 workshop agenda item was a calculated, premeditated ambush and was the definition of a personal attack. His agenda request, which appeared to request discussion on how to practically execute the requirements of Resolution 14-812 — which he drafted with city attorney Ricinda Perry — purposefully cloaked his real intension of unseating the mayor. This intentional misrepresentation on the part of the vice mayor prevented the mayor, the press and the public from being properly noticed or prepared. This is a clear demonstration of his un-interest in having informed public input on the issue. He then launched into his prepared attack.
Here are my comments on his monolog:
• A new server was absolutely a time-sensitive necessity. The previous server was incapable of handling the needs of the city and had been cobbled together for years from used components to avoid necessary upgrades. Server outages routinely affected staff productivity.
• The Microsoft 365 program was never an “unusable” component. Hundreds of thousands of users successfully utilize this software. In spite of that, commission voted 3-2 to scrap it in favor of purchasing redundant software at an additional unbudgeted cost of over ,000.
• No additional “components” have been required. There are no “non-operational” components. There are two components that require the allocation of additional staff time to fully implement. The only additional expenditures have been for annual renewals on maintenance agreements for the city financial software (Asyst).
• One of the first tasks the previous city clerk initiated was obtaining a detailed IT status report from an amply qualified IT provider to determine “big picture” technology requirements for our municipality. The entire technology package was well thought out, properly planned and could have been professionally executed by qualified personal. But due to political maneuvering, commission over-ruled the recommendations of the qualified provider and the city clerk and decided to continue working with a vendor with no formal education or experience in providing services to government entities. In addition to ensuring a continued stream of income for a former commissioner, this was primarily motivated by ensuring that he continues having full access to all incoming and outgoing city emails.
• The previous city clerk identified fatal flaws in the system and attempted to rectify it to ensure all city public records were being preserved. Prior to her interventions, the city webmaster/email vendor — Ric Gatehouse — had made absolutely no provisions for maintaining city public records sent/received via his email system. That is egregious malfeasants by a vendor who represented himself as being qualified to provide such services to a municipality. It is also interesting that Gatehouse failed to register a fictitious name filing with the state of Florida for more than 10 years and he only did so when questioned by city clerk Jamie Anderson.
I also question: If Clarke is so satisfied with the current email system, why does he still routinely use his private gmail account to correspond with Commissioner Jan Vosburgh, city attorney Ricinda Perry and Joe Hendricks? Can it be to avoid the correspondence being included in the public record read file at city hall?
I also question what possible reason public works director Tom Woodard, who has an office, a city computer and a city cellphone, had to create and continue to routinely use a private gmail account to conduct city business? What correspondence is taking place that has not been captured by city public records?
Speaking of IT cost overruns, how about the ,000-plus unbudgeted dollars that commission approved in early summer to replace the woefully outdated and largely unusable city website? At that time, Gatehouse assured the commission that the new city website would be up and running in 30 days.
We are now much more than 90 days out and kissing the heels of fiscal 2014-15. As far as I can tell, the website has not been fully updated and Gatehouse was paid in full long ago. Where is the concern for fiscal accountability here?
And there is more:
• The only reason the outcome of the previous city clerk was unsuccessful was because Jamie Anderson attempted to stay apolitical and would not be a “team player” with Clarke, Vosburgh, Perry and other department heads to try to remove the mayor from office. That is the true reason she was let go. It had absolutely nothing to do with her qualifications or leadership abilities.
• Examination of the innumerable emails between Clarke and Perry on his private gmail account belie his statement that he gave the mayor his full trust and support. It is evident that he has been working against the mayor with the city attorney since soon after he was sworn into office.
• The “discretionary” spending of the mayor has finite limits. Department heads can spend up to ,000, the mayor can authorize up to ,000 — but every check/expenditure issued by the city is signed by two elected officials and every expenditure over ,000 comes to commission for approval either under the consent agenda or new business.
Every expenditure passes through the auditor’s recommended system of checks and balances. There is no hidden, secret spending. Clarke is woefully uneducated on how city spending occurs. Perhaps he needs to meet with the city treasurer again to acquaint himself with the procedures.
Comments on point-by-point
• The March 20 policy was initiated by Clarke with the city attorney, what is the concern?
• The mayor is the executive head and directly supervises department heads. What is the issue?
• Complete monthly financial reports and on-demand reports have been provided since the new city treasurer came on board. Total rhetoric. Commission has absolute control. Due to requirements initiated by this Mayor, one commissioner is required to sign every single disbursement the city issues. This never occurred in previous administrations. The city clerk and the mayor signed all checks with no oversight or involvement at all by commissioners.
• Hiring. The city attorney participated in the hiring process in both the previous and the current city clerk. In fact, she was responsible for verifying the references of the current city clerk. Due to the shoddy treatment of the previous city clerk, there was not a pool of certified municipal clerk’s with experience with Florida Sunshine statutes to choose from. It was Gia or re-post.
• As for the loss of four employees in the past nine months, the loss of the staff member with more than 10 years ten experiences was no detriment to the City. Even the previous commission was aware that she could and would never be the next city clerk. The mayor did not unilaterally do anything. Karen Cervetto resigned after being reprimanded for failing to execute her duties as required. Then the commission unanimously voted to appoint myself and Audra Lanzaro into the two open positions in the clerk’s office.
Now Clarke is whining about the waste of time, effort and dollars regarding something that he and everyone else on the commission unanimously voted in favor of? Jamie Anderson and I were both causalities of the vendetta of a couple of bitter department heads and two disgruntled commissioners who all thought there was no way Mayor Bill Shearon or Commissioner Janie Robertson would ever be elected. From the time Shearon announced, the department heads (with the singular exception of the building department) and the city attorney all stated that there was no way that he would win, and that they couldn’t/wouldn’t ever work for him. While no one put their money where their mouth was, it is clear that they have all stuck true to their statements and have never worked for him, but only against him. It is unclear what Clarke is stating regarding the mayor causing one of the employees to be terminated. The only terminated employee was Jamie Anderson, and that was at the hands of Clarke.
The claims of a hostile work environment from the public works department stems from resentment for being asked to be accountable for their time and resources. If public works employees are routinely seen outside of city limits, and in places where it is unlikely they are conducting city business, someone should be asking why. That would be being fiscally responsible for city resources. If an entire department is absent from the public works building, and no one is answering their city provided cellphone, someone should be asking why. Why does the city pay for cellphones for city employees unless it is to be able to contact them as needed? There have been repeated concerns that timecards are being falsified and that all employees are not working full eight-hour days. There should be accountability – that is not hostility.
In my experience working in the clerk’s office I have never heard of any allegation or concerns from any vendor, contractor or county representative regarding the mayor.
From my experience, the allegation that department heads can’t make agenda requests without the “blessing” of the mayor is totally fabricated by Clarke. Staff routinely makes agenda requests. The PD, public works and building/planning department submit agenda requests for nearly every commission meeting. The only scrutiny by the mayor is to ensure they include adequate backup so that commission and the pubic is educated on the request.
The meeting issue is interesting. The handful of meetings that were rescheduled thus far in Shearon’s tenure have all been at the request of Clarke. In an attempt to keep scheduling to a minimum and respect commissioners’ and department heads’ time, Shearon initially scheduled work sessions immediately ahead of commission meetings. Clarke is the one who initiated scheduling them on another day.
Regarding reports, this ordinance was orchestrated by Clarke. It was from its inception met with resistance from the mayor and department heads. The only detailed reports came from admin/finance and the building department. If the mayor attempted to push for reports from the PD or public works, he was accused of bullying!
Again, his attempts to hold all departments accountable were called heavy-handed and micro-managing. Commissioners have the ability to meet with individual department heads on a rotating monthly basis, and more often if necessary. Neither the mayor nor the vice mayor can force fellow commissioners to meet with staff if they aren’t inclined to do so. Regarding Clarke’s request to identify how much time is devoted to providing mayoral assistance, he needs to immediately acquaint himself with the requirements of ADA compliance. Upon election, Shearon could have requested from the city ADA accommodations for his visual impairment. That could have been for a dedicated staff member to provide him assistance as needed. The city would have been required by law to provide him that support. He chose to make due with the current clerk’s office staff. Should the commission decide that his need is too onerous, he could demand the support of additional qualified support, which the city is mandated to provide by ADA regulations.
I believe Clarke very much enjoys his attempts to discredit the mayor. It is clear Clarke has been plotting and manipulating city staff and resources with the sole purpose of unseating the mayor and putting himself in his place. It began long before the orchestration of attorney Robert Lincoln attending a commission meeting to recall the liaison appointments, whereby Clarke was elected vice mayor. It is clear when he repeatedly interrupts from the dais and attempts to take charge steering the direction of the meeting that he wants to be mayor. If that is his desire, he should work with the mayor and commissioners to productively complete his tenure as commissioner with a little dignity and decorum, and then seek the mayor’s position at the next election. May the best person win.
There is a hostile work environment in the city, but it is not at the hands of the mayor. I was harassed at the hands of Tom Woodard in retaliation for daring to object to a public works employee illicitly taking pictures of a public record which were in my possession (as city clerk pro tem) and leaking it to an attorney who is suing the city. He encouraged her to do it, when interviewed by law enforcement lied not once, but twice. For some reason, the PD intentionally omitted the involvement of both Woodard and Clarke in this incident. Why would that be? As a result of that, I became a target of harassment.
While Clarke derides the mayor over lawsuit costs, I would caution that Clarke and Vosburgh should have better guarded their own actions. They have opened the city up for another very costly lawsuit for making libelous statements about me under the pretense of evaluating Jamie Anderson. While the evaluations were anonymous, it is clear who submitted each, and it isn’t really irrelevant, since the fact is that the “commission” as a body submitted the evaluations. The only employees commissioners have the authority or responsibility to critique are department heads. They grossly overstepped their authority by publicly commenting on their perceptions of my performance in an evaluation of my supervisor.
As a final thought, I hope the citizens will take note that many of the decisions commission renders come down to a 3-2 vote. The thee being Clarke, Vosburgh and Ed Straight — none of whom were elected by the citizens for their last term because they ran unopposed. Not one person voted for them. The only two members elected by the people were Mayor Bill Shearon and Commissioner Janie Robertson.
Clarke and Vosburgh are attempting to overturn the will of the constituents. I also contest Vosburgh’s statement that she desired to take the high road and not be disrespectful to her opponent. In a public record email correspondence, she called her opponent an idiot on the record. That doesn’t sound very much like she is taking the high road and running a respectful campaign to me. Remember that on Election Day.
Tammy Johnson.

Name: Janie Robertson
Date: 2014-09-28 19:37:44
Subject: Bill Shearon poll
Comments: If the actual taxpayers and voters in the City feel it is more important to spend your money for this effort rather than our streets and flooding problems, I invite you to attend the meeting Oct.6, at 11am, and support Comms. Straight, Clarke and Vosburgh in their costly effort to oust our duly elected Mayor [at the polls]. This power play will cost thousands of dollars, as it will involve multiple attorneys and unknown hours, for possibly years in letting the process "play out". I will never vote to spend your money for this egregious and self-serving effort. If VM Clarke wishes to become mayor, he should do it at his own expense and be elected by a vote of the people, not by default at the cost to the people. Please note that Comm. Vosburgh supports Clarke without question, while Comm. Straight has reservations.

Name: jo ann meilner
Date: 2014-09-28 18:20:41
Subject: ethics
Comments: This survey has the ethics of a reporter who would take an email from a City commissioner's then send that email to other commissioners and members of the City staff. certainly not as background for a story, but more to inflame.

Name: B. Wortman
Date: 2014-09-27 11:36:01
Subject: BB Mayor
Comments: I would like to know how many BB VOTERS answered the survey, The voters are the ones who should have the say not anyone from the whole county or island community!!

Name: David Johnson
Date: 2014-09-26 12:52:59
Subject: Bill Shearon Poll
Comments: Comments: Hello there unequivocally biased SUN newspaper. Your paper posting a poll about Bill Shearon is equivalent to asking viewers of the "Al Sharpton" show on MSNBC whether or not Barack Obama should be impeached.
Hey where are you guys headed out to dinner tonight. I know a place. How about the BEACH HOUSE.

Name: David Johnson
Date: 2014-09-26 12:49:52
Subject: Bill Shearon Poll
Comments: Hello there unequivocally biased SUN newspaper. Your paper posting a poll about Bill Shearon is equivalent to viewers of the "Al Sharpton" show on MSNBC whether or not Barack Obama should be impeached.
Hey where are you guys headed out to dinner tonight. I know a place. How about the BEACH HOUSE.

Prev. Next

Post a Comment


Email Address:



Address, and Phone number are required, but will not appear on the website



Security image. You must enable images to post comments

(Note: Enter the letters and numbers exactly, image is case sensitive)

Let us know what you think, post a comment.

AMISUN ~ The Island's Award-Winning Newspaper