Since when does an incumbent candidate being asked to defend his record or take a position on an issue constitute rude treatment? I found it very telling that that during the recent debate, while the other candidates presented their views and answered the posed questions with candor and restraint, Andy Lark played dodgeball and whined about how rude his opponent was being.
Is it too much to ask Mr. Lark why he wouldn't respond to a constituent's inquiry about the city budget? Is it off base to ask about where he stands on the Overlook helipad? Is it unreasonable to want to know from Andy why on his watch no meaningful corrective action was taken to stem the growing costs of running the city?
It's my opinion that elected officials should be held accountable. That means answering the tough questions. Mr. Lark has shown that he either can't or won't.
It's time for a change. Steve Murphy is a logical choice for Council at Large. He has a proactive plan for change. Let's give him a chance.
The opinions expressed herein are the writer's alone, and do not reflect the opinions of TAPinto.net or anyone who works for TAPinto.net. TAPinto.net is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by the writer. Click here to submit a Letter to the Editor.