Wilmington City Council Race at a Glance

Here's my attempt at wrapping up the candidates one by one to give some insight to voters, with my unapologetic editorialism added for good measure... my endorsements in red.

Incumbents:

Laura Padgett (D): Padgett's legacy is that of a nanny government that has its tentacles in everything - from controlling every aspect of private development, to funding every feel-good, utopian idea that crops up. She's an avid traveler - on the taxpayer dime - and believes that her presence in Panama on a tax-funded junket is something we should be indebted to her about. She wants the Skyway Bridge yesterday, even though no one has ever come up with a viable way of paying for it, and she wants more failed taxpayer-funded economic development and taxpayer-funded arts - which isn't art at all.

Ron Sparks (D): In addition to being embroiled in a controversial lawsuit in which the Wilmington Housing Authority charges that he scammed them for services paid, Sparks is a hot-headed politician that is best at going along to get along. He supports the status quo well, and offers no new vision for our city's problems, even after serving on council for several years. Among his qualifications, he refers to himself as a physicist - which may be true - but doesn't assist him in keeping taxes and spending low for the struggling taxpayer of Wilmington.

Mayor Bill Saffo (D): A caricature of a slick politician in every way, Saffo's hair and smile remains perfectly groomed no matter what. Always eager to mug for the cameras while cutting ribbons and kissing babies, Saffo believes that Wilmington is completely headed in the right direction and needs no changes. In his mind, being mayor of a city means focusing money, time, and resources on the downtown area, and ignoring the other 98.9% of the city. He believes a healthy economy is bought with taxpayer dollars given to an endless stream of faceless alphabet soup so-called "economic development" agencies, who make big promises while they laugh all the way to the bank. A recent example that was discovered was that Wilmington Downtown Inc. (WDI), an organization Saffo is intimately involved with and very proud of, charged city taxpayers over $60,000 in admin fees to middle-man a loan of $12,000 in tax dollars to small business, creating a total of one job. He supports the Skyway Bridge wholeheartedly - not because of any perceived benefit to citizens, but because he owns some of the land in the bridge's proposed footprint - on both sides of the river. Apparently, it does pay to be mayor.

Pseudo-Incumbent:

Margaret Haynes (D): Haynes is very good at being impressed with herself. She offers her educational pedigree an average of 7.4 times per forum, and truly believes that those who don't support her do so because they are simply too stupid to know better. She is known for standing outside at the polls during early election interfering with her challengers' supporters and calling them "ignorant" for not voting for her. She was appointed to the Wilmington City Council in 2008, and was ousted by voters in 2009. She has an MBA in public administration, and a career history working in government in Washington, DC - both reasons for making sure she doesn't win a seat on council. At the WHQR forum earlier this week, she said concerning forced annexation, "Professionals who intellectually understand the benefits of annexation, will voluntarily annex themselves"; rendering all of those who oppose annexation unintellectual, and therefore, stupid.

Her campaign manager in 2009 was none other than Louise McColl, who still claims that she has a 100% track record of getting her candidates elected on her website - and she doesn't claim Margaret Haynes anymore, since Haynes was her first defeat: http://www.mccoll-associates.com/campaigns.html

Challengers:

Justin LaNasa, mayoral contender (R): LaNasa came to Wilmington on a Coast Guard Cutter, and was a decorated member of its ranks, as well as an Army veteran. He runs a very successful tattoo studio in downtown Wilmington, and lives the plight of downtown small business owners, rather than simply regurgitating political rhetoric about the "backbone of our economy" and so forth. LaNasa brings fresh ideas to the table regarding government transparency and accountability, and shedding the light on the inner workings of local government. He apologizes for nothing, and offers radical changes and solutions to persistent problems without apology.

Neil Anderson (?): Anderson promotes himself as the hard-working everyman who wants to make a brighter future for his kids to grow up in blah blah blah. His positions and ideas are very inconspicuous, and he seems to not offer anything substantial in the way of new ideas. His signs are popping up everywhere next to Saffo, Padgett, and Haynes signs; and some say that he is desperately trying to join the club. Seems like a nice enough guy, but not one of my choices for this race given the little I truly know about him. He does support a taxpayer-funded arts council - a favorite incumbent issue. His campaign financial reports read very similarly to that of Saffo, Haynes, et al. showing that the same machine behind them is behind Anderson.

Napier Fuller (R): Fuller is an enigma. A self-described "proud Republican" with utter contempt for local Republican positions on issues of importance. Fuller is a rabid supporter of the Skyway Bridge claiming doomsday prophesy economically if we don't get it yesterday. At the WHQR forum, he proudly proclaimed his loyal support for incumbent Democrat Mayor Bill Saffo and his policies. He touts "bi-partisan" support for his campaign, and lists a couple of Republicans who have regularly and openly been described as liberal RINOS by more conservative Republicans, such as former Mayor David Jones. Fuller supports virtually all, if not all, of the incumbent Democrat platform issues such as the taxpayer-funded arts council, and the endless continuing flow of tax dollars to groups like WID, who gladly take it, and offer nothing but contempt for taxpayers and citizens asking for transparency with their money. Fuller describes himself as an educated Silicon Valley product, and regularly describes Wilmington as a better place, if only we did it like they do in places like San Francisco.

Joshua Fulton (R): Josh Fulton is a newcomer to Wilmington politics, and is the name on many lips this election cycle, given his tenacity and fresh perspective. Though similar in last name, Fulton's platform stands in stark contrast to that of Fuller - even though they are both Republicans. Fulton has, by far, the most comprehensive plan for city government if elected. He talks about, and clearly demonstrates a very real method of virtually instantly slashing $10 million from the city budget, in areas where few would even actually notice. Fulton's approach is refreshing in that it resembles qualities reminiscent of the great Austrian economists such as Mises, rarely seen today. He exemplifies rugged self-reliance, low taxation, and limited government as a foundational approach to everything in government. He argues that local government should be in the business of providing its standard chartered services - doing them well and efficiently - and not in the business of developing hotels and convention centers, performing arts complexes, baseball stadiums, and other tax-funded monuments to waste that glisten in the sun. He also makes a compelling argument as to why the CFPUA should be eliminated entirely.

Matthew Hinson (R): Hinson is a retired city worker after 30 years of service as a police lieutenant. He presents himself as a conservative, and believes that campaign signs are equivalent to litter, and therefore has no campaign committee receiving or disbursing campaign funds. The one point of interest regarding Hinson is a perceived soft spot for city workers and their benefits, at a time where the average city worker makes a salary twice that of the average individual in the city paying it.

Frank Christopher Meares (R): Meares is a lifelong Wilmingtonian with a common sense approach to how city government should be run. His platform is point blank, simple, and conservative. He believes in an abrupt end to wasting tax dollars, ridiculous zoning and regulation, increasing taxes, and building things that a city has no business building. His positions strongly resemble that of Fulton in ideology.

Ricky Meeks (R): Meeks is a what-you-see-is-what-you-get salt of the earth kind of guy, who probably knows Wilmington street by street more so than any other candidate to have ever run for city office. Meeks is a perennial candidate for office, and has a somewhat cult status as a Wilmington staple. Every election cycle, a facet of people vote for Meeks simply to say that they voted for Meeks. However, Ricky Meeks has a very real platform. Meeks' issues begin and end with public transportation. He believes that every tax dollar that can be found should be dedicated to building a multi-modal center, bus depot, train infrastructure, and any and every other kind of mass transit system money can buy. His teddy bear persona, innocence, and honesty are refreshing in a system of politics where the victors are the last ones standing after a brutal battle, but with his expensive ideas, and no real way to pay for any of them, Meeks as a candidate would be problematic. My admonition to anyone and everyone is if you truly believe in this platform, and you would vote for someone else with the same platform, because you believe in these issues, then by all means, please support him. But if you are one of those clever genuises who really think that you are the first to vote for Meeks just because you think it makes you cool, you're not - and shame on you for being a moron.

Please feel free to add your thoughts and insights regarding this race below.