Scott: Comparing candidates based on the Chamber Report

Who doesn't want better schools and streets and a balanced budget? A rhetorical question? How do you succeed if you want low taxes and don't like bonds and overrides?

If you vote for Friedel, Watts and Corrigan, you get three guys who seem fine with Fountain Hills becoming older by the year; seemingly wouldn't support funding security measures for schools and are willing to follow the ROT agenda.

Referencing the Chamber Report on candidates: Dickey rated an "A." Friedel rated a "C." Watts and Corrigan rated B- and C+, respectively. Four other candidates rated better! 

Mayor Dickey, the most favorable Chamber Board interview. Dickey was seven for eight with "most favorable response.” Freidel, Watts and Corrigan did not offer a "most favorable response" to any.

Friedel and Corrigan hinted at support for FHUSD and Watts said, "We should encourage and support our schools and businesses to grow.” However, based upon their Chamber responses, all seem to have voted against the school bond.

You get convoluted messages with Friedel, Watts and Corrigan at best. Our town will not go forward but will become introverted. Regional partnerships will suffer. Relations with MCSO will be strained. Staff exodus will continue (we've already lost an experienced manager, Finance director, PIO and clerk.)

Remember, Dickey has six years of experience as mayor and eight years as a councilwoman, while Friedel has four years on council (he lost an election two years earlier). Watts and Corrigan have no elected experience. Newcomer Corrigan has no voluntary or relevant experience.

Finally, Corrigan says, "We're rated very high by 'best places to live' and it's important that we maintain this gem of the desert as home." Thank You! Mayor Dickey got us there. She proved it with the Chamber Report. She proves it on the dais. She has my vote on Nov. 5.

Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at AzOpinions@iniusa.org.