Tampa voters weigh in on District 5 city council candidates
The Tiger Bay Club of Tampa will host a moderated discussion with all qualified candidates, Friday afternoon. As of Friday morning, 14 candidates had declared their intentions to participate in the race.
Richedean Hills-Ackbar is a lifelong resident of District 5 and believes there's been a void in the community since Henderson's death.
'She showed up to a lot of the local meetings, and she wasn't afraid to answer questions,' Hills-Ackbar said.
Seven of the candidates participated in a forum at Blythe Andrews Jr. Public Library. They laid out plans for housing, business development, and funding for the East Tampa Community Redevelopment Agency.
Hills-Ackbar explains, 'It's important that someone actually cares about this community, that's from this community, they actually answer and return phone calls, that their concerns are the concerns of the people here.'
'It's real hard out here, but all the elected officials get in, they talk about they're going to do something for the people, but when they get there, they don't do nothing,' describes another district 5 voter.
Whoever wins the race will represent families in portions of downtown, the Channel District, Ybor City, West and East Tampa, Sulphur Springs, McKay Bay, and Palmetto Beach.
'I hope their intentions are to do their best for the community and their intentions are to serve the people of District 5. If they're not here for that, they can just keep it moving,' describes Hills-Ackbar.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
24 minutes ago
- Yahoo
A MAGA Voter's List Breaking Down 4 Major Things Trump Needs To Do Better As President Is Going Viral, And It's Not What You'd Expect
A Reddit post by a MAGA voter has recently gone viral for sharing a list of things Donald Trump needs to do better as President — but it's not exactly what you expect. At the start of the post, the MAGA voter explained why they voted for Trump in the first place, expressing their belief that a woman should not be president. "He was the best we had to choose from and I don't believe a woman should sit in that position." Related: They then went on to list what needs to change in the Trump presidency. "Tired of hearing about Elon Musk and see some results." They wrote about Trump focusing on people other than the Biden family. "Move on from Joe Biden..." Related: They emphasized Trump continuously bringing up past events. "Stop living in the forward." Related: And advised Trump to stop the division, and "work for of America." Many people in the original poster's comments who also voted for Trump expressed support for the post: "We voted for Trump because there was not any other option. His big beautiful bill does zero for middle class Americans..." "I would love to see the Bidens prosecuted but it's time to move on and quit dwelling..." this user wrote. "I also do not believe a woman should hold that well said." Related: Elsewhere, this person wrote, "It's really, really telling they'd rather have a felon than a woman running the country." "Lol most of these [people] don't realize they're spouting liberal talking points," another person wrote. What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below. Also in Internet Finds: Also in Internet Finds: Also in Internet Finds:
Fox News
27 minutes ago
- Fox News
NYT columnist claims Trump ordered Abbott to 'mustard gas' democracy with Texas redistricting efforts
New York Times columnist David Brooks claimed that President Donald Trump ordered Gov. Greg Abbott, R-TX, to "mustard gas" American democracy through redistricting efforts in Texas.
CNN
27 minutes ago
- CNN
Judge blocks Trump FTC's ‘retaliation' against liberal media watchdog
A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration's investigation of a liberal advocacy group known for its campaigns against Rupert Murdoch's Fox News and Elon Musk's X. Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan cited evidence that the investigation, which was opened by the Federal Trade Commission last spring, was an act of retaliation against the advocacy group, Media Matters for America. The judge granted a preliminary injunction because, she wrote, 'Media Matters is likely to succeed in its First Amendment retaliation claim, which is all it needs at this stage.' Media Matters has been a thorn in the side of Musk and his X social network for years. The group has published numerous reports about the prevalence of violent and hateful posts on X, leading Musk to call them an 'evil propaganda machine' hellbent on harming his business by turning off advertisers. Musk sued Media Matters in response; the group has countersued, and some Republican elected officials have backed Musk. The overarching charge is that liberal activists have colluded with advertisers to hurt conservative platforms and chill speech. Some of the advertisers Musk has sued have fought back, arguing that he has resorted to legal and political maneuvers 'to win back the business X lost in the free market when it disrupted its own business and alienated many of its customers.' With President Trump back in power, Musk and other Media Matters opponents have felt emboldened. Media Matters alleged 'retribution' when the FTC said it was probing possible collusion. Media Matters filed suit against the FTC seeking legal relief, which is what Sooknanan delivered on Friday, though the court battle is likely to continue. An FTC spokesperson did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the court order. Media Matters, which has been seriously hampered by Musk and company, said the injunction is a symbol of effective resistance to the Trump administration. 'The court's ruling demonstrates the importance of fighting over folding, which far too many are doing when confronted with intimidation from the Trump administration,' Media Matters president Angelo Carusone said in a statement. 'This case is not just about the campaign to punish and silence Media Matters, however,' he said. 'It is a critical test for whether the courts will allow any administration — from any political party — to bully media and non-profit organizations through illegal abuses of power.'
