document.write('

This site does not necessarily agree with comments posted below — responsibility lies with the relevant reader alone.

Posted by ROY on February 27, 2008 JEKYLL ISLAND DOSE NOT HAVE TO BE COMPETITIVE WITH ANYONE. THE ONLY ONES THAT WANT ALL THIS CHANGE. IS THE GREEDY DEVELOPERS. MONEY DOSE NOT MAKE THINGS BETTER.
Posted by JH on February 23, 2008 In the words of James Carvell, \"It\'s the economy, stupid.\" By law Jekyll is not subsidized by the state, and was given a mandate to develop as a resort community. The current development is based on 1950s economics and sensibilities - and it shows in stagnant revenues, amenities, and visitation. Every opportunity that the Authority has had to change those economics since 1974 has been shot down by vocal island residents who don\'t want their slice of heaven to be changed by the island actually staying popular and successful (in 1974 the battle was over a proposed \"sea world\" type attraction). Changing the economics of the island is a must for its long term survival, something the naysayers don\'t want to believe. While the changes are drastic, they are needed to stay competitive. Chapman proposes price controls for privately owned hotels - which ultimately are not possible. Would he propose that residents sell their homes with price controls, since all of the homes are priced above the purchasing power of the \"average Georgian\"? I think not.

');