From the Review’s point of view, i.e., a paid observer, the six months between the change-of-government election on May 19 and today, have created a political frenzy probably unmatched since Bainbridge voters decided 19 years ago to support island-wide annexation. It’s been a wild ride.

With 69.7 percent of the voters wanting to abandon mayor-council for council-manager, one could argue that the overwhelming result represented a mandate for change by a disgruntled citizenry. Many issues surfaced as a group of enthusiastic City Council candidates (nine in the primary, narrowed now to six) have voiced their opinions concerning a deepening crisis in our government that took an economic calamity to reveal its complexity.

Their supporters and many residents who previously were nothing more than passive observers have realized the importance of involvement, whether by attending public events, writing letters and guest columns, or just talking politics in coffee shops. Today’s election section in the Review (pages B1-8) is full of strong opinions, most of them written after considerable thought about the candidates and the state of the city.

Problems and their perceived solutions have been spewed here on a miniscule scale when compared to the gushing occuring right now on the national stage. Nevertheless, they are equally as important to us. So what’s wrong here? Too much? Not enough? In America, doesn’t it always boil down to that?

Here’s a guess: What has evolved here since the island became a city is a symbiotic power structure, basically private and public individuals working together for what they considered the community’s best interests. And their best interests, too. Business as usual. And when a city needs to thwart perceived threats to such a power base, often it erects a communication wall and important decisions that could be challenged are made behind closed doors.

It’s also only a matter of time (often lengthy in a democracy) before walls crumble and doors are battered down. So what’s the fix? For some, there is no problem, just regroup and do it better next time. For the outsiders? Change occurs only through the ballot box.

So, back to the council candidates. Thanks to that vote for change (don’t forget, 69.7 percent), they were plentiful in number and generally very qualified. With the door thrown wide upon, discussions were spirited and the possibilities explored voluminously. Best of all, the community has responded. Just what we needed.

One can hope that it really doesn’t matter who is elected since the electorate has finally awakened to what’s been going on here, and all of the final six have their own strengths. But let us be picky, and choose:

Debbie Vancil deserves a chance to finish what she has started. She’s the key to the next council’s success.

Kirsten Hytopoulos should be able to step right in without a hiccup since she’s been involved from the outside for a few years.

The Central Ward is a tossup – flip a coin between Dee DuMont and Debbi Lester. Like the other two, both are independent, intelligent, caring people who love a community they want to help change for the better.