Comments » 74

optomist writes:

The following quotes from Councilman Popoff are taken from the EARN Marco website. Judge for yourself if he misled the voters.

Councilman Popoff says he is constantly being MISQUOTED
Here are some of those misquotes.

Then - - - "I firmly feel that the current process must be stopped until we make sure we have the best system (whatever that system may be...I am open-minded) for the Island .”

Now - - - "I am, and always have been, in favor of completing the STRP; for the record, I never said I would be in favor of limiting the STRP!”

Then - - - “We must stop the current process until the finances are worked out and it is equal for all concerned."

Now - - - “We do not need to stop the STRP to investigate/approve a more equitable way to pay for it."

Then - - - “If I am elected I do promise that I will, with an open mind, look at all alternatives.”

To Reiterate - - - "I am, and always have been, in favor of completing the STRP; for the record, I never said I would be in favor of limiting the STRP!” - - - “We do not need to stop the STRP to investigate/approve a more equitable way to pay for it."

INCONSISTANCY, PREVARICATION, OR MISQUOTED?
WHICH WAS THE MISQUOTE, THEN - - - OR NOW?

Councilman Popoff Campaign Promises

Then - - - "I will create a citizen panel consisting of individuals with different viewpoints in hopes of building a consensus on whether or not we should sewer the entire Island. This panel will objectively look at all possibilities and will report its ongoing findings to the city council. This panel may offer irrefutable proof that septics are better than sewers in which case the council would have to listen.”

Now - - - Although Councilor Popoff did make a half hearted attempt to place a motion on the floor to organize such a panel, as soon as it was opposed he withdrew it, never to be seen again. Councilor Keister has been relentless in his efforts to keep his campaign promises. Maybe Councilor Popoff just isn’t as committed to keeping his campaign promises.

Something said during a campaign is a promise, a statement upon which voters rely to determine whether or not they should vote for a candidate. To abandon those promises after being elected is unethical and dishonest. Councilor Popoff in an effort to avoid those labels continues to say, “I’V BEEN MISQUOTED”

lauralbi1 writes:

Speaking of John Glen and the Sierra Club, let's all make certain we bring them in on the Septic Tank issue. Mr. Neylon andf Mr. Hall dropped Mr. Glen like a hot potatoe once they found out they could not misquote him and once they found out that, for coastal communities, the Sierra Club is OPPOSED TO SEPTIC SYSTEMS for urban areas. Bring it on Mr. Hall, we have a lot of great people, quotes and issues we want to confront you with. Announcing your candidacy is the best thing you could have ever done for the people that want to keep Marco Island moving forward. Look forward to putting you in the pressure cooker.
Ed Issler

tinhat writes:

Mr Issler,

This will be my second blog ever and both on the same day. Please take a moment to read my first one, it's just a few spaces up from here. I want you to know that I'm not just some blowhard, venting from frustration, like several of these bloggers who appear to have several aliases.

I have followed City issues for quite some time. My husband knows you and reads most of what you write.

I'd like for you to go to the Election Board in Naples and check the voter roles for yourself to see if Edward Foster is a voter. Then we can get off that topic....forever.

The purpose of my second blog is to ask you to run for City Council at the next election which probably will be in January 08. The campaigning will be starting this fall, I assume, so there isn't much time for you get your supporters together to form a support group. You seem to have all the answers, and are more than prepared to share them with the rest of us. You claim that there's a silent majority out there that supports the STRP and Bill Moss, and everything the Council does. If that is true, then you should be a shoe in for election victory.

However, there does seem to be some question as to your qualifications. From what school did you receive your engineering degree and where did you work in California?

My husband says that you are a good speaker. I think that you are just a good bullsh----- and don't have what it takes to come out in the open and stand up for what you believe in. So, I invite you to prove me wrong, get in the game, and stop your bleating from the sidelines.

jockey writes:

tinhat,

Here's a posting from Ray Beaufort shortly after the Popoff flip at the first Council meeting. Your husband isn't the only one that reads archives.

All you revisionists should take note, the records don't lie!

Mr. Beaufort does keep a very close eye on Council activities, and we should be grateful to him for his vigilance. Thank you Ray!!

Posted on August 12 at 8:33 p.m.

Just felt I had to jump in with my two cents. Rob Popoff you lied to the voters of Marco Island. As too your statement that you never stood when asked if you would cancel the current contracts, that's BS. The question was would you stop the sewer project and you are correct you did not stand up. At that time only the South Barfield contract was issued and the email you sent to Gail Day on February 26, 2006 where you said "the current process must be stopped" was after the forums in which you did not stand up making the Gail Day letter your last public position, to my knowledge, on the sewer issue. You apparently must have felt that in order to get elected you had better jump on the anti sewer band wagon. The I did not stand up line you keep trowing around just ain't cutting it.

Posted on August 12 at 8:37 p.m.

Sorry I forgot to sign my name to my last comment.
Don't want to be thought of as a coward like "ILOVEMARCO"

Ray Beaufort

jchamberland writes:

Sounds to me like Roger Hall supporters have nothing better to do than other than throw insults. In the article above Hall claims that:

"Hall’s first priority is to restructure and reform the attitude that the city government has toward its citizens.

"What other council in a normal world would sit on their hands and allow insults to flow freely from a councilman against a citizen speaking from the podium?

Yet, in the same article he slanders both Popoff and Tucker, makes me wonder. If Hall was a true gentleman and a man of his word he would not have done that. He would have also asked his supporters to tame down the rhetoric, after all, it's all politics.

I must agree with Flowerpower, what in the world does any of this have to do with Halls qualifications. What will make him a good representative for Marco Island? As far as I'm concerned he is starting off on a negative note.

karenglaub writes:

Wow, its been two days since Roger Hall announced his candidacy and he is being viciously attacked as though he had committed some terrible crime. He has stated his position and what his plans are. He has never been ambivalent, coy, or has any hidden agenda.
What are you people afraid of?

I admire him for confronting the wrong being done to our community. Thank you Roger and Joe Batte too, for being willing to put yourself out there. Many Marco Islanders appreciate it!

EdFoster writes:

Ray,

I assume you are "Geezer." If I'm wrong, please correct me. That's the problem with blogs that are not signed; it's easy to make a mistake.

Rob Popoff met me at my home before the last election. He spent half the morning with me and assured me that although he thought sewers were probably best for the island, he opposed the way they were being shoved down peoples throats and the way they were being paid for. He assured me that, if elected, he would support an immediate suspension of the program until alternatives could be investigated pursuant to an open discussion, people brought on board in support, and the finances could be assured to be equitable.

CARES, of which I was chairman at the time, did not suppport or oppose any candidate. We offered our website as a place where every candidate could voice his position and most did, Rob included. Those postings are still listed on www.marcocares.com on the Candidate's page.

Neither I nor CARES formally opposed Rob Popoff since we assumed that he would at least listen to alternatives with an open mind even if he did not support them openly prior to election. (Regarding asbestos, he told me he had forbidden his children from visiting anywhere near Veterans' Park and would not walk the site with me because he feared bring home asbestos on his shoes.)

At the first council meeting with the newly installed councilors, Chuck Kiester proposed an immediate halt to the STRP and was shot down on the grounds that the issue was not on the published agenda. He then proposed that the STRP be brought up at the next meeting for discussion and again was shot down with Rob Popoff being in the opposition. This is when I lost all faith in Rob Popoff and entered into an all night e-mail back-and-forth with him. I didn't object to his opposition to the STRP because he never promised me he would support an end to the program. But he did promise he would support a suspension so that a dialog could continue. In voting against Kiester's second motion, Rob voted against even discussing the STRP and I blew my gourd as he can corroborate. This is why I do not consider Rob a man of his word, nor one who can be trusted. His explanation to me was that "things move very fast up there (during a council meeting) and he wasn't prepared. Well then, as Truman said, if the heat's too hot, get out of the kitchen!

Assuming you are "Geezer," Ray, I'm also upset that you should quote Billy Bruce. You were/are the custodian of the City's e-mail records and you know bloody well from them that Billy Bruce was a wholy owned subsidiary of City Hall. How can you quote him against CARES and Roger Hall?

Still your friend,

Ed Foster

sailingalong writes:

Just felt I had to jump in with my two cents. Rob Popoff you lied to the voters of Marco Island. As too your statement that you never stood when asked if you would cancel the current contracts, that's BS. The question was would you stop the sewer project and you are correct you did not stand up. At that time only the South Barfield contract was issued and the email you sent to Gail Day on February 26, 2006 where you said "the current process must be stopped" was after the forums in which you did not stand up making the Gail Day letter your last public position, to my knowledge, on the sewer issue. You apparently must have felt that in order to get elected you had better jump on the anti sewer band wagon. The I did not stand up line you keep trowing around just ain't cutting it.

lauralbi1 writes:

Karen: Roger Hall has lied and/or made false statements or mis-quoted officials or made statements that are just not true. He made one in the article announcing his candidacy with regard to the sand being dug up for the new sewers. he stated that there was no Septic contamination. Not only does he not know this for a fact (I assure you he has not had the soil tested, for if he had he would be proven wrong immediately as it has to be there), but all the evidence that we do have suggests that he is absolutely WRONG !! Do you or anyone else actuallyu think it is beneficial for us to be putting what you plce down your disposal or tyhe kliquid from your toilets into the ground sometimes noit 60 feet from our canals ?? The water quality has been going steadily downward since the 1980's as has been monitored by the EPA. We cannot atribute this directly to septic discharge, but the chemicals are the same. That is why the entire State as far as coastal communities is replacing septic tanks with sewer. And to use occasional leakage as an excuse not to do it, is absolutely ridiculous. I can show you neighborhoods on Marco where the Septic tanks have not worked properly due to soild conditions for over 20 years. Imagine the smell and environmental damage these have caused. I suggest yo8u check with the FDEP and the new Govenor's office to get a position from the State on Septic Tankls in coastal communities.
Ed Issler

lauralbi1 writes:

Oh, and by the way, please do not misunderstand my posting above. I think it is wonderful and great that Mr. Batte and Mr. Hall are against the STRP. If they make their positions strong and clear, that should go a long way towards cementing their fate. The majority of the registered voters on the Island are connected to sewers (and rightfully and environmentally so) and I do believe that this majority is looking forward to having us all share in our future. Now suffice it to say that even if we stop the program on a local level, the State will step in and mandate the completion. But in the interim, the stronger their position against the STRP is, the more of the majority will support those candidates that desire all of us to share in our future and to share in the cost of the program. It is not a hard sell at all. So, I suggest to Mr. Hall and Mr. Batte to keep it up !!!! Again, I encourage any doubters to contact the FDEP or the Governor's office to get a position on this issue.
Ed Issler

sailingalong writes:

There just can't be this many masters of misinformation on Marco Island. I think eagleeye has to be Ed Issler or his genetic twin.

For your information Roger Hall has owned a home on this island since July 2005 and not for a week as you state. Are you suggesting that only those who have lived here since 1986 or some other arbitrary date of your choosing should be allowed to voice an opinion.

I can read your opinions and not respond that is my choice. What I can't do is stand by and read your moronic misstatement of the facts without comment.

Ray Beaufort

jockey writes:

lauralbi1 aka Ed Issler,

I think you should be very cautious regarding what you say about people that you openly name in public.

Lolala writes:

Issler, Mr. Hall did not mistate anything when he said there is no evidence that our septic tanks were causing contamination. There isn't. You say there is. Please tell us where we can go to look at it. Mr. Hall backed up his statement when he said go look at the work sites. The City has also confirmed that the foul smell is coming from sulphur and decaying mangroves. The City never said it was from our septic tanks. You are telling lies to support your opinion. Mr. Hall is an honest upstanding business man. He is successful and cares about Marco Island. That is far more than I can say for you. Is it not true that you beleve asbestos that is labled as friable is not hazardous? That sir, is real proof that you could care less what happens in our community. You sir, are the teller of lies not Mr. Hall.

EdFoster writes:

I don't know whether Ed Issler purposely lies or is simply the most ignorant man on Marco Island (including Marco Man). There practicaly isn't a verifiable statement in his blog and some of his comments are totally moronic. He says that Roger Hall "lies" when he says that the sand being dug up shows signs of septic polllution because he "knows" Roger hasn't had it tested. Then he goes on to say that he "knows" it is polluted with household waste ... but he hasn't tested it either. He complains about Roger's omniscience but claims to be more omniscient. This is "science"? Give me a break! The only scientific tests we have are of the canal water and it is NOT polluted or anywhere near becoming polluted. Science does not rely on so-called common sense but upon verifiable fact. "Common sense" would tell you that the sun revolves around the earth and people believed that for millenia. Apparently, Ed Issler still does. Maybe four people on the council still believe it too!

The city has said the horrible stink is from sulfur in the ground water and rotting vegetation. Most likely, the city is correct. If the groundwater has been tested by anyone, I expect it would have been the city or some governmental agency. I think it's safe to say that IF the city found excessive levels of fecal coliform or other dangerous substances connected with human waste in that water, it would have been a banner headline.

Issler, calm down, take your medication and leave well enough alone. Everytime you post a blog the credibility of the city diminishes. If you're the best the incumbents have to offer as defense, even I could get elected to replace this council.

Ed Foster

EdFoster writes:

Whoops! Make that "shows NO signs of septic pollution"

Ed Foster

rogerhall59 writes:

Thank you Ed.

The contractors have been pumping millions of gallons of water that was immediately surrounding our leaching fields and dumping it into the canals untreated. The City has assurred us that this is uncontaminated ground water and the reason for the smell is the natural furmentation process, this information can be found on the city's web site.

The City has surely tested the water and if it did contain contaminates from the septic tanks they would be requiring the contractor to take it to the waste water treatment plant for processing.

Mr. Issler can place his faith in the fact that the city is testing the water that was surrounding our septic systems and there isn't any creeping pollution from our septic systems into the ground water.

Roger Hall

strike3 writes:

We now have 2 people that I can vote for. Thank you.
People need to understand this is not all about the STRP. It's about stopping the current idiots from stuffing all their "great ideas" down our throats. It's about asking the people what they want or believe is needed.

Don't remember who said Collier Blvd was flooded but I know I said months ago that I was willing to bet Isslers house that it would still flood. Does it bother me? No. It was fine the way it was. All I see know is a gigantic waste of tax payer dollars that still floods.

I believe it would be prudent for the current council to halt the STRP where it is now in the face of inevetable change coming. Our friend the VI says Hall has 2000 petitions. That is false. He has 10K plus. Though each is counted 3 times. Registered voter raw numbers must look to be about 3,800 individual votes. Approx. 6000 people voted last time and by my count 3,800 is a majority. No I do not have a crystal ball but I would say change is coming! Maybe we can find Marco man after the election and pull him down with one of the many new city trucks and drag him through the streets of Marco after the changing of the leadership!

GodfreyDavies writes:

strike3,

That's a great post. Nothing like a little humor to raise our spirits. The appearance of two viable candidates for the next election is a very good indication that "change is coming". For far too long we've heard the same old story from our leaders and from City Hall.

This next campaign is going to be electrifying, the stage is set, with web sites, interactive blogging, streaming video and opinions from the candidates on the latest "Monday Night Follys"

So if anyone is thinking of selling your home, and pulling the plug on Marco.....you will miss out on a great event, the "Bringing back of Marco".

Stay tuned, we've only just begun.

Godfrey Davies,
394-7200.

strike3 writes:

Thank you,

thank you for seeing it for what it was intended. It would be very funny to see NBC 2 live on Marco showing residents tieing ropes to marco man preparing to pull him down and through the streets.

Where are you Marco man?

ba10da69 writes:

Roger
When will the lawn signs come out ,would love to post for you.Need to clean house,we need to take back our city from these so called leaders(Popoff,Tucker,Moss,Reinke).We need to put this island back together like it use to be.

karenglaub writes:

Mr Issler, your city council had opportunities all along to make proper decisions, but chose not to. We asked for testing to be done to show pollution. They refused to do that. When the asbestos contamination was brought up by Roger Hall at the council meeting, they chose to ignore him, deny that it occurred, then charged that citizens had planted it there. Think about the opportunities they had to act in the best interests of all of us and chose not to. And you wonder why lawsuits get filed?

lowus writes:

Karen, I could be wrong but I believe you would make an excellent canidate for city council.

Geezer writes:

Yes Lowus, you ARE wrong. Will you be her Political Strategist?

turbos141 writes:

Yes and some of the present councils' family members should be in jail.

Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.

Features