Reply to a comment

"Let he who is not poorer in real estate valuation than he was five years ago cast the first stone in rebuttal. Marco Island has lost approximately 50 percent of its property value since the last real estate price peak."

I shall cast the first stone, because I came to Marco Island after vacationing here, and I did not move here because of the changes but in fact, my belief that the Deltona plan was not obsolete.

However, I did realize an opportunity to spend my dollars to build a new home in a depressed market. I first bought a 1967 Deltona built home in 2000 for 219K, by 2006 it was valued at 990K without any changes. Demolished it and now live in a new home completed in 2008; triple in size with more amenities now valued at 660K in 2011.

So your argument, we should now accept change on this island because we all witnessed the bursting of a national housing market bubble? Help me understand.

And this is your basis for accepting changes going forward for Marco Island, including density transfer (increase density/mass zone changes in disguise). I suspect this is a slam dunk change you feel is good for this island.

Well my friendly realtor, you are very limited in defining your argument, because change for change sake and based on property valuations is .....................myopic at best.

For all changes are not equal in impact, in fact, some are detrimental depending on whether you are a homeowner, property investor, or commercial entity. I guess change is in the eye of the property owner.

Your qualifier to cast a stone, essentially, dismisses all the wasted infrastructure especially as it applies to waste water treatment overcapacity as well as safety services and management.

The only change I see is heightened debt and operational costs as a result of myopic visionaries like yourself, that claim property valuation as an indicator of community health. I guess, you believe bubbles are a good indicator of property values.

So let me cast the first stone, not based on property valuation but on quality and cost to the homeowner to maintain living here. There are some of us who do want to live and stay here, and operational costs are playing a larger role than property valuations. And who wants to pay higher taxes or fees on inflated property valuations as we saw in the early 2000's? The result: The folks that made out from your valuation perspective have left the island! They did not stay and we now pay witness to the reality that Marco Island is now listed as one of the highest taxed communities in Florida. Quite a distinction, for those that believe if its expensive it must be good. Especially as it applies to government services?

Really?