Reply to a comment

You are absolutely on target.

What really scares me about Marco Island, the current council seems enamored with Mr. Murphy. I thought some on council would see past the limited scope or framework of the argument provided by the city; but again I was dismayed that the new council did not have a wider perspective of rescue operations on the water, which include a review of organizations with assets, including those that spend much more time on the water by directive and design.

And most incredible was Mr. Murphy's statement actually diminishing the watercraft's role in fire fighting and highlighting its capability in rescue for use of such an elaborate watercraft.

Again, unbelievable.

From my perspective, Mr. Honecker, Mr. Sacher Mr. Petricca and Mr. Honig have not embraced spending nor critical thinking as I had expected. I could not believe they limited the discussion of water rescue operations to a cost analysis of a Donzi vs a detailed spec at a cost of 400K. I do not believe Naples has a spec as costly as what was issued by this city. All while a rescue boat is provided by the county in dock at Isles of Capri.

Again, simply in awe!!!!!

Please, help stop this madness from proliferating!!!!!!!!!!! Have we not learned from the past!!!!!

And to those that argue that I am too negative, I simply ask, we deserve critical review of issues from both elected officials as well as city directors/chiefs. Otherwise, we will simply walk a path of spending based on arguments provided by the city only, resulting in duplication of services to protect self promoting public kingdoms especially those we entrust with safety. That is why I place tremendous responsibility on council members to probe, to be representatives of residents, NOT simply base decisions on city presentations.

Oh God, what can I expect with regard to future issues: density transfer, CRA, etc. I guess, it will be depend on how the argument is framed.

To return to the topic of this article, thank God, this is NOT the case with Mr. Milk and his staff's presentation to council with regard to seawall staging regulations.

Yes sometimes, the city directors can be fair and balanced, even while a council chair insists the small number of complaints as provided by the city is dismissed as not representative.

Is it too much to ask council to be fair and balanced while probing an argument or position irregardless of what business the city claims is their responsibility?

I hope council does not make the same assessment and require the city be in the seawall construction business.

I believe Mr. Milk has a clue while the council probes how many ways can we regulate seawall staging. After all, this issue has been reviewed ad nauseum. Just asked those who have witnessed all the discussions since Marco Island's infancy as a planned community.