Web Search powered by Yahoo! SEARCH
MIPO represents all the folks, and the slate of Mr. Honecker, Mr. Petricca and Mr. Sacher ran on transparency and fiscal responsibility, and to be fair Mr. Honig makes the claim of fiscal responsibility, as well, and I believe he would endorse transparency in government, as well.
So what separates such a group of distinguished representatives? To a written question that was posed but never read publicly: why did these members all agree that a 400K watercraft was the most cost effective answer to provide water rescue operations given the existing inventory and manpower provided through a host of public and private organizations.
My concern is based on a simple fact: the most expensive means of rescue operations is the fire department. On that basis, why did the council only consider Mr. Murphy's proposal without any consideration of other entities and assets in the area?
And if fiscal responsibility is such an over arching concern, the existing boat will now be turned over to the control of the police department, thereby adding to the overall cost of operations.
Now, I understand that budgets have been pared back since 2010 and Mr. Murphy is acting a responsible steward, but has anyone actually looked at the growth of spending in years since city-hood as a point of reference to provide a sense of expansion given the loss of single family homes (1000-1500) as evidenced by an increase of vacant lots?
If these newly elected members of Marco truly wish to wear the mantle of fiscal responsibility, I would ask they review all options, not just those brought before council under the heading of a cost/benefit in maintaining a Donzi as a point of reference.
If MIPO truly represents all property owners, well this property owner would like to see a higher standard of efficient city operations and NOT relative reduction in city budgets, that were built upon a spending spree that ballooned in the early 2000's in excess of growth. Just look at your tax bill from 2000 to 2006, excluding SOH. As well, as the increase in percentage of tax dollars now going to the city relative to the county.
And to Mr. Petricca's comment: ""If people don't get irritated, I'm not doing my job." I believe he was referring to city management, however,that decision truly irritated me because it truly was the most expensive option, yet only option brought before you for water rescue.
And you all considered it a great proposal! Well it was, but it was the only one proposed and from my perspective the most expensive.
Please, if you think potable drinking water is expensive on this island, then I believe we are on a path to maintain the most expensive water safety operations and equipment in the county and perhaps Florida!!!!!!!
Here is a sampling of how other outlying communities have spent:
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.
Username * Don't have an account? Sign up for a new account
Password * Can't remember? Reset your password
Comments can be shared on
Add both options by connecting your profiles.
Feels Like: 84°
Feels Like: 76°
Feels Like: 86°
Share your photos and videos with our online community. Take a look »
View a webcam of the Judge S.S. Jolley Bridge and other places on Marco Island.
Sign up to read an electronic replica of the Marco Eagle newspaper.
Get your local news anywhere you go from the Marco Eagle. Download app »
See photos from local anglers with their biggest catch of the day. Submit your photos.
Our radar shows current conditions and possible severe weather.