A majority of the seven Marco Island City Council members will vote against a proposed ordinance to change the council election date from March 11, 2008 to Nov. 4, 2008, the date of the presidential election.
Councilors Terri DiSciullo, Ted Forcht, Chuck Kiester and Rob Popoff told the Marco Eagle they will not vote for the ordinance.
First reading of the proposal will likely be during the Aug. 6 council meeting. A second and final reading could follow on Aug. 20.
DiSciullo, chairman Mike Minozzi and councilors Glenn Tucker and William Trotter voted June 18 for city staff to draft the ordinance.
The four-year terms of DiSciullo, Minozzi, Tucker and Trotter are up for election next year.
Minozzi and Tucker can’t run for reelection because of term limits. DiSciullo and Trotter haven’t decided if they will seek reelection. If a Nov. 4 election was held, the terms of the four councilors would be extended.
Kiester and Popoff voted against the draft. Forcht did not attend the meeting. The three were elected in 2006. Their seats will be up for election in 2010.
The council’s recommendation to draft the ordinance angered many Marco Island residents who want a spring election, including council candidates Joe Batte and Roger Hall.
Batte announced his candidacy in the May 28 issue of the Eagle. Hall announced his in the June 18 issue. Both candidates timed the announcements based on a spring election date.
The council election is held the second Tuesday in March, the day of Florida’s Presidential Preference Primary. This year, however, the state Legislature approved moving the primary up to Jan. 29. The council could vote to hold the election on that date instead of in March or November.
"As for my vote, I stand by my vote to not change the vote to November 2008 at this time," Popoff told the Eagle. "I will need to hear council discussion and public input before I will make up my mind between January versus March 2008."
Kiester wants the election held in January and the newly-elected councilors taking their seats the next council meeting.
"I personally would or will not be opposed to shortening my office by three meetings should it come up during my term of office, especially if it’s a reelection where I were to be defeated — or for that matter, one in which I could not run due to term limits," he said.
Kiester said adding eight to 10 months to his term by moving the election to November is simply not an option.
"Those current councilors who advocate that change are, in my opinion, simply trying to extend their terms to continue their efforts to put this island into absolute bankruptcy and to chase as many middle-income residents as they can off the island," Kiester said.
He also wants to change the Marco Island City Charter to coincide the council elections with the two-year November elections. He said the change would appease Tucker, Trotter and Minnozi who want to avoid any costs to the city for an election.
Forcht said he was very surprised the council discussed the November date as an option.
"It never even occurred to me that any other option than March could be considered, unless we just leave it as it is," he said.
Forcht said public servants can’t vote themselves a pay raise and shouldn’t give themselves a term extension for the same reason.
"There is a big gap here between what’s legal and what’s right," he said. "For heavens sake, we aren’t the Collier County Commission, or even worse, Congress. I could never vote for taking more time in office than I was elected to."
DiSciullo said on June 20 she wanted the council election to be held in January with the four seats taken in March. DiSciullo sent Marco Island City Manager Bill Moss an e-mail that same day, stating that she resented the way the issue was handled before and during the June 18 City Council meeting.
"It is obvious to me that members of the council had discussed (a November election) with you and Rich many days before it was thrown out there to me," DiSciullo stated in the e-mail, referring to Marco Island City Attorney Rich Yovanovich and a possible violation of the Florida Government in the Sunshine Law. "I see no extenuating circumstances to allow me to serve for eight more months."
She stated in the e-mail that Minozzi didn’t allow public comment on the issue during the meeting and Forcht was not present. DiSciullo added she agreed to a first reading of the proposed ordinance so that residents could comment during the mandated public hearing that would precede the vote.
Minozzi said on Monday he would not discuss how he will vote on the ordinance.
"There are pros and cons to all aspects of this change — if any," he said. "In the meantime, I have more than a month to contemplate the issue."
Tucker also declined to reveal how he will vote. Trotter did not return a request for comment.
Buddy Day, 2012
Marco Island GOOOH meeting, Feb. 2012
Tommy Davidson at Marco's Off the…









Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 11
Lolala writes:
Don't put your money on Popoff. He has a history of changing his mind. After all, he includes a qualifier in his response; "As for my vote, I stand by my vote to not change the vote to November 2008 at this time,". His mentor is Tucker and we know that Tucker is fond of surprising his constitutency. Let's see if Popoff keeps his word or is he getting ready to spring a Tucker?
1Paradiselost writes:
What do you think? What would happen if President Bush announced tomorrow on CNN or FOX that he decided to move the presidential elections from 2008 to 2009? That is no different than what is happening on Marco Island. If the Marco Island city counsel votes on a change of date for the city counsel elections extending the date to November, There is only one solution. The counselors, whose terms would have expired in March, should not be allowed to vote on any resolution extending their term. Only the remaining counsel members whose terms end in 2010 should have the right to vote...
patton1 writes:
Moving the election date from March forward to November or back to January are both dopey ideas. You can neither reduce nor increase elected officials terms without a charter amendment or a constitutional change. So whomever thought of this brilliant idea should be sentenced to spending a long weekend with Ed Foster at his new home in North Carolina.
The idea was a non-starter and accomplished nothing for the proponents.The elections will be held in March as originally scheduled.
On the other hand, Lolala is full of it as usual with conspiracy theories about Rob Popoff; and 1Paradiselost still thinks we have a City "counsel". FOR PETE'S SAKE; IT IS NOT A "COUNSEL" AND THEY ARE NOT "COUNSELORS" OR "COUNSEL" MEMBERS YOU DOPE!
barfieldfly writes:
The cities most effective tools for getting the STRP completed aren't shovels and picks but 'hammers and sickels'.
Lolala writes:
Patton1, there you go with your name calling again. The idea came from the Governor's office. Take it up with him. You don't see a qualifier in Popoff's statement? I am not accusing Popoff of conspiring anything, I am saying that he is pretty slippery and can't be trusted.
ed34145 writes:
Doesn't this article smack of a violation of the Sunshine law? Is Ed Bania being a conduit? Why all the discussion outside of a public meeting?
lutherdog writes:
Minozzi and Tucker continue to be out of control and desperate at this point to do anything to accelerate the STRP and extend their terms. We ask, what's in it for them? We'd like to see the money trail attached to the STRP. Anytime there is deceit and corruption, just follow the money trail.
patton1 writes:
lutherdog: I strongly suggest that before you make such accusations; have your facts straight.Otherwise, you may have to eat your words and we will be happy to watch. What's in it for you to oppose the STRP?
ed34145: Bania the Conduit? That is not news.
lolala: I did not call you or anyone names. That happens to be the specialty of the CAVE dwellers. I guess your side can give it but not able to take it. When someone makes dopey statements, I call them a dope. You will not find any PC here.
Hawke1 writes:
patton1, take another look at your post above. You do call people names, you can't help it. Here is what you wrote in case you can't find it: "YOU DOPE"
Try harder to be nice.
patton1 writes:
Hawke1:As long as people make baseless accusations, spread lies to satisfy their selfish interests and in the process make life difficult for those who are working hard to make this island a better place; I will continue to call them the names they deserve. When the CAVE dwellers learn to live and let live; I may consider being nice to them. For now, they are getting what they deserve. I never forget what I write or say; therefore no need for a reminder from you. I and I alone will decide when I have to be nice. I do not need you or anyone else to tell me how to behave.
Lolala writes:
Patton1, if you behave like an adolesent then you will be treated like one. The people you call names are honorable people that are simply defending themselves from self-serving politicians. If you expect us to respect you, then you need to take a little more effort to be civil.
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.