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.

Naples Daily News
Naples Sun Times
The Banner

Collier Citizen
Vista Semanal
PrepZone

Coastalbeat
Set Anchor
SWFLMoms