Marco councilor Kiester, residents sound off on top city issues

Photo by KELLY FARRELL, Staff // Buy this photo

A show of hands at a community forum Thursday evening hosted by City Councilor Chuck Kiester illustrates how many Marco Island citizens are against adding tolls to the Jolley Bridge. A similar show of hands demonstrated that the vast majority of residents at the forum were also in support of keeping LCEC as their electricity provider without allowing the city to takeover the utility and also were against privatizing Alligator Alley.

Marco City Councilor Chuck Kiester’s forum drew well over 100 residents, more than attend many city council meetings.

Kiester and his constituents sounded off on state and city issues that will most affect island residents over the next several weeks and months.

Topics of conversation included privatization of Alligator Alley, replacement and tolling of the Jolley Bridge, city takeover of LCEC, a fire assessment, the general budget and other issues.

“Thank you putting this forum together to hear what the people have to say,” said resident Dale Nicholas to Kiester.

Nicholas turned to city councilors Wayne Waldack and Gerry Gibson who were also listening in on the forum to thank them as well.

“You ran on that plank (of listening to the community) and I’m glad to see you’re here,” Nicholas said.

City Manager Steve Thompson, Fire and Rescue Chief Mike Murphy, Public Works Director Rony Joel, Finance Director Bill Harrison and Parks and Recreation Director Dana Souza were also standing by to answer any questions as they arose.

Joel and Murphy fielded the vast majority of questions directed toward city staff.

Privatizing Alligator Alley

After a brief show of hands demonstrated that almost everyone present was against privatizing Alligator Alley, Joel began fielding some questions, including: who will collect the toll revenue from Alligator Alley?

“The State Law is if the road is tolled by DOT (the Department of Transportation) then DOT receives the funds. If it is privatized the funds generated are split between the counties served,” Joel said.

Collier and Broward Counties would split the $500 million toll revenue to maintain the roads, he added.

Amadeo Petricca raised a concern of whether the money would ever really be used for its supposed purpose of maintaining roads.

“It’s just like the lotto doesn’t go to education,” Petricca said.

“I agree with all my friends,” Kiester responded, adding that it is true that funds generated from the lottery go to education but then the equivalent amount of money is taken out of the general fund for education.

Jolley Bridge

Architect and former planning board member Herb Savage opened the discussions on the Jolley Bridge enthusiastically.

“We do not need two bridges across the jolly area. We do not need two bridges period,” he exclaimed.

Kiester said he recently met with DOT official Johnny Limbaugh of Fort Myers and that Limbaugh informed him that “technically there is no congestion on the Jolley Bridge.”

Kiester also said that a resident’s idea of having one-way traffic on and off island using both the Jolley Bridge and the Goodland Bridge may be a viable idea.

The Goodland Bridge has a sufficiency rating of only 45 according to DOT, meaning that it is in need of major maintenance and repair. The Jolley Bridge’s sufficiency rating is 70 because it is in need of some repair and maintenance as well.

“It’s like having a patient with two conditions – a hemorrhoid and a tumor. Which is more important? I think the Goodland Bridge is more important,” said Marco Island resident Gay Santiago.

Kiester said the differentiation is that currently the Jolley Bridge is owned and maintained by the state while the Goodland Bridge is the county’s responsibility. He also explained his previous vote to approve proceeding with the Phase 2 study.

“I thought it was the state’s money ... I also thought they may find it infeasible to put toll stations by the bridge,” he said.

Kiester also shared some good news. “If you haven’t already heard, the MPO (Metropolitan Planning Organization) will not be moving forward with Phase 2 because they heard that we’re not in favor of a study.”

Politically active resident Russ Colombo said the question shouldn’t be if tolls but rather if a bridge is really needed.

“If there’s no bridge, there’s no question of tolls. The idea is to get your attention on tolls instead of whether we need the darn bridge to begin with,” he said.

Community members clapped and Rick Medwedeff of the Marco Island Marriott said his 800 associates at the hotel are “totally against the idea” of a toll as well.

“It’s just another barrier for their entry onto the island,” Medwedeff said of his employees and island visitors.

Another show of hands indicated that constituents held a nearly unanimous opinion against tolling the bridge.

Takeover of Lee County Electric Cooperative

The idea of the city taking over the electric service on island was equally popular among community members at the forum.

“Every time Marco wants something and doesn’t get it, it seems council just says ‘Let’s take it.’ There are only 15,000 of us (residents) here,” said John DeFalco, adding that he didn’t think they could take on everything themselves.

Kiester was the only councilor to vote against a study of the feasibility of the city operating an electric company.

“As a co-op, we are already part owners of the system and presumably will share any dollars generated over and above that needed to run its operations,” Kiester said.

He added that the money received is minimal, but wondered more about whether the $25,000 for a consultant and study was going to yield much.

“ ... I found that all you have to do is tell (the consultant) the outcome you want and that’s what you’ll get,” Kiester said.

Requesting a show of hands on this topic, Kiester said smiling, “It would take a person with real courage to show support at this point.”

Gary Elliott of a new island company, Solar Power and Light, was one of the few in the room who voiced support of the study.

“I’m just happy to get people to start talking about electricity,” he said.

Elliott also added that the challenge was not with the co-op, but with the fact that the co-op gets 70 percent of its power from FPL who relies on both oil and coal prices which have gone up drastically in the last year.

“We don’t have a preconceived idea of what the conclusion is and that’s why we’re asking for LCEC information,” Joel said regarding the study and ad-hoc committee which residents are encouraged to join.

Joel was asked if the takeover would eventually require a referendum vote of the constituents.

“It wouldn’t require it, but I would recommend it,” he replied.

Mike Gaynor stood up and addressed the crowd: “We already own this company (LCEC) ... I don’t want to sell it. I still want to be an owner,” he said.

Long time resident Keith Pershing had similar sentiments about the idea. “Isn’t LCEC a nonprofit? What’s cheaper a bureaucracy? I get my $1.36 each year. The city hasn’t given me any money yet,” he said drawing laughter from across the room.

Fire assessment

The fire assessment also drew some heat from the community.

“I guess council didn’t understand that we wanted tax reform. Even though we won the victory (voting to pass Amendment 1) it seems that was hollow,” said Roger Hall, a former council candidate.

Hall concluded: “This island is just going to be a place for rich people.”

Colombo raised similar concerns adding that he believed Governor Charlie Crist and the State Legislature was working on prohibiting assessments and any other means to make up for the property tax savings that residents were to receive due to amendment 1.

Murphy maintained that the fire assessment was fair because the assessment would charge on average usage by property type versus taxing of property value.

“The longer you wait on something that’s fair, the longer you’re sticking it to someone else,” Murphy said.

The City Council voted 6-1 June 16 to approve the fire assessment ordinance, with councilor Ted Forcht casting the dissenting vote. Councilor Frank Recker discussed setting up a fire assessment district without actually funding it or charging the assessment. Thompson reported that since that City Council meeting, Government Services Group (GSG) has explained that “legally it is not possible to establish a fire assessment district without funding, as it does not indicate a true intent or commitment to the establishment of the district.”

Thompson said in his weekly update posted on the city’s Web site that a table outlining options of the fire assessment and taxing rates will be presented for council and resident consideration prior to the meeting of July 24.