POLL: Marco city council campaign finances revealed

Does how much a candidate spends campaigning influence your vote?

See the results »

View previous polls »

— The biggest spender in Marco’s city council campaign has spent not double, not triple, but about 27 times as much as the lowest spender, according to recently filed campaign treasurers’ reports. Likewise, a similar proportion of Islanders contributed to those most expensive, least expensive campaigns.

The interim campaign treasurers’ reports were filed with City Clerk Laura Litzan Friday. A final report will be filed after the conclusion of the election in late January.

Here is what the four candidates, who are vying for three open seats, have collected and spent thus far:

-Joe Batte has collected $500 from three contributors to his campaign, with $350 of that coming from a personal loan. He spent $343 thus far.

-Incumbent candidate Ted Forcht has collected about $2,700 from nine contributors to his political campaign, including a $500 loan from his personal account. He spent about $1,500 thus far.

-Incumbent candidate Chuck Kiester has collected $3,225 from about 10 contributors thus far, including $1,900 in loans from his personal accounts. Kiester spent approximately $856 so far.

-Larry Magel spent $9,333 and collected $9,200 from 40 contributors thus far, including a $1,000 loan he made to his campaign. The $1,000 loan was accounted for in an earlier treasurer’s report as Magel was the first to begin campaigning and thus is the only candidate to have filed two reports thus far, campaign manager Al Diaz and Litzan confirmed.

Want to know who is contributing to the candidates’ campaigns and what the expenses are? View supporting documents, including the most recently filed campaign treasurers’ reports for details.

© 2009 marconews.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Related Topics

Related Stories

Comments » 22

OldMarcoMan writes:

The most conservative guys spend the least money, typical,typical.

happyonmarco writes:

$9,300 . . . Holy Cow!

sharkfloss writes:

It is quite interesting comparing the contributors of each of the candidates. Once again, this will be an election between condo owners and individual house owners. Whichever interest plays greatest will win the election. It is up to all of us and get our fannies in gear and vote for the candidates who are best for them and our community.

ajm3s writes:

I recommend we vote for those who spend the least in the campaign. This way we can feel confident that the true message is those who spend less will be elected.

gladtobeonmarco writes:

It's interesting to see what people focus in on, I read the article and I see that Magel has 40 supporters while the other three candidates only have 22 combined.

Fossil writes:

I have no problem with wealthy people supporting wealthy candidates. I do however, have a problem with candidates not being up front with the electorate. I also have a problem with a hometown newspaper that has no idea what their role is during a local election. Will someone please ask the candidates for clear and concise platforms? This newspaper needs to do in-depth interviews to find out why these people are really running. General campaign slogans should be discarded. Ask some hard questions. A look at the donors list indicates to me that one of the candidates is much more interested in protecting gated commuities, beach renourishment paid for with public funds and continued restrictive beach access, protecting the status quo as to re-use water, it's avialability and protecting water utility costs that favor multi-family buildings. Now is the time to ask these questions while seeking out those candidates that intend to work for the greater good and not just those who want to preserve special privleges and protect their seperation from the rest of our community. People, follow the money and you will see that there is a real danger that that at least one candidate is running on behalf of a few and once in office will work to ensure the rest of the community pays for maintaining the lifestye of the privledged living in gated communities.

jwputnam writes:

Fossil is dead on. He should submit same as an LTE.

There is clearly an objective here. Magel will not get my vote. It would be like voting for Arceri. The syndicate just marches on. Prepare yourself for more construction and far more debt IF the City can find a bonding agent. We owe about 160 million NOW with another 55 million to be bonded (again, if they can get one) in a few months. Annual revenue is about 35 million in GOOD times when there are not 400 homes in foreclosure. Could you run your home like this?

Marco voters don't need another slick New Yorker (sorry, but true) to come in and throw a lot of money around and take us further in to debt. Judge him by his campaign expenses! Is he conservative?

MarcoJimbo writes:

The best darned government money can buy, compliments of Hideaway Beach! The oversize campaign signs on Bald Eagle and San Marco are a nice touch too, if "bigger is better" is the message you're trying to send.

playballonK writes:

Condo dwellers: you screwed the island (and yourselves) last couple of elections. Don't think this syndicate group(Larry Magel and gang) can't spend you out of your retirement savings because they can. I urge you all to question any canidate that comes promising the world to you the condo owner.
Because whether you believe it or not, the condo owner does as the single family homeowner does.

lauralbi1 writes:

I think the best thing that Mr. Magel could do is take these blogs and use them as campaign print.
It is obvious that there arew those on the Island that would desire only that a small minority be represented by 3 out of the 7 votes on the Council. And that minority is voicing their attitude above.
I thinkl all mof you should realize that there are 13,000 or more registered voters on Marco Island. They reside in homes and condos and all need to be represented.
Hopefully any candidate that wins will win with more than 22% of the registered voters voting for them, as happened in 2006.
You should be more concerned about getting people to vote, than where they live. The more voters we have, the better represented we all are.
Ed Issler

dc5799 writes:

Not good Mr Magel having Ed Issler speak for you. We have gone from a landslide to 22%. Thing's are looking up

lauralbi1 writes:

DC5799: I like it. Keep on thinking that way. That's how the good guys captured a landslide in the last election.
So out of touch. So sad. When are you and your fellow bloggers going to realize that the future of Marco Island is not how you perceive it. The voters have spoken many times and yet you still refuse to adapt. Just make certain that you vote so you have nothing to complain about. Democracy is a great thing. Let's let it run it's course.
Ed Issler

lauralbi1 writes:

Fossill: I could not agree more. I guess we need to get Mr. Kiester off of worrying about the size of his other candidates signs (he lost that battle also) and get him more focused on explaining why he is the only Florida politician ever convicted of Sunshine Law violations. Yes, have him explain to all of us what he was trying to hide. And if he was so s----- that he did it unintentiallly (ha ha), he doesn't deserve to be on Council.
Let's see, in the words of the judge who heard the whole case, "he has no business in politics and "he has made a mockery of the law". Yes, I think we need to get as much of that to the voters as possible. Do you want to let the Eagle know or do you want me to ??
Ed Issler

MarcoJimbo writes:

Hey Ed, as I recall, you were in favor of the City takeover of the electric system and undergrounding of power cables. Talk about out of touch with the majority, you're only batting .500 pal. The latest utility rate increase hurt everybody, including the coveted condo dwellers. The maintenance fee on my investment property condo went up chiefly for that reason. Try not to act too surprised when hte syndicate gets caught up in their own lies and deceit.

EdFoster writes:

You vill adapt!

You vill adapt!

Heil Issler!

jwputnam writes:

Dear Mr. Issler,

I asked you the other day if you could tell me what blasteding information was in those Kiester emails. You did not respond. As I recall...and I do...there were only personal memos to family and bill payments...nothing political at all.

I also asked you why Magel, Gibson, Waldach and Trotter are meeting for several hours at Arceri's home before council meetings (and many other times). Perhaps they are playing cards?

Magel is an arrogant blowhard (PLEASE don't bore me with your very important background again Mr. Magel! I don't care how many countries you worked in or how many people worked for you. You insult my intelligence by spending so much money on a small local campaign while claiming that you are a conservative!!!! BS) with a particularly bad temper. Marco does not need another one like him. Arceri was enough!

happy6 writes:

putnam...have you ever met magel?...have any of you ever met the man? in my opionion...vote every incumbant out...whether they are a councilman, commissioner, congressman, senator or what have you. and for your information many of the people that contributed to magel's campaign are ordinary working folks.
trust me, hideaway pays more than their fair share of money to this island...and they give to the needy constantly....like breast cancer and the guadeluope kids to mention two.
and as for the cost to taxpayers for beach re-nourishment....all hideaway owners have been paying a special city/county assessment for 5 years with 5 to go for the saving of the north beach...that anyone and everyone on marco can use...if they come by boat...and hideaway paid for the traffic light at collier/.kendall because the previous city mgr did not budget it.

why not rant about the marco yacht club or the island country club...they have more affluent members than the 600 owners in hideaway...
so...bottom line...do not hold hideaway against magel..i don't know the guy from a load of beans(except from his resume)...but neither do those who are chastising him...i don't live in hideaway...but i gave to his campaign...we need fresh ideas and new blood on this council.
now...i may change my mind after i hear more from magel...but i don't need putnam running down someone he does not even know ...unless he has the facts to back it up.

Fossil writes:

Shadow: I agree with you. Responsible citizens should never permit an incumbent to hold elected office for more than one term without undergoing a complete review by the media as to their positives and negatives. As for hideaway granting beach access to boaters - thanks for nothing, I don't own a boat. I do not want one cent of my taxes to go to any beach renourishment that that does not include full, free and improved access to me and my fellow taxpayers. The only reason I commented on this story is that the record implies one candidate is Hideaway's candidate. Hideaway is a closed gated community that enjoys special utility cost considerations and inhibits our access to what is ours (the beach). I think that candidate should promise to look out for all of us and not treat the condos and hotels as exceptional citizens deserving lower utility assessments and special considerations (the city should resolve to force these special citizens to fund an access trail for the rest of us. Your candidate should promise all residents that pay City taxes that he will work for granting access to our beach, including that fronting Hideway. Is 9,000 dollars too much to run a campaign on this small island, who knows? Popoff was also pretty well funded when he ran. The amount of money that is donated to any candidate will not assure the citizens that the candidate will not tell a big lie to get elected or that he is personally financialy responsible. Financial donations although a form of free speech does not translate into honest service. It does say the candidate is a good begger and likely has a likable personality, but then so do successful used car salesmen and other unsavory folks looking to sepearte you from your hard earned cash.

happy6 writes:

fossil...if folks want to come to that beach they can walk from tigertail...and many many do. there are gated communities all over america..always have been always will be...hideaway was not developed by the people that live there...so to hold it against them seems a little unfair to me.
and as for magel's $$$...that's been the way it is in politics forever. if there were a huge majority (as issler always points out) that are supporting a particular candidate then there would be no problem in raising a large sum of money.
i seem to remember that recker and the boys had quite a few dollars in their coffers.

lauralbi1 writes:

JW: I do not know where you are getting your information but I have not been to John Arceri's house for over 2 years. Not since before the last election. You will need to do better than that.
Ed Issler

PBH writes:

Magel appears to have what it takes to be on the City Council. Just look at the finance reports of the 4 candidates. Magel is the only one of the 4 who has already spent more than he has received in contributions!
That's enough for me...he won't get my vote!

jwputnam writes:

"I also asked you why Magel, Gibson, Waldach and Trotter are meeting for several hours at Arceri's home before council meetings (and many other times). Perhaps they are playing cards?"

Do your see your name in there Ed?


Shadow: I quizzed him at the MITA forum. He shirked every question. He intends to vote for CAP change. He favors lower water rates for condos. He favors ad hoc committees for utilities. (Gee....I wonder if Arceri might be nominated?) Need more?

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.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.