Joe Batte of Marco Island City Council
Documents
Documents
Documents
MARCO ISLAND — More than 2,000 Marco Island residents gave a thumbs down to the idea of creating a Community Redevelopment Area in Town Center.
The redevelopment district could limit the use of millions of Collier County tax dollars to just within Marco’s Town Center.
Each year, the Marco Island Civic Association sends out about 6,000 surveys to its members, all of whom are Marco residents. This year, more than 3,000 surveys were returned and the results reveal that among the least popular ideas is the creation of a CRA in the 250 acres surrounding the Town Center shopping center.
“I’ve been talking to members of MICA and people directly in that CRA area and I was not getting positive feedback,” said City Councilman Joe Batte, who wasn’t shocked by the 93 percent disapproval rate.
The membership includes a large cross-section of Marco residents and taxpayers, so the survey is a good gauge, Batte said.
Membership in MICA, which is responsible for enforcing deed restrictions, is open to property owners and renters for an annual fee.
Batte isn’t opposed personally to a CRA, but said if Marco residents don’t get on board with the redevelopment of the business district, it likely will be a no-go.
Many survey respondents supported the city purchasing Tract K from the Collier County School District for less than $3 million if it’s paid off over the course of 10 years without interest.
“That was a little surprising to me that people would be amenable to the city spending that much money,” Councilman Bill Trotter said.
About 35 percent of the people said ‘no’ to the city purchase.
“Frankly, I can’t support that. It shouldn’t be an item for sale by the county. I don’t feel the city should buy it for any price,” Batte said.
The reason, he said, is that the school district purchased the deed to the 11.6-acres in the Tigertail Beach area from Marco’s developer, Deltona Corp., for just $10, with the understood purpose of setting aside the land for future educational use.
More residents are becoming amenable to establishing a charter high school on the island, the survey revealed.
Nearly 60 percent of respondents in the 2009 survey didn’t support the school. This year, the disapproval rating slipped to 50 percent.
“It’s the question of the location of the high school that’s very controversial,” MICA President Bernardo Bezos said.
Proponents for the school are currently seeking to obtain use of Tract K.
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Comments » 19
sailingby writes:
Oh for crying out loud. The MICA newsletter editors wrote a scorching article throwing fear into its membership claiming that the redevelopment would mean thousands of people would be moving into the high rises that would be built in the town center increasing the density and causing bedlam in the streets!
The article was filled with distortions about communities bankrupted by CRAs (there have actually never been any bankrupt communities as a result of a CRA) and rampant corruption and plague and pestulance...
No wonder they got the results they intended to get. When you have to win by deception and integrity is nowhere to be found, what does that say about the way Fay Biles and the naysayers are running things?
The folks heading up MICA should be ashamed of themselves. But those of us who have lived here a long time, know that will never happen. They are so afraid of losing more power. They were the little princes of the Island before it became a City. They are self important guardians (more like condo commandos though) of the deed restrictions Deltona handed them and constantly refer to the deeds restrictions as "The Master Plan" (even though there isn't one) for Marco Island.
So now that another entity, such as a Community Redevelopment Agency, begins to look promising, they try to kill the baby in the crib before it can chip away more at their dwindling power base.
This is just more of the same dig your heels in and just say no to any promising idea that they do not control.
Brillo writes:
The actual figures from MICA do not really say that those NOT in favor have really slipped. There are still almost 10% undecided which means it can go either way with them. You can not count them one way or the other until they decide. There are still only 40.6% in favor and that is an actual decided figure. That number is still less than half or a majority and should only be counted as that. The "in favor" also contain a condition in which states only if taxes do not go up. That condition "clouds" the "in favor" vote and could change it to "not in favor".
The figures below are from the actual MICA article. See for yourself.
"Do you support a public charter high school on Marco Island?
1378 (40.6%) a. Yes, I support a public charter high school on Marco Island, but only if it does not result in an increase in my property taxes.
1694 (49.9%) b. No, I do not support a public charter high school on Marco Island.
324 ( 9.5%) c. I am undecided."
Please do not make someone's dream cause someone else's nightmare.
Respect your senior retirees, because you will be there someday, too.
A high school if, actually, needed should only be put in a place that does not cause the intense mental pain that is being caused by the thought of using Tract K for it.
ajm3s writes:
So is that a yes vote based on the "findings of necessity" as your guide to creating a CRA? That is where we left it prior to this CRA citizens advisory board being formed.
Have you read the City of Marco Island CRA ordinance? Have you heard an overwhelming or even a whimper from the business community which lie within the boundaries of the CRA endorsing this? If so, are there vested interest that may run counter to the citizens of Marco Island to the benefit of few?
For the record, I am still evaluating with severe reservations. At this scale, with a basis on recovering county tax revenue? How about a basis on intended design, cost, etc.
I encourage redevelopment, but its focus should be on what do we actually want to do based on the wish list as gathered from the charrettes. We have not even prioritized this wish list as to what is important and significant. Yet we are willing to use a CRA/TIF as the means to that end. I believe the City of Marco Island can make better choices and not be guided by the framework of a CRA.
If you wish to frame this fight in terms of power, then I seriously suggest you read the ordinance, review the documentation provided by the consultant(which I believe is scanty and inadequate) from a business model perspective. And ask yourself would you empower such a board without knowing what we are actually going to do in these areas, to make such a decision with such broad impact?
Does due diligence have any meaning? Or am I just another naysayer who doesn't care about Marco Island? Or perhaps a hack for MICA? Will we ever know?
The problem is not the MICA members position, it is the inability of the City of Marco Island as presented by the consulting firm to convince (at least those who chose to participate in a survey) to provide enough supporting evidence to move onward. When in fact, the consulting firm thought they did, unless they did not do their jobs as well as expected. {Correction: they did statutorily) I believe Marco Island is an exceptional island and expects more than meeting statutory minimums.
Did we not just read a LTE of myths and facts from Mr. Grover that was filled with myths and opinions. I for one thought he would at least know the basics. So much for facts.
stepuporshutup (Inactive) writes:
Try sending the questionaire out during season when everyone is here and see what you get. I would guess that over 90% of the citizens that live on the beach are not members of MICA and therefore didn't vote either. Don't believe everything you read people.
marcoislander writes:
life to short you are so right. They also probably handed the survey out at the middle school
lauralbi1 writes:
Dear Mr. Batte and Mr. Trotter: It is with the utmost of respect that I write this comment. But for anyone, especially a member of City Council, to take any of these results as an indication of the will of the people, is a very poor decision.
I love MICA, am a member of MICA, and voted in this survey. But only 2,000 responses were received. We have over 13,000 registered voters and over 9,000 actively voting in elections. And I would be very interested in the breakdown of the members of MICA and those that voted.
I do not think the results of this survey mean anything. They are meaningless !! If you really want to see how the voters feel about CRA, or any other issue, put something on the next Ballot. I would love to know the median age of those that actually responded.
Ed Issler
captnjimbo writes:
I live near the beach, I am a full time resident, I vote, I did the survey. We need doctors, lawyers, police, entrepaneurs, mechanics...in short an infrastructure to help provide for us old coots. Providing a local high school was part of the master plan, a place was designated, a critical mass of people are now here...it took 25 years but the time is now. More of the money you already pay will come back to your Island and choice breeds competition and competition usually increases quality...how can this new school be a bad thing when you look at the bigger picture. Build baby build.
lauralbi1 writes:
captnjimbo: I hope that you did not take what I wrote above and interpret it to have any bearing on whether or not we should have a Private/Charter High School on Marco Island. My only point was that the entire survey, based on the lack of response, is meaningless.
If we can build a Charter School without Public Tax Money, then let's do it !!!!
Ed Issler
lauralbi1 writes:
Sorry: I misread the article !!! I guess over 3,000 surveys were returned, not 2,000. I have no problem taking the CRA issue to a vote, as I said above. Of the surveys returned, a high percentage voted to not pursue the CRA and a high percentage voted in support of the High School.
There is never an issue with taking something to a vote of the people.
I still feel that 3,000 or so survey forms is still not enough to dictate the votes of members of City Council.
My reasoning is the same as I explained for 2,000 survey forms.
Thanks for bringing my error to my attention.
Ed Issler
stepuporshutup (Inactive) writes:
lauralbi1, "a high percentage voted in support of the high school". Since when does 50% constitute a high percentage of anything?
Brillo writes:
41% in Favor
50% not in Favor
9% Undecided and against if it increases taxes.
This does not seem as warming up to a school except in the opinion of a biased newspaper reporter.
Let there be a total vote by the taxpayers of this city on this issue in November.
A Dream of a few should not be a nightmare for anyone!
fastboat writes:
put it on the ballot(simple)
dwbadger writes:
41% in favor of a high school and 49% NOT in favor of a high school. The majority is NOT in favor of a high school. Numbers don't lie. Another misrepresentation of facts by the Eagle.
stepuporshutup (Inactive) writes:
Marco Island will someday "need" a High School. With the expansion of East Naples and the added number of students that will be coming from the Habitat for Humanity Neighborhoods (why are they all being built in one small area of Collier County?), Lely, Fiddlers, Naples South, Reflection Lakes, etc. Lely will not be able to support the number of students coming their way in the next 5-10 years. The issue is that Marco does not need the High School "now". Forget the Charter School idea and get started on the County preparing designs, etc. for a Public High School on their very own site (Tract K)to be built when it is truly needed. There is no money for "wouldn't it be nice to have's" in today's economy. Marco Island will get it's High School when the time is right. The County and the School Board owe it to Marco Island and they know it.
Brillo writes:
In order to have a "Real" high school that will be able to provide all of the necessary services for a diverse community of student population, Tract K is much too small. Remember "all" of the services would include, ball fields, tracks, swimming pool, basketball courts, parking lot for as many as 600+ cars, gym with various activity areas and locker rooms, showers, administrative offices, audititorium, music practice rooms, home economics rooms, shops for various mechanical skills, computer rooms, teacher's and staff lounges, classrooms, cafeteria, kitchens, nurses office, custodial offices, bathrooms, guidance offices, Main Office etc.
If Collier County would ever become serious about building a high school on Marco Island some definite thoughts would have to be east on San Marco where there is plenty of room and with the right permits will not interfere with the lives of existing residents.
stepuporshutup (Inactive) writes:
Have you ever been to a small town before? Small towns have smaller high schools. They also dont field every sport under the sun. By the way, schools are allowed to be built over 2 stories high, with no swim team, or have parking for the entire student body( half of whom don't drive). I guarantee someone can design a school to fit on tract K. Will it fit the mold of other schools in Collier County? No, but so what.
Brillo writes:
Sorry, I don't know what small town you are talking about. Do you really think that students from Marco will opt to go to a school with few facilities? They will want to go where they have options both academically and athletically. If Lely provides those options, and the efforts of concerned parents are put in that direction then going to Lely would satisfy most, if not all of the needs of our students. Now we just have to convince our Acadamy moms to direct their efforts for the common good and not just for their own selfish interests.
sailingby writes:
islandeye-Having trouble staying on subject? Are you denying that MICA editors wrote a biased article denouncing the potential CRA prior to their surveying their membership about their opinion about the CRA? Aren't you curious about their motivation?
If you would like to debate (or even discuss) any of my previous positions on issues I welcome it. Your post above, however, was not to enlighten but to distract from the issue at hand, namely the credibility (or more precisely, the incredibility) of the MICA survey.
Brillo writes:
And by the way, I did grow up in a town/village that had a population of around 27,000 which in fact did have all of the items I listed above except for the swimming pool. Oh yes, I also forgot the space needed for bleechers and score boards in the ball fields. That was some 50 years ago and students/parents did not "expect" what students expect now from their schools.
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.