Guest Commentary: MICA surveys; is anyone listening

The Marco Island Civic Association has surveyed its membership on an annual basis for at least the past 30 years. Great thought goes into preparing the survey questions. Way back when, some claimed that some of the questions were biased and could have been worded better. It is true that we could all do better at times! To that end, MICA consulted with professors at FGCU and incorporated their suggestions into the survey writing.

Each year City Council members are given an opportunity to submit questions to be included in the survey. In 2010 three councilmen submitted questions, and in 2011 two questions were submitted. The MICA Board tries to anticipate what issues may come to the forefront in the upcoming year.

As a civic organization and as a public service, each year MICA goes through the effort to prepare a survey, the expense of printing and mailing, and the time and manpower to tabulate the results. More than 7,000 surveys are mailed with an excellent rate of return. The City has also issued a couple of surveys on their website and received responses from a couple hundred individuals at best.

Just recently MICA sent its first survey via email. Not having asked a question regarding water and sewer rates on recent surveys, the Board wished to have a clear picture of what members are thinking when it comes to Marco Island’s water and sewer rates. The results of this email survey were passed along to City Council, the Utilities Advisory Board and the City Manager. One councilman expressed concern that the report from the city-hired consultant was not included in MICA’s survey. Wouldn’t it be a great idea for the utility department to include all of the rate scenarios City Council is considering in the next water billing to customers?

At the Planning Board meeting on Oct. 7 MICA Board member Dick Adams was making a statement in response to discussion of the proposed “Midtown District Improvement Plan.” He was relaying MICA membership survey numbers regarding intensity and density, which were overwhelmingly opposed to hotels and motels in the Midtown District, which incidentally is the busiest intersection on our island. “With all due respect,” said Planning Board member Monte Lazarus, “in some MICA surveys, the answer is part of the question. I don’t see the neutrality or the validity.”

This is not the first time a Planning Board or City Council member has chosen to ignore the opinions of the residents of Marco Island. If our city representatives like the results of a survey question, then they quote from it. If they do not agree with the majority opinion of the residents, then they point out that they do not like how the question was worded. MICA has always stated that the survey is not scientific; however, all sitting City Council members have stated that the survey is “directionally accurate.” At public Candidate Forums held during election periods all seven councilmen stated that the MICA survey is extremely important and the only tool that gauges the opinion of the residents of Marco Island.

When it comes to intensity and density, MICA members (who are residents, with a super majority being voters of Marco Island as well) have been on the same page for years and years, going back to when Marco was governed by Collier County. They do not want increased intensity or increased density. MICA has been attending public workshops, Planning Board meetings and City Council meetings and relaying this message from Day One of Cityhood. Is anyone listening?

It is a shame that some elected and appointed city officials feel they can minimize the opinions of 4,000 to 6,000 residents of our island. We are not talking about numbers that are close. When 88 percent are opposed to changing the “density transfer” program in the Midtown District and the Planning Board approves it and City Council approves it, what does that mean? That a hand full of individuals knows better than the 88 percent?

Residents of Marco, it is time to get involved. Please write or call your City Council members. Attend Planning Board and City Council meetings. Please let them know how you feel.

© 2011 marconews.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Comments » 7

lauralbi1 writes:

I am VERY interested to know the true, accurate figures regarding the total number of responses received from MICA SURVEYS. It would mean a lot to not just myself, but we can use the information to make statements to Council in the future.

The only issue I have had with past surveys is that the last time I checked for true, accurate numbers, 6,000 surveys were mailed out and only 2,000 came back. That response does not make up enough of an opinion to be meaningful.

I question the 4,000 to 6,000 figure used above just because it is not a definitive number, but rather a range. I would like the exact number.

Ruth ??

Thanks
Ed Issler

ajm3s writes:

in response to lauralbi1:

I am VERY interested to know the true, accurate figures regarding the total number of responses received from MICA SURVEYS. It would mean a lot to not just myself, but we can use the information to make statements to Council in the future.

The only issue I have had with past surveys is that the last time I checked for true, accurate numbers, 6,000 surveys were mailed out and only 2,000 came back. That response does not make up enough of an opinion to be meaningful.

I question the 4,000 to 6,000 figure used above just because it is not a definitive number, but rather a range. I would like the exact number.

Ruth ??

Thanks
Ed Issler

As in all surveys, there is an MOE. And a 33% response is fairly average given a 4k- 6k population size. But as in real life, there are so many factors to consider in evaluating responses to surveys.

http://www.supersurvey.com/papers/sup...

But irregardless of numbers, there were specific questions asked and there are specific respondents, and they are a voice that is dismissed by some on Planning Board because the survey is suspect as expressed:

“With all due respect,” said Planning Board member Monte Lazarus, “in some MICA surveys, the answer is part of the question. I don’t see the neutrality or the validity.”

So are we to dismiss the MICA surveys because some questions are too leading? I think NOT.

GFonda writes:

I wonder if it is possible for the survey to be made available to non MICA residents for their responses to be included - perhaps as a separate tabulation.

marcofriend writes:

Unfortunately, there are certain Planning Board members that like to lead things in the direction of their own personal interests and not for the people of Marco Island. Are you listening Monte (and you aren't the only one)?
As far as Mr Issler being concerned with the number of surveys sent vs the number received, I'm happier to know what 2,000 people are thinking vs the City Councilmen who only listen to their small group.

lauralbi1 writes:

Marcofriend: It is great to know what 2,000 people are thinking, I agree. But the Council is elected by a majority of the registered voters on Marco Island. 2,000 represents only about 15% of these voters and of the 2,000, a percentage disagrees with much of what you want the Council to do.

The Planning Board members are appointed by members of City Council and are supposed to reflect the visions of the Council person that appointed them, in theory.

I cannot help but think back to the 2,000 people that signed the Recall Petition and cannot help but associate that 2,000 number with the 2,000 MICA number. As it turned out, the 2,000+ number was also the number of people that voted for the Non-STRP Slate as opposed to the 6,000 that voted for Council candidates that voiced a favorable vote for the STRP, in the last election.

That 2,000 number just keeps going and going. The problem is that it does not comprise anywhere close to a majority of our Electorate.

Ed Issler

naples_rocket writes:

here we go again. 'Not listening to the people', 'listening to their small group' crap. There's such thing called elections. People vote and elect representatives to the city council. Or are you suggesting that election process is corrupt? If you don't like someone, elect someone else. Heard about that?!

Seawaller writes:

The problem with putting too much credibility in elections actually representing the will of the people is that what "candidates" say they will do and what "councilors" actually do are often two different things. I do recall one candidate who said he was opposed to the STRP but upon election as a councilor he voted in favor of it. This is just one example, and if I had time I could name many others. If only we could rely on a candidate's rhetoric to know what he/she would really do!

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.

Features