Hideaway Beach renourishment approved – for now

Public Works Director TIm Pinter, left, speaks to the board. The Hideaway Beach Special Tax District Board met Tuesday at City Hall. Lance Shearer/Eagle Correspondent

Photo by LANCE SHEARER // Buy this photo

Public Works Director TIm Pinter, left, speaks to the board. The Hideaway Beach Special Tax District Board met Tuesday at City Hall. Lance Shearer/Eagle Correspondent

Lance Shearer/Eagle Correspondent
Consultant Michael Poff, left, and Chairman Erik Brechnitz, center, listen to board attorney Bruce Anderson, front right. The Hideaway Beach Special Tax District Board met Tuesday at City Hall.

Photo by LANCE SHEARER // Buy this photo

Lance Shearer/Eagle Correspondent Consultant Michael Poff, left, and Chairman Erik Brechnitz, center, listen to board attorney Bruce Anderson, front right. The Hideaway Beach Special Tax District Board met Tuesday at City Hall.

Chairman Erik Brechnitz sits under a Jo-Ann Sanborn painting in the Niles Conference Room. The Hideaway Beach Special Tax District Board met Tuesday at City Hall. Lance Shearer/Eagle Correspondent

Photo by LANCE SHEARER // Buy this photo

Chairman Erik Brechnitz sits under a Jo-Ann Sanborn painting in the Niles Conference Room. The Hideaway Beach Special Tax District Board met Tuesday at City Hall. Lance Shearer/Eagle Correspondent

— There was really only one point up for discussion at Tuesday's meeting of the Hideaway Beach Special Tax District meeting at City Hall. The big news was that Hideaway won a 4-1 vote in the Collier County Board of Commissioners meeting on Oct. 23, granting Hideaway nearly a million dollars for beach restoration.

Unless they decide to take it back. This was the scenario the Tax District Board returned to over and over on Tuesday. The meeting Tuesday was all about that previous county commission meeting, which had a major contingent on hand from Marco Island. City Manager Jim Riviere, City Attorney Burt Saunders, City Councilor Jerry Gibson, Hideaway Beach Tax District attorney Bruce Anderson, and consultant Michael Poff of Coastal Engineering all attended, along with tax district Chairman Erik Brechnitz.

At the county commission meeting, Commissioner Tom Henning joined in the vote for the project, after he "talked passionately against it," said Brechnitz. "We suspect he intends at some point to ask for a motion to reconsider, and he can only do that if he voted for it." He added that the second vote, if any, would take place after a new commission is seated following the upcoming election. Commissioner Georgia Hiller was the lone vote against the Hideaway project.

"We got a favorable opinion from the county attorney," noted Brechnitz. "Clearly, we are not eligible for TDC funding," as Hideaway is too difficult to access by land to be considered a public beach, "but we are eligible, not for sand, but for erosion control structures."

"If you put in sand, you know where it's going to go – right into the channel," said board member Paul Fernstrum.

Keeping the Hideaway Beach condos, on the northern tip of Marco Island, out of the channel is the point of protecting the beach. The project the board members fervently hope to get underway soon is phase three, including three T-groins positioned to keep a sand barrier between the encroaching waters of Big Marco Pass and Hideaways condo buildings 5000 and 6000.

Asked why the board has to deal with two different federal agencies, both with requirements on safeguarding wildlife, Poff explained that the National Marine Fisheries Service governs from the waterline seaward, whereas the US Fish and Wildlife Service has jurisdiction from the waterline upwards. Marine Fisheries shepherds sea turtles while they are swimming, plus toothed fish, while Fish and Wildlife watches over shorebirds, plus nesting seabirds and nesting turtles. If approvals and bids come in on schedule, along with the $975,000 grant from the county, Hideaway is hopeful of completing their project prior to sea turtle nesting season, and greatly simplifying the work.

They can save some money, said Poff, if City of Marco Island personnel can take on some of the monitoring chores.

"The timing may work out rather well," said Marco's Public Works Director Tim Pinter, sitting in as city liaison to the board. "Your old contractor is on the island right now working for us," potentially easing the staging for the work, getting equipment in place with the least possible delay.

Anderson reported that Hideaway had been turned down for a FEMA grant, again.

"I have the feeling we took $5,000 and burned it in the fireplace," said Brechnitz, of the funds expended seeking the grant. "Let's develop some institutional memory – we've seen that movie before."

City Councilor and Hideaway resident Larry Magel, who sat in on the meeting, said afterward he is not convinced the funds for the beach erosion control are securely in hand.

"I'll believe it when I see it," he said.

"We're pleased to see this money, but there's always a question why someone would speak against it and then vote positively," said board member Dick Freeman.

The county commission meets again on Nov. 13, and the Hideaway board's next meeting is scheduled for Nov. 27.

© 2012 marconews.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Related Topics

Comments » 4

bondie writes:

Coconut Island was a small, barrier island covered with trees. Even though they were "not native" trees as some complained, they held the soil and island in place. I remember Hidaway Beach tenents viciously complained that their view was compromised and ordered that the trees be removed. That was unconscionable. Not only did the trees hold the island in place, it was a refuge for birds. Also, as a barrier island, it helped to keep Hideway's beach from eroding from the wind and serf. This is now your problem and you should pay for any replenishment. We, the taxpayers should not be charged for your arrogant mistake!

Throat_Yogurt writes:

in response to bondie:

Coconut Island was a small, barrier island covered with trees. Even though they were "not native" trees as some complained, they held the soil and island in place. I remember Hidaway Beach tenents viciously complained that their view was compromised and ordered that the trees be removed. That was unconscionable. Not only did the trees hold the island in place, it was a refuge for birds. Also, as a barrier island, it helped to keep Hideway's beach from eroding from the wind and serf. This is now your problem and you should pay for any replenishment. We, the taxpayers should not be charged for your arrogant mistake!

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

bigkillsh writes:

in response to bondie:

Coconut Island was a small, barrier island covered with trees. Even though they were "not native" trees as some complained, they held the soil and island in place. I remember Hidaway Beach tenents viciously complained that their view was compromised and ordered that the trees be removed. That was unconscionable. Not only did the trees hold the island in place, it was a refuge for birds. Also, as a barrier island, it helped to keep Hideway's beach from eroding from the wind and serf. This is now your problem and you should pay for any replenishment. We, the taxpayers should not be charged for your arrogant mistake!

i remember the sales pitch all to well " we'll get those trees taken down you'll have a great view " pay for your own problem . unless i can park and swim neerby !!

Mayor_McCheese writes:

STOP THIS WASTE OF TAX MONEY!

If they want their beach saved, they should pay for it out of their own common charges or they should have a special assessment to cover the cost. I think most people who live on Marco - and in Collier County since this is County money - would not want their tax dollars paying for this since the beach is essentially non-public. Why should everyone else bail them out with this sort of welfare?

Those Hideaway residents who vote for Romney because they think Obama is all about welfare and redistribution are hypocrites if they accept any public money for their private beach. This is a taxpayer funded bailout of a private beach community. That smells like welfare to me.

Take care of your own problem. If you want us to fix it, make it a public access beach. Public money should be spent for the public good.

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