Poll Results

Poll: Should the city council consider a referendum that would cap all sewer assessments at $10,000?

Response Percent Votes
Yes
 
64% 305
No
 
35% 166
total votes: 471

Comments » 21

captnjimbo writes:

Tough question without knowing the alternative financing plan.

lowus writes:

This question as it is worded will confuse many people, leading them to think that the STRP will cost them only $10,000. I think the question on the referendum should read: Should the city council consider a referendum that would cap all sewer assessments at $10,000 AND add the balance, what ever that figure may be, to our property taxes?

kristall writes:

The continuance of the STRP is bad for the Island and the 40% of the victims of the STRP don't want it. The City council knows this, but is locked into it to bring new users in so as to get the funds to repair and expand the broken down treatment plant. This newest scheme of a referendum to sugar coat continuance of this tragedy is born out of the pressure being brought on the group of 5 on the council. If RIGHT is to be the motivation, why not have 2 questions on the referendum, the $10,000.CAP as well as SHOULD THE STRP BE DISCONTINUED.

15yearsmarco writes:

I would like to see the NDN run a poll to see how many people are for the STRP.
We know the city will never let us vote on it.

rogerhall59 writes:

I echo the call for a poll on the STRP.

rlegan writes:

These NDN polls on highly charged political/environment questions are a waste of electronic ink. A poll done here will just have the ballet box stuffed by the anti-STRP activist.

15yearsmarco writes:

Randy, I don't know about you but when there is a poll on the NDN I only vote once so I see the correct results.
I guess the people for the STRP could stuff the box if they wanted.

patton1 writes:

Roger Hall; in case you were out of town at the time, as you frequently are; Marco Islanders voted for STRP during the last election cycle.

What part of our system of government do you not understand?

Lolala writes:

patton 1, what town was that election held in? The result of Marco Island's last election produced 3 new Councilmmembers that promised to either vote against the STRP or to delay it while the equity issues were resolved. It would appear it was you that was out of town during the last election.

15yearsmarco writes:

Patton, you must have had a special voting booth. The one I used did not have the option to vote on the STRP.

karenglaub writes:

No. 1, this still doesn't answer the question of whether the septic tanks are polluting, hence it is an unneeded program. No. 2, you cannot pull out the septic tanks because of unproven pollution, and then put in these deep injection wells to handle wastewater when they are now suspected of polluting the aquifiers. Wouldn't that defeat the purpose stated?

patton1 writes:

lolala and 15yearsmarco: you do not seem to understand the system of government we have.
we voted in our representatives who in turn manage the affairs of our city... if you are unhappy with the STRP decision, you can always run for office in 2008 and change it around or vote someone into office who represents your point of view and let him or her do it for you. but, do not expect a referendum on every decision the council makes. that is a different system of government.

gators910 writes:

so patton1 ,if tomorrow the city council voted to close all the marco island beaches for good with your logic that would mean we all wanted this to happen because we voted for the council..there was no vote for the strp by us the islanders ...

15yearsmarco writes:

Patton, I don't want to vote on were the city puts stop signs and traffic lights but I think with the $135,000,000 STRP they should find out if the majority of the people support the project before they okay it.

EdFoster writes:

The referendum misses the point. The real question is: "Why are we doing this?" Our waters are not polluted (City & State Data), the city has halved the water testing budget (from every month to every two months), sewers are the second worst polluters of the environment in the United States (EPA Data), there are 77,000 sewer spills each year in the United States (EPA Data), there are more spills on average on Marco Island than there are complaints about septic systems (FDEP and FDOH data). Before we worry about how to pay for the STRP, we ought to ask ourselves why we need the STRP at all! That's the real question ... and it has never been answered.

Ed Foster

patton1 writes:

EdFoster; the question you continue to ask was answered 40 (forty) times to date. The Council asked the question, did their research and approved the STRP over and over and over again.

You complained that the City Council did not listen to the citizens. Now, the Council wants to put the question of FAIRNESS on a referendum and and ask for the citizens input and YOU don't want them to do it! You can't have it both ways...
What part of the this don't you understand?
When did you say you were moving to NC?

sunnycity writes:

First, Pay your full assesment if you are not already hooked up to the system--don't make the rest of us pay your share. Second it will never be less expensive to build than it is today. Third, your property will be more valuable as a result of this. Don't make everyone else pay for your own riches. Think about it........ were is the rest of the money going to come from? Right, higher taxes on all of us!

Lolala writes:

sunnycity, fact is you and the rest of the folks using the sewer plant for more than 30 years never paid for it in the first place. Deltona gave it to you as a gift. The plant was likely paid for with government grants. The plan clearly identifies the tax increase as necessary to replace the plant you and those on the sewer used up. Your rates prior to the city purchasing it were never collected for maintenace. The new users will still be assessed to pay their share of the expansion, bringing the pipe to thier homes and the connection fees. This plan simply makes it fair. The ones that have a real gripe are non-resident snow birds. They will receive a tax hike without the ability to vote on it. That said, the deadbeat in and out of state investors, vacant lot owners and absentee landlords will finally pay their fair share. Sunnycity, you wouldn't be a vacant lot owner would you?

lutherdog writes:

Patton1, Do you currently live on Marco Island and does your property connect to sewers? We'd like to know. The STRP is being rammed down our throats, and the strange part is the desperation that the City is displaying to get everyone's money before the waste traeatment plant is even upgraded to handle the increased capacity. Where do you propose we put the additional sewage until the plant capacity is increased, in your canal?

happy6 writes:

patton1...i voted for mr popof and he renigged on his campaign promise at the first council vote after taking office....so just voting 'em in does not always work...then mr tucker flipped because he finally had to vote his opinion instead of the public opinion vote.

jillo203 writes:

Whine, Whine, Whine! The property owners against the sewer hookups haven't minded the increased value in their homes over the years, the least of which are valued well over 1 million dollars. They don't mind spending more than the sewerage will cost to have a pool put in their back yards or to buy a boat to park out on their dock, or a Mercedes in the garage.

What is the value of bringing your homes into compliance with the safe and modern amenities of a sewer system? Will it not increase the value of your property at least as much as the cost of the sewers?

If the less affluent people of Cape Coral saw the light, years ago,that their miles of canals were worth protecting, then surely the wealthier people of Marco can stop Whining and spend their money wisely.

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