Posted on August 8 at 10:27 a.m.

I'm looking at the picture and it looks to me that the south side of the existing t-groins, where the road is, could soon wash away. Has there been an engineering study done recently that estimates the time when the whole stretch of land shown in the picture disappears under water? Looks to me that we are facing another Coconut Island situation. Can we stop Mother Nature? Will the environmentalists stop us? If I lived in that stretch of Hideaway Beach, I'd bail.

On Marco to loan Hideaway Beach $1.6 million

Posted on July 3 at 4:58 p.m.

I may be mistaken, but I believe property taxes are deductible on our income tax returns. So, why would anyone want to move "legitimate" City expenses from property taxes and bury them as a surcharge on our utility bills which are not tax deductible? Seems like a "shell game" to me.

On Alternative revenue sources may be answer to Marco's property tax shortfall

1 of 1 people thought this was a good comment.

Posted on May 30 at 7:13 a.m.

That's what happens when you are "Skylarking"!!!

On Vehicle crashes and burns

1 of 1 people thought this was a good comment.

Posted on May 9 at 7:38 a.m.

I believe that the folks living on the East side of Collier Blvd. between Spruce and Maple were not expecting a "Yellow Brick Road" to lead them to the beach, just a path would be fine.

On Council increases reuse water rates, tables beach access

4 of 4 people thought this was a good comment.

Posted on February 16 at 4:48 p.m.

I believe that there is a line item in the operating budget for road repaving. I also believe there is a schedule for the streets that are to be repaved. I would prefer to have the operating budget road repaving schedule updated/revised to accommodate the sewer line digging rather than tacking on a surcharge (8%?) to our water bills. I think that this will in the long run be extremely expensive to the property owners and muddies the water (no pun intended)when shown on the water bills. What on earth does road repaving have to do with water rates when the repaving could be paid for out of a revised operating budget that has that line item in it.

On Council proposes plan to finance wastewater plant

Posted on February 14 at 7:56 a.m.

The interest rate on the Revenue Bonds appears to be 8%. That seems awfully high to me. I think I understand the discussion on the options relating to funding the capacity plant expansion requirements, but when the road repaving subject is introduced, it seems to muddy the water. These sound like two separate issues.

On Marco council to discuss wastewater plant funding options