User profile: Marcoite
Joined: Feb. 15, 2007
Comments posted: 52
Contact Marcoite (log-in required)
Comments by Marcoite
Page 1 of 5 | Next
Posted on May 3 at 12:29 p.m.
It would appear that no one really knows how to calculate the total cost of the sewer payment plans.
I would like to see the Finance department add the interest rates and compounding methods to the STRP portion of the of The City of Marco Island website. Sample calculations for the 20 year and deferred payment options would be necessary to help people understand because not everyone is good at this type of math.
Also, since some people do not use the internet, the Eagle could also publish the information.
On Sewer construction begins in Sheffield and Lamplighter districts on Marco
Posted on May 1 at 10:12 p.m.
Phlentyn_dorderch, It appears that "you" have no class.
Read your own message and decide.
3 of 3 people thought this was a good comment.
Posted on November 23 at 10:18 p.m.
Don, you like to say that it is about the money. It is .... because the money requests never stop.
I am not amused to read that the Septic Tank Replacement Program now needs an extra 1.8 million dollars. Is this the end of the extras or will we find out that additional plant components, for example, will cost an extra 2 million. Will someone familiar with the numbers total the cost of the project. How much more than 130 Million will we spend?
It seems that we need a 5 year plan showing how much money will be required to complete the Septic Tank Replacement Program including the upgrading of the associated utilities on Marco .....and fix the infrastructure, the bridges etc.
No more surprises!!!!
I believe that "the City" has this information. Perhaps Bill Harrison should give us an outline and the bottom line.
The council could request his presence and an accounting at the Monday meeting. This is not just about Bridges
On The Farmer File: If sewer program stops, some may raise stink over cost
2 of 2 people thought this was a good comment.
Posted on September 28 at 10:09 p.m.
I get the feeling that the council just gave the city Carte Blanche to implement any "half thought out idea" it could think of to reduce the H2S that we will breathe. How is the end result going to be checked?
I was much happier with the fact that Environ was monitoring... yes we were paying but at least they were under the microscope. Who will monitor the city?
Will the numbers all be buried under the sand at the campus?
Will someone respond to tell us that this is a better outcome.
Thank you.
2 of 3 people thought this was a good comment.
Posted on August 31 at 10:07 a.m.
http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/lmmb/tables/...
The federal EPA website above shows units of measure.
"Concentration, volume" shows the notation of "micrograms/liter as ug/l" and "milligrams/liter as mg/L".
There are 1,000 micrograms in a milligram so the reading of 5.3 mg S/L would be 5,300 micrograms/liter.
Perhaps Leslie Williams can tell us who asked her to provide the correction... the Marco News editor, the FDEP, or the city?
1 of 2 people thought this was a good comment.
Posted on August 31 at 7:26 a.m.
Something is wrong with the situation surrounding the FDEP chemical analysis report... it was officially certified. Was it incorrect?
2 of 3 people thought this was a good comment.
Posted on August 31 at 7:16 a.m.
This article starts with the following note:
"Thursday's story about water test results from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection erroneously listed the sulfide measurements in milligrams per liter. The measurements from the DEP were actually in micrograms per liter."
The FDEP water quality report clearly states that the reading for Sulfide as was "5.3 mg/l". It is hard to believe that the FDEP would not use the correct notation for micrograms/liter which would be abbreviated as mcg/l or ug/l.
View the report:
Posted on August 30 at 11:06 p.m.
I think that the subtitle should have said:
Marco would swap a piece of land off the island for the property.
2 of 3 people thought this was a good comment.
Posted on August 30 at 10:56 p.m.
The more I think about it, the Environ contract at $58,000 will not help us if the DEP is going to take air samples. Also, the Environ report will be useless in late October when we get the results.
Let's cancel the negotiations or get another firm that can give us daily readings.
Page 1 of 5 | Next
Posted on May 4 at 6:53 p.m.
Thank you Byrone. i would support an Eagle article and I agree that a third party verification would add legitimacy to the reporting.
On Sewer construction begins in Sheffield and Lamplighter districts on Marco