marconews.com Accounts

Here is the potential road map brought about by local reporting out of Cincinnati. Bear in mind it is a FOX affiliate to those that cannot separate the story from the affiliation. To give credit where it is due, at least it is being presented to the public for consumption:

http://www.fox19.com/story/22380127/r...

Wow! Thank God I guess this is the conclusive end to this story because....? I think NOT. If you read the NY Daily News story dated May 15th, the original source is McClatchy reported on May 12th with more detail and review:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14...#.UZavocqucZn

And interestingly the article ends with the following:

"Traditionally, State Department officials have depended on the State Department’s own Diplomatic Security Service, local police and military forces and security contractors to secure embassies around the world. U.S. military personnel at embassies consist usually of Marines whose job it is to guard the perimeter of a compound and to protect classified documents and equipment inside. It is rare that U.S. forces would be called upon to guard embassy personnel traveling outside embassy grounds.

Any increase in U.S. military force would have required State Department approval. It’s unknown if Stevens might have passed along Ham’s offer to the State Department and been turned down, or whether he believed that the security team Ham offered would not provide the kind of security he needed.

Officials familiar with the exchanges between Ham and Stevens said they did not know whether Ham offered any other support than the security team.

“It was a brief conversation,” the defense official said."

So please, let the investigation go where the testimony leads including future testimony by Gen. Ham if brought before the committee based on information reported by McClatchy whose motto is "Truth to Power"

But then again, we are just sick SOB on a witch hunt.

"All will be forgotten. Any takers."

Sounds eerily the same as Mr. Carney, White House press secretary, to those that pursued the Benghazi story more than 8 months ago.

I will have a drink, and toast those who seek the truth for families that lost their loved ones in that organized attack by terrorists. Those folks did not accept the government claim it was the result of a video by an American to stir anti-American fervor.

What I will predict, the lies, yes lies will NOT be swallowed whole by the mainstream media going forward, simply because Mr. Obama says it is so.

Excellent update. And quite informative.

For comparison.....

Here is the official posting of the repair to the bridge and interestingly it was posted on the same date the repairs begin:

http://www.cityofmarcoisland.com/inde...

I may be misinformed but I thought the first lie that was propagated and repeated was the one initiated on Sunday news programs from a US representative of the UN making the claim it was an uprising due to a film made by a US citizen mocking the Islamic culture. And the "lie" was continued from the President on down in subsequent days.

"In the days and weeks following the attack, President Obama and one senior administration official stated that the video was an excuse for the attack. Two days after the attack, CNN reporter Sarah Aarthun quoted an anonymous senior U.S. administration official: "It was not an innocent mob. The video or 9/11 made a handy excuse and could be fortuitous from their perspective but this was a clearly planned military-type attack."[105] In his September 18 appearance on The Late Show with David Letterman, President Obama said that "extremists and terrorists used (the anti-Muslim YouTube video) as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies."[12] In his Univision Town Hall appearance on September 20, President Obama said that the "natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests."[106] The U.S. government later had to retract these statements when it became increasingly apparent that there was no protest outside the consulate in Benghazi and that the violence had little to do with a video.[17]:56 A later report from an independent review board concluded "there was no protest prior to the attacks."[107] According to Joan Neuhaus Schaan of the James Baker Institute, "The primary reason for the focus on the video was likely to cast the Americans’ deaths as an unfortunate and unforeseen incident resulting from an inflamed crowd. That video story redirected the debate from scrutinizing our Libyan policies that were supporting known extremists, to a debate centered on blasphemy."[104]

Reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Ben...

Now we could debate the "lie" but I would be more concerned why the "lie" was the first piece of information given to the public by the government given all the covert operations in Libya that the US government manages to gather information.

I would have expected, as a minimum, a sanitized comment from our government like: it is under review and we are investigating. Instead we got a pretty definite conclusion that it was an uprising based on a specific reaction to a anti-Muslim video.

Quite a statement by the government,,,,,, and the press is NOT skeptical?

I could be wrong because I first heard the statement while watching Fox Sunday instead of NBC although the statement or "lie"was consistent across all Sunday news programs.

Augghhhhhh! This is getting as pathetic as the left.

Let's start with employer provided health insurance which you ascribe to organized labor unions. The real start and growth of employer sponsored health insurance:

"Offering insurance policies to employee groups not only benefited insurers, but also benefited employers. During World War II, wage and price controls prevented employers from using wages to compete for scarce labor. Under the 1942 Stabilization Act, Congress limited the wage increases that could be offered by firms, but permitted the adoption of employee insurance plans. In this way, health benefit packages offered one means of securing workers."

http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/th...

You can maintain your Republican vs. Democrat dichotomy, but the reality is America is constantly giving up its freedoms including freedom of choice against government subsidized goodies which distort the marketplace, as well as unions that do not seek lower cost for same care or alternatives in which its members may be willing to assume the risk given their personal profile and taking the savings as additional income.....

I could go on but you have bought into the union's perspective that it has solutions for labors inequities for the 21st century. Yet I learned how the public employee's (teachers) union in Wisconsin actually prey on taxpayers in providing its members a higher cost insurance though a dominant health insurer (WEA Trust). Sounds like a nice cozy deal that you would ascribe to "corporatocracy" but can also apply to unions.

The devil is in the details:

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/a...

In the end I believe unions will fall prey to their own trap. Central power consolidation and collectivism! And eventually eat their members and the hand that feeds them, the taxpayer.

For perspective, here is how Dana Souza handled waste when in charge of crews removing all the debris from the roadways and city properties in the aftermath of tropical storm Fay in 2008:

http://www.marconews.com/news/2008/au...

Now, ask yourself, is there a difference in style of leadership: direct and efficient vs bored.

So again, I ask: how long does it take the city to remove a damaged flagpole that was put there by the city?

Folks, pay attention, we had an efficient city manager that understood details and he is now Director of Parks and Recreation of Greenville, SC. In his two months as interim city manager, he was able to focus on the problems that plagued this island. He understood details!!!!!

PAY ATTENTION!

Excerpt of city manager:

“When I came on board, I had lots to do and it was exciting. Now it’s pretty much routine the same thing I was doing yesterday, I’ll be doing tomorrow,” he said, reached Friday in his office at City Hall. “I get bored easily.”

Wow! I guess this explains why a damaged flagpole can sit in a ROW at a public park for an extended period of time. I guess boredom has its own set of consequences.

I do not know who to address this boring request: Mr Pinter for allowing a ROW in a park as a staging or holding zone or a city manager that is bored with running the city.

From my perspective this may explain why this city operates the way it does, essentially without a daily plan! Even though we have a grandiose Midtown District plan.

Folks, this damaged flagpole is indicative of sub-par standards of management, when a discarded flagpole cannot be properly disposed.

Thank God the county picks up my trash twice a week, on a routine basis (some would say a boring schedule).... because the city cannot dispose of a single damaged flagpole.

My only rationale in understanding the city decision: its too boring to manage? So lets just park it here in a park.

Oh! And we all complain we have a parking problem, yet the city can park a flagpole under the revised management of Public Works now responsible for Parks and Rec maintenance set by Mr. Riviere.

I think we may need a new city manager with an understanding of how parks are managed, because the last place one would dispose of a damaged flagpole would be an open park.

Speaking of city managers, the last one I thought had a clue was a Parks and Rec director given the responsibilities as interim city manager, Dana Souza, and we know his fate. I believe he would have a plan in dealing with a damaged flagpole: NO DISPOSING OF WASTE IN A PUBLIC PARK!

"Misguided anti-gun activists need to educate themselves in regard to The Battle of Athens"

I am hopeful that Americans and students of American history grasp the color of professors, not of skin but of content of history lessons taught in schools of higher learning.

In keeping with Marco Island and Southwest Florida as a golfing destination, I offer a hyperlink to an article, titled "The Golf Shot Heard Round the Academic World" by David Feith:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001...

Given the philanthropic nature of this town and county, I urge a review our own alma mater's "ideological pillars" because they may be limiting the future of America by teaching history as a means or progression of goals and objectives.

It may be time to challenge the "intelligentsia" for limited view and lack of scope.

Is the city listening to this committee?

MAINTENANCE!!!!!!!!!!!

Let me offer another example brought to the attention by a resident who recently purchased a home adjacent to Plummer Park.

Why is there a damaged flagpole laying in a ROW for over four months? And my understanding this is under the management of Mr. Pinter.

Is this another "efficient" staging area or holding area until a decision can be made as to disposition of a damaged pole?

RECOMMENDATION: ROWs are NOT to be used as staging areas, or zones for temporary storage regardless of future disposition...especially in parks!

Consider the implications of safety standards addressing a flagpole laying in a ROW. Although, it is a fun play item as children try to peek inside. Perhaps it is the newest idea for a playset in a ROW.

God help us all!

If the basis for expansion of the Mackle Park Community Center is to accommodate all the interior activities both existing and planned, I simply have to ask: Why does a Community Center hosting an array of activities need to be located in an open air park with playing fields, walking paths, spray park, dog runs, lake etc. This is an expansion for interior activities but Mackle Park is primarily an open air park?

I understand the role of parks for recreational activities, but recreational activities now include culinary classes, card games, dancing classes, etc. Geeze I could do these things in a vacant commercial strip mall, with ample parking located on main roads in a commercial zone.

I bet it would be a lot less expensive proposal to bolster the city profit/loss projections!

We can discuss the "needs" of government provided activities, but a great commentary was recently submitted, and I just need to pass it on.....to rebut the a-la-carte activities now to be furnished by local governments within the confines of a new building.

http://www.marcoislandflorida.com/app...|newswell|text|Home|p

And please! Do we really need an interior running track and gymnasium when there are existing facilities that typically provide these items for children in schools or commercially operated gyms for adults?

And the weirdest part: the city is going to justify the interior expansion based on revenue projections and profit/loss evaluation. Sounds like a government operation pretending to be a commercial entity.

Hey! I have an idea, how about we house all these inside activities in the newly resurrected Midtown District revitalization plan and simply start in a vacant store front. How's that for government putting its money where its mouth is.

And guess what? There is park in the Midtown District, with an open field in the same area that you could walk to. Hey this would conform to the pedestrian friendly atmosphere the city is promoting for this area.

Never mind, they want a hotel near the park.

God Help Us All!

Nice!

I watched the council meeting and the estimates provided were akin to a salesman convincing me to sell my 2006 Porsche 911 for a new Ferrari on a maintenance cost basis.

I find the use of "minimum level" to describe response capabilities of the Coast Guard and county, is quite nuanced.

If you haven't read the most recent rescue and search associated with water, they were successfully performed by the Coast Guard Axillary and Collier County. Even the most recent search of a victim that was found in the canal, was a county helicopter. Quite impressive for providing a "minimal level" of service.

And the most obscene, please tell me why some cities share resources ie. Ft. Myeers, Estero, Bonita Springs for water rescue operations, yet an ALS rescue boat provide by the county at the Isles of Capris is considered minimal. And if I recall the public discussion the new $400K boat will be housed on a trailer on San Marco Blvd.

The amount of monies Marco Island is spending on equipment for water rescue operations exceeds similar communities by a factor of 2-4X. And in other communities I have the pleasure of spending a fair amount of time, with commercial cruise water traffic and vacationers, i.e Newport RI, the disparity is overwhelming. The goal in that city is quick response time with inflatables and jet skis. And RI with Narragansett Bay is quite a recreational gem, and all the municipalities that line the bay, NONE has a rescue boat that even approaches the cost of $400K, even considering commercial fishing and shelling operations. The Coast Guard and state provide the equipment and resources that match the specifications Marco Island felt was "needed" for water rescue. If you believe in efficient government operations, then you would expect "minimum levels" at the local level supported by county and state with more sophisticated and larger capabilities.

And for Mr. Murphy to categorize the Coast Guard's primary responsibility to Homeland Security is quite a distortion of the CG's mission statement. Simply because the Coast Guard is now found in the organizational chart of Homeland Security did NOT change the mission of the Coast Guard as it applies to rescue operaitons, it merely changed the reporting structure.

And for a final thumbnail sketch, I expect local municipalities to provide "minimal level" of services that are supplemented and backed up by county and state agencies with more sophisticated and far ranging equipment.

In your world the county helicopter that recently found the body of a woman in the canal was minimal level.

Sorry, I disagree with your comments on a host of fronts.

What I do not understand, the folks that wanted a dog park raised more than $50K, vs the $20K the folks (P&R Foundation) + $17K Island CC donation that want an expanded community center. Note: the dog park was a $50K project and the community center is $4.3M. So by my math, I would have expected complete funding by the foundation? Or at least more than the dog folks in convincing the park haters of their commitment.

Am I missing something? And to claim this expansion is for Marco Island residents is quite a stretch, considering the make-up of Tommy Barfield Middle School and visitors and programming.

Why are we wrestling over a community center, when the big need is Smokehouse Bay bridge. I guess we have lost our way, AGAIN!

And to 1P, I believe it is intended (wink, wink) for the school, but surprisingly I did not see Ms. Watt at the podium, however, the program leaders were in full uniform.

The Y was represented but was very careful not to ruffle any feathers. This is a time to fly high and wide but we live in a real world, where projects are promoted on needs and quite frankly, if you stack the programing list with every conceivable learning program, I guess you can re-qualify it as a learning institution. If fact, the city is turning away programs due to limited space. WOW! All that revenue loss!

I was hoping the city manager was going to rescue Mr. Galiana during his presentation, but I believe Mr. Riviere was just as convinced of his revenue projections.

It was painful to watch, and Mr. Honig and Mr. Magel were trying their best to dissuade Mr. Galiana from promoting the revenue argument. Mr. Sacher had to instruct the crowd as to the gross misrepresentation; but Mr. Galiana was convinced, he could justify his tables. It was truly sad.

I believe Mr. Milk could have done better, but against a pro like Mr. Murphy for the fire boat, it is quite a hurdle.

All I may suggest is send it to a referendum, and have the city propose the best plan based on need only, and quit shooting for the moon. They must have been optimistic after seeing Mr. Murphy convince both past and current council that a $400K fire boat was the best solution to maintaining water rescue operations, in light of the crafts in outlying communities and county.

I will say this in defense of Mr. Milk, on my list of city requests, a $400K fire boat would have lower standing, than addressing the needs of the community center. Please address your needs!!!!!

Mr. Honig:

I am interested to understand why number 3 is a high priority in light of number 1.

Was that not apparent by comments made by those that wish to expand the Community Center? Mr. Meyer was quite clear when he stated publicly that, "the fire dept got its rescue boat" and then went on to lament why can't the city support a community center that is used by its citizens. And I heard from council that safety is the highest priority, but no one wishes to consider the existing resources available or less costly options to securing our safety.

What I perceive is a city that is managed without any regard of resources that are provided by the county, such as a fire ALS rescue boat sitting in dock on the other side of the river on Isle of Capri or Collier county sheriff office. But the past council supported the purchase of the most expensive rescue boat in Collier County and the new council confirmed it. Now that was a shoddy analysis, given the cost other communities spend to address the SAME responsibility!!!!!!!!!!!!

Number 1, 2 and 3 priority should be financial management and software.

Your #1 and #3 priorities are extensions of director's self promotion. And honestly, some departments are better at promoting their cause with the Fire Department under Mr. Murphy the master of all. And that is what I witness. Just review the Mr. Pinter requests for capital projects vs Mr. Murphy and as of last night Mr. Milk.

If you really wish to impress the folks with your prowess and experience, you must ask yourself, why is an ambulance service run under Mr. Murphy so important? If you want to increase the cost of ambulance service then by all means get the city to provide the service. In fact, Mr. Murphy's claimed that the county would provide another EMS vehicle if the city would reopen station 51 on Elkam Circle several years ago. How is that going, the city provided the monies to restore Station 51, now is there a second County EMS vehicle? or is that now by the wayside?

I find it interesting Mr. Murphy can convince the city council to give him what he wants but NOT the county.

If you are truly a steward of efficient government operations I would widen my view, because some fire districts outside of Marco Island are consolidating while others are trying to maintain their fiefdoms. In fact, I can hear Mr. Murphy humming this modified quatrain:

Fee! Fie! Foe! Fum!
I smell the blood of a Citizen.
Be he 'live, or be he dead,
I'll grind his bones to make my bread.

"With an expanding statewide law enforcement crackdown into racketeering at strip center gaming parlors and Florida out a lieutenant governor, the House took the first step on Friday to shutter the adult arcade industry by further prohibiting the electronic machines and devices they use."

Need to broaden our horizons......to include the political arena:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Governme...#.UUMnmlEk7PY.facebook

Wize:

Appreciate your comments and agree wholeheartedly, but I am truly confused as to the direction of this island as it attempts to mold specific districts given the highly planned character established in is development under Deltona Corp then transferred to MICA to now under the management of a city manager and elected council

Consider, as an example, Tract K. I watched this property considered as a site for a school, a recreational park, a solar power generating plant, to its current condition as a preservation area/eagle sanctuary in a lease agreement with the Collier County, the property holder and a non-profit citizens group wishing to preserve a nesting site. As a result, tourists now visit the site adding to the allure of this island.

Now, the city is attempting to entice hotel operations by passing an ordinance (11-05) to include the transfer of density credits to the Midtown District, to accommodate hotel operations inland.

The allure of Marco Island is the beach and weather it affords for outside activities, providing a quality for residents and tourists/visitors alike. Interestingly, the city felt the need to expand density transfers to the Midtown district, instead of maintaining the prior development ordinance to exchange density credits amongst waterfront commercial properties only- to now allowing density be transferred inland away from the amenities which attract tourist (beaches/waterfront).

So in adapting to growth, why would one want to encourage hotel growth inland when the prior comprehensive plans allowed for density transfer on waterfront properties.

This is where I do not understand the pathway the city is promoting in redeveloping the Midtown area; especially considering the fact that the city purchased waterfront land in Midtown to develop Veterans Park with the vision to create a cultural center.

So why would one want to re-intensify the area with inland hotels when visitors really want beach access. This amounts to encouraging growth at the expense of quality.

And if you review most presentations the city provides regarding Midtown, the emphasis is never on the residents, it is on promoting business. And that is where they dilute the program by diminishing the role of residents.

A good article I recently read:

http://www.lincolninst.edu/pubs/424_T...
of-Development-Rights-for-Balanced-Development-

My comments are not to simply be antagonistic, but to encourage CRITICAL review. And honestly, I sometimes do not understand why they pursue options or ordinances that run counter to promoting and enhancing the jewels on this island for the benefit of residents as well as visitors/tourists.

K:

I agree Obama set the sequester up as a means to get the Republicans to compromise down the road because of the deep cuts in defense. He was so confident in this tact that he promised to veto any proposal or amendment that would change the sequester he proposed. So off it went to Congress, was passed and now, as 1P has stated in a previous post, Mr. Boehmer got 98% of what he wanted.

So why is Obama now chastising the Republican party? Because Mr. Obama thought he could get the moderate wing to go with him as the deadline approached and further reduce the power of the opposing party.

Mr. Obama and Mr. Boehmer have to deal with the consequences. At this point (polls), Obama has the edge, but as the sequester unrolls I believe the sequester will not have any impact because from a business and accounting perspective, it amount to less than 3% cut. And the Republican party would be dust if they did not stand ground. Mr. Obama created a scenario with no wiggle room which is a trademark of his rhetoric.

Obama may have undercut his position by overstating the dire consequences in press conferences and public appeals, with his show of first responders as a backdrop, his claim of air travel disturbances......

It will interesting to see as it unwinds... but a 3% cut in any venue is a pittance but liberals will scream at any cut in spending and from your perspective Americans are under taxed relative to Europeans.

So my position: this is nothing but hype and Mr Obama may have been outwitted by the dimwit, Mr. Boehmer.

But one thing I have learned, I will NOT wager any prediction because as you say so often, most Americans are dimwitted and/or ideological. With such an adoring crowd, Mr. Obama works his magic. And with the entertainment news network to broadcast his message, he may win out in the end because he never reveals what is behind the curtain:

Economic hardship to those who are most economically challenged. And what did I recently read:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/b...

This will impact the lower income class disproportionately......... putting more pressure on Federal aid programs to gain more support for big government. So perhaps Mr. Obama is planning it this way? And I am the dimwit.

The lies continue from our illustrious leader

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-5...

America WAKE UP!

I believe we have the unfolding of a putz!!!!!!!

Nice!

Obama offered the idea, Congress passed it, and Obama signed it into law.

And now he wants too............

I have been accused of being too wordy in my comments, so I intentionally omitted Obama and his administration because it IS the entertainment news media.

Very impressed to hear the references to studies showing the relationship of gun control policy and actual crime. Including studies using data collected by the federal government.

Its refreshing to know local and county law enforcement leadership understands gun control with a clear and wide perspective, without the emotional trimmings being offered in the entertainment news media.

Collier Blvd will be a congested highway, it is the plan that has been envisioned by the county to handle the influx of tourists, snowbirds and folks who are coming south.

However, Marco Islanders, which include full time residents can make their voices heard. Just consider the density transfer ordinance that the city of Marco Island passed last year to encourage the development of hotels in the Midtown district. It was to serve as an initial foray into transferring waterfront commercial unused density credits to a land locked Midtown district in the heart of the city.

Now if you want my take, we are taking unused density that was to be used on the waterfront and transferred it to the center of town on Collier Blvd. Imagine, increasing density in the center of town on Collier Blvd.

In essence, Marco Island is encouraging more development in the heart of the city on the busiest street on this island.

Well I am not a sophisticated land planner or traffic analyst, but all I can say is good luck with making it a pedestrian friendly area.

See in my world, density has impact.

The 5 Councillors that voted for density transfer, of which three running for re-election were NOT successful!

I believe we are making an impact.

"Since 80 percent of the county’s ad valorem income is provided through residential taxes, the county is actively working to diversify its tax base. By creating a better business climate and attracting new businesses, Ochs said, the tax burden could be spread over a greater number of payers."

I read this several times, and I am trying to understand how the tax burden could be spread over a greater number of payers of which 80% are residents, YET we must attract more business?

Remember Jackson Labs?

Folks, pay close attention when government leaders want to expand, they generally mean subsidies, and a whole bunch of gimmies.

Just keep in mind 80% is paid by residences, and yet I have heard this story that the county MUST attract more business.

WATCH OUT!!!!!!!!!!

Disclaimer: I am a small business owner and consider myself a job creator, but not at the expense of residents or to simply justify more government programs such as incentives to draw more business at the expense of residents.

Pay attention!

"This whole thing was just a show by people with too much time on their hands and to much money in the bank. Our time is better spent being a good neighbor or friend to someone in need."

I believe we can do both and with so much time on our hands some folks like to confront the media and the current administration from turning a tragedy into a anti-gun demonstration.

And no conspiracy theory in my bag, but I do believe the 2nd Amendment should be taken seriously:

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-poli...

But the media wishes to portray the 2nd Amendment under this perspective:

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-poli...

This article, "The Real Rationale for the 2nd Amendment, That Right-Wingers Are Totally Ignorant About" is a poor attempt in assessing history, by totally disregarding the genesis of the Bill of Rights. The author's thesis from the onset is NOT supported by the conversations that led to the inclusion of the Bill of Rights. Just Google George Mason for a start.

George Mason, one of the Virginians who refused to sign the Constitution because of its lack of a Bill of Rights asked in conference: "Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people."

The 2nd Amendment was to protect the states rights and prevent the federal government from overreach. The framers understood the power of central government control as well as the powerlessness and negative impact of no central governance hence the dissolution of the Confederation of States to what is now the law of the land.

Fast forward to today: if the current administration was really interested in addressing the issue via the bully pulpit, he could start with enforcing and reviewing laws that deal with felonies committed with a gun. To address the problem we must at least aim and focus on the felon.

But I know the retort, its guns that kill. Really?

I will applaud any organization no matter how zealous, if it elevates the discussion beyond the media's portrayal. Are we not American's that can engage our representatives on a host of issues? Or will we now have to have a resolution regarding the 1st Amendment to combat political correctness now permeating this country under such headings as sensitivity training.