Tucker headed the group that recomended the law firm with the travel expense knowing he only had a few months left, now he comes in with a lower bid when he is off the council and those he backed are on it? Sounds like a set up to me. Do these people think we are all stupid?

Here we go again. What's next, Minozzi for City Manager?...

Captobvious1black
I am sure no one would ever mistake you for stupid. Crazy with unsubstantiated suspicion and a really really loose grasp on realty....but stupid I just don't see how someone would think that.

Not everything is a mass conspiracy, cut back on the TV and movies.

Isn't this incestuous?

Good Grief--Not Again!!

marcogirl: If it is not a conspiracy it must be a series of coincidental circumstances. Marco Island has way too many of those to ignore. After a while patterns and trends evolve and become more evident to casual observers. Eventually outsiders become interested and their perceptions develop into unsubstantiated beliefs. The time will come when, coincidental circumstances will trump the unsubstantiated and the guilty will stumble into the light. Keep watching the reality show that has been playing on Marco Island for the past three years and you may yet see that trees are what make up the forest you are staring at. Even the largest and oldest trees in that forest will eventually be vulnerable to the gathering winds. Encourage Tucker to take the job, who knows? His appointment may actually speed up the process and bring this show to an end. Whatever his motives, you can bet this will be just one more chapter for those of us who are watching.

There you conspiracy therorist go again. Why not ask some questions first like how much can Tuckers firm save the city? If the council can save the taxpayers money why not at least look into it?

Beowulf and esplanade2,

Go back to whatever northern state you came from.

Among other things, Councilor Tucker was notorious for sleeping during council meetings. So if he becomes city attorney, he can make big bucks as he snoozes.

Shouldn't City Attorneys know the law? How can a man who bragged about deleting e-mails from constituents by the dozen be considered for the City Attorney position? He encouraged the persecution of Chuck Kiester for deleting e-mails but exempts himself from the same law.

Furthermore, his firm's business is based on Marco Island much of which (all of which?) is related to development. Will he not have a continual conflict-of-interest problem?

To paraphrase the man: "I retch at the very thought of him as City Attorney."

I think you need to ask the question behind the question. Can Mr. Tucker even serve as City Attorney?
When I first read this article I thought I remembered that under the Charter you couldn't work for the City for two year after you left office. I thought this was so there would be an Election between you and getting paid by the Government. (So you cant hire yourself)
You know what I did? I looked it up in the Charter. 'Oh facts' that will never work on a Blog Posting.

CHARTER – CITY OF MARCO ISLAND
Section 3.05 - General Provisions.
(4) No former council member shall hold any compensated city position until four years after the expiration of the term for which the council member was elected.

Now unless the Council changes the Charter, which they cant do without a referendum, or Glenn has a time machine he cant be City Attorney for another 3 years and 8 months.

Whew! What a relief, OldMarcoMan!

Forgot to say there's obviously more than one law (in this case a Charter Provision) E. Glenn Tucker doesn't know about!

What part of section 3.05 (4) of the City Charter does Attorney Tucker not understand?

(4) No former council member shall hold any compensated city position until four years after the expiration of the term for which the council member was elected

Echo Enman ??? Isnt that what I just said? Try reading before you write.

Of course, E. Glenn could argue that he slept through his last four years as councilman so they don't count. He only woke up now and then to bellow at citizens speaking at the podium and he never read e-mails he didn't like. He had that Archie Bunker-like quality of knowing what he knew before he knew it. Ah! "Those Were the Days". You've got a lot of egg to wipe off your face Mr. Tucker. Couldna happen to a nicer guy.

Wow, this is a landmark day; we all seem to agree on something. For slightly different reasons but it seems we all agree.

According to the Charter it is very clear that Tucker cannot be legal council for the city. Too bad though, he knows more about the city than anyone. Regardless of his stances on issues as a councilor, he would make a very good attorney for the city. Not to mention his firm would save the city a lot of money.

Keeping perfectly working Septic systems of our many retired residents would have saved money also but that didn,t matter to the majority of our residents in the last election. At least in this case, our Charter answers this matter. Since Tucker recommended the present City Attourney, is there a conflict that he now wants to replace the person he recommended?

Employing Tuckers firm is not employing Tucker which may be a loophole.

The City Attorney is not a City "position". It is a Contract position with the City. There are no City benefits, etc. I am not certain if that falls within the confines of the Charter. I guess we had better ask the City Attorney.
Ed Issler

Wow. Let's ask the present contracted City law firm if they can be replaced by a Marco firm who happen to employ a former councilor who headed the committe who recommended them for the contract. If the City Attorney is not a "position" and does not fall within the confines of the Charter, why wasn't the cheaper Marco firm hired in the first place? Conflict of interest issues? Probably. That's why the Charter addresses the issue. Councilors, present or immediately past, shouldn't have a crack at jobs (or "contracts") they have (or recently had) an influence over. I suspect that was the intent of the Charter provision and suspect any attempt to loophole around it will be met with justifiable public disdain.

Archie Bunker for City Attorney! Edith for Chief of Police! Meathead (Power to the People) for City Manager! Gloria for City Clerk! Ah, what a city we'll have!

Maybe Issler is right, why should the people of Marco Island believe Glen Tucker would adhere to the spirit and will of the Charter. He is an attorney and we know that profession is always trying to find sneaky ways around rules and such. Position or Contract, doesn't make any difference to us street folks. They both work for the City so we see them as employees. Only a slick attorney or someone trying to game the system, would feel otherwise.

Well, I just watched the last part of the city council meeting. Tucker’s butt-boy Popoff wanted to add an item to the next meeting agenda—consideration of Rhodes, Tucker, & Garretson for the city lawyer position. Final decision (6-1, Kiester dissenting) was to get the current city attorney to render a a legal opinion, just like gosixpack prophesied!

Avenger, I am sure about two things:

1. Popoff doesn't like Tucker (Tucker bad mouthed him on a business deal)

2. Whoever you are I am sure you don't have the guts to talk trash to Rob's face.

Finally, six councilors voted to hear his plan. They put their emotions aside and voted to see if Tuckers firm can save the city some It. If it violates the charter, end of story. Too bad for Tucker.

ejburger, Popoff is the biggest pansy on the Council. He does what he is told. He is used by the strong to do their bidding for him. He has never had an original thought and always goes with the city on every proposal they bring to him. You and I have never seen him vote with the minority on anything. Where the wind blows goes Popoff.

Dana Souza for Mayor!

Maybe Glenn will bring the pictures of people planting the asbestos at the Glon property to his job interview.

Talk about collusion. Quits a civic job and as luck would have it... the city needs an attorney at an undisclosed fee. What a coincidence!!! SOMETHING STINKS!!!

You are not watching the same meetings I am if you think Rob is a pansy, like Mr. Burger I would love to see any of you cowards have the courage to say these things to his face. At Mondays meeting he voted in the minority to not purchase property. Too many times to state but one memorial vote that shows he has more character than Avenger and Fossil combined was when he voted against the city, Tucker, Minozzi and Trotter to not accellerate the STRP. Once against you feeble minded cowards have selective memory...under anonymous blogs. How brave of you!

Jon Chamberland

As I recall, Popoff voted TO accelerate the STRP on one part of the Island AFTER he voted NOT to accelerate it on another section...

Point is your arguement is ridiculous; he sides with no one. I think he gets a lot of pleasure voting on controversial topics to irritate people like you. Tucker can't overcome the charter but like any citizen he deserves the right to be heard. Like most naysayers you have selective hearing and selective memory.

Ha--talk about selective memory:

From Aug 20, 2007 City Council meeting article:

“The sewer issue was proposed for discussion a second time Monday night after it failed to pass at the Aug. 6 meeting when Councilor Rob Popoff was away. Popoff was expected to give the go-ahead to move up the two sewer assessment districts originally set for construction in 2011, effectively beginning construction in 2008.
As expected, Popoff did vote Monday night to accelerate. However, his vote was not enough to get past a majority composed of councilors Terri DiSciullo, Ted Forcht, Chuck Kiester and Glenn Tucker.”
…

"She (Councilor Terri DiSciullo) ended her comments by imploring Popoff to vote against the acceleration, as he did with the Lamplighter and Sheffield districts."

Full story at:
http://marcoeagle.com/news/2007/Aug/2...

Avenger must be Foster becasue he takes information and twists it to fit his needs.

The only string pulling was Godfrey Davies telling Kiester what to do and everyone knows that. It's amazing good ole Chuck can make any decisions at all now that Davies is gone.

BF_lo:

1. Thanks for the compliment—I think Ed Foster is smart and writes very well.

2. I didn’t “twist” the information. We just disagree on Popoff’s motivation for his action.

3. You’re employing the standard technique you use when things get too close to revealing the machinations really going on behind the scenes—changing the subject.