Posted on October 30 at 9:52 p.m.

25years
I don't disagree with the outcome of some of the cities past adventures and the intent of the committee is not necessarily to take over the electric distribution on the island. Even Rony Joel, City Public Works Director, thinks there will not be much savings to the rate payer if the city took over.
The intent is to reduce electric costs to the City govt and to its citizens.
LCEC is a monopoly and monopolies in general tend to get fat with waste and tend to look after the needs of management, not their rate payers. Where are "our" LCEC member dividend shares from the last two years?
Why has the cost of undergrounding more than tripled in the past 3 years? LCEC yas yet to explain the increase.
No one is saying that LCEC isn't "reputable, honest and reliable" what ever those words mean these days. The concerns are is LCEC running at minimum cost? What excessive overheads are they putting into the recent prices they have given City for undergrounding? Competitive prices for similar work elsewhere are half of what LCEC has quoted. There must be an "honest and reputable?reason for that!

On Controversies, challenges continue in Marco’s study of electric utility takeover

Posted on October 30 at 8:47 a.m.

The intent of the committee and study is to find out what options we have to reduce the cost of electricity to the city and residents. The city spends over 3 million dollars a year for electric purchases. The island residents and businesses purchase more than 10X that each year.LCEC is a monopoly and like any monopoly, spends money how they feel and not always in the interest of their customers/owners. While LCEC has in the past returned excess profits to their customers/owners, they haven't done that in the past two years. They reportedly made a profit of almost two million dollars last year from sales to Marco Island.Marco is a densely populated area with heavy residential and commercial users of power and have a low incidences of non payments. That is different than the rest of LCEC. LCEC is reportedly expanding their electrical grid to serve the needs of new developments, including Ave Maria and possibly using the profits from Marco.
Another area of concern is that to reduce the vulnerability of Marco citizens and businesses to storm damage, the switching of overhead lines to underground is needed. The city of Marco Island has been collecting a 5% franchise fee on our electric bills to fund the undergrounding. LCEC is the only one who can do this by law and the cost of which must be borne by Marco Residents. LCEC has reportedly raised the price to do this by over 3X over the past few years with no explanation. Then by law, not only do Marco residents need to pay for 100% the undergrounding, we then need to turn over the ownership to LCEC!
Another concern is that LCEC purchases power with long term contracts from other utilities and passes the cost along to its customers. We have no choice in whom they purchase the power with nor at what cost. We have to pay for that no matter what. We also have to pay to use electric lines to get the power to LCEC lines from whom ever generates it. Presently, LCEC purchases power from Seminole Electric, located near Orlando. There are other potentially lower cost producers closer to Marco such as Progress Energy and FP&L.
While the study may cost up to $100,000 and it seems like a large cost in a time of tight budgets, it will be paid for by money already collected by the City from the franchise tax and will not be paid for by property taxes. It is also less than 3% of what the city gov't now spends for its own electic purchases. It is a small amount to see what alternatives the city has to reduce the cost of undergrounding and electrical purchases in the future. That is the goal and not to just purchase the assets of LCEC so the island can run its own electric system.
No one is saying that LCEC isn't providing reliable electric service to the island, it is but why should we be the cash cow to pay the bills of others? Until the study is completed and the true costs known, we won't be able to negotiate with LCEC from a position of strength.

On Controversies, challenges continue in Marco’s study of electric utility takeover

Posted on June 3 at 6:37 p.m.

Bridges need to be replaced, but just like us humans, a little bit of periodic maintenance and a few new parts and we can live a lot longer.
Lets look at options and vote on it, not have some city manager ram it thru like our fiscally irresponsible sewer and Collier Blvd projects.
Lets fix the corroding structure and shore up the bases.
Lets look also at lower replacement bridges. The few tall sailboats (if any) that travel thru the bridge can either go around the island or store them at a slip elsewhere on the island. Even if the city has to pay for the existing tall ships' slips, we will be millions ahead of replacing the bridge with a structure of the same height. The height makes it much more costly to build and maintain due to it's wind loading capability.
Lets be creative, not just throw money at large capital projects that never finish on budget or time.

On Marco bridge to be at full capacity during 2015 peak season

2 of 2 people thought this was a good comment.

Posted on June 7 at 10:57 p.m.

After reading the flyer I got in the mail and this followup article, I continue to wonder why realtors refuse to see the reality-real estate is no longer producing enough economic returns to attract investors.
Stocks have produced returns of over 20% in the last two years while housing has had losses in the same period in SW Florida.
The market was over heated in 2003-2004 and the low interest rates helped fuel that market. Local realtors and other "investors" bought new condo's before the buildings were built and hoped to "flip" them and make a profit.
Now they are upside down on their loans and no market is avail to absorb them even at 15% under sales prices. Many of those subprime loans are now above 6% and with the help of the city's appetite for tax dollars and higher insurance costs, I suspect many will walk away from their mortgages. The lenders will want to recoup what ever they can from the properties. I think we should ignore Mr Prange's self serving advice and wait for the "real bottom" to occur in another year or more and hope the property tax reform and lower interest rates make Marco more affordable and stable for all.

On Property prediction: ‘Window of opportunity’ not such a buzz term any more, according to expert