On Marco Island: Independent Reporting, Documenting Government Abuses, Exposing the Syndicate, Historical Records of Crimes Against the Environment

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

eLibrary - All Crimes and More Recorded!
Click this BIG button for ... All the evidence in one place! The documentation in pictures, documents and video of what was done to Marco Island .. and more!
Today is: Click here:Today's Meditation

Wednesday, February 27, 2008

Predicted the Future

"When there is more government, industrialists take it over, and together they form a coalition against the individual."

Milton Friedman


  • An open letter to my friend Ed Foster. Have you read Joe Granda's diatribe in today's Marco Eagle? In it he gloats over the conviction of Mr. Kiester and makes all sorts of innuendos about him. This is what I was talking to you about. Taking a "can't we all get along" attitude is not the way to go in this instance. If out of the goodness of your heart you want to forgive someone that is your prerogative as an individual. But when the offense is against the community then justice must be served. If there was justice in the case of Mr.Kiester then we must have justice for Ms. DiSciullo and Mr. Tucker and any other councilman that broke the same law. I understand that in this corrupt County the law does not apply equally to the legal system's cronies. But that is why we must go out of our way to make the guilty bastards who beat the law squirm. Then, as Joe Granda says, we can move on.
    H. Sarlo

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Friday, February 29, 2008 2:58:00 PM  

  • Mr. Sarlo,

    I posted the following following the Granda article:

    "Mr. Granda:

    Your diatribe is self defeating. "Mr. Kiester is the first elected official in the state to have been convicted for destruction of public records" because he was the first elected official to be charged with this "crime" despite two other Marco Island councilors having freely admitted to doing the same thing. Why was Kiester singled out? Because a vindictive person, Sal Sciarrino, was urged to bring the charge by John Arceri and Monte Lazarus, the founders of Celebrate Marco, a self-proclaimed bastion of love and "civility." (Was it not Monte Lazarus who proposed a City Ordinance demanding everyone be "civil"?)

    It is obvious that the suit was brought for political purposes. Their actions were and are disgraceful to themselves and to the city. No one can seriously believe that Chuck Kiester is the only city councilor in the state of Florida to have deleted messages from his e-mail account.

    You may "wonder if the hard drive was 'sanitized' and if the recovered emails were left to be recovered so as to satisfy state officials" because you are too ignorant to know that such an action can't be done. Had Mr. Kiester wished to wipe his hard drive clean, there are plenty of programs that do so, but the entire e-mail record would have been destroyed and nothing found. The fact that such was NOT the case, is prima facie evidence that Mr. Kiester had no criminal intent in deleting e-mails.

    I am not surprised that almost all the e-mails recovered were from after February 23, 2007. That is the result of how computers store information. When a computer "deletes" a file, the file data are not deleted. Instead, changes are made to the FAT (File Allocation Table) which directs the computer to the sectors of the disk on which the file is located. Those sectors that heretofore contained the "deleted" file are marked as "available" to store a new file but the data remain on the sectors until they are overwritten. Sooner or later, the computer uses those "now-available" sectors and, when that happens, the old data is destroyed. The longer the sectors are marked as "available," the more likely it is that they will have been overwritten and the original data destroyed. The evidence you cite sucggests that that is exactly what happened and that Mr. Kiester did not attempt to permanently remove specific files from his computer.

    Mr. Granda, before making accusations against the one councilor who has made it a practice of listening to citizen comments and complaints, you should learn how computers function. Your specious allegations encourage a continuation of the hatred rampant on Marco Island since Celebrate Marco was established.

    Ed Foster"

    I'm not trying to "get" Ms. DiSciullo or E. Glenn Tucker or any other councilor who has deleted e-mails from his/her personal computer. I submit that citizens must be able to communicate with their councilors and expect that communication to remain PRIVATE. The law forbids the destruction of "public records" which, to me, means records on the city server. The AG has given an "opinion" that the law extends to councilors' personal computers, i.e., that e-mails on a councilor's personal computer that conceivably can be construed to be about public business cannot be deleted. That "opinion" destroys a citizen's right to private communications with his/her councilor. If private e-mails are part of the "public record," telephone calls to a councilor must be recorded and maintained and private conversations on the street must be recorded and maintained as part of the "public record."

    Therein lies my problem: if the AG's "opinion" is upheld and extended to its logical conclusion, my constitutional right to privacy is compromised. I am not a particular fan of the ACLU, but this is a case that they should pick up and carry to the U.S. Supreme Court, if necessary, to ensure that a citizen's right to private communication is not destroyed by a local elected judge. Anyone who wishes can file a request with the ACLU on line. The solution to the "problem" is very simple: if a citizen wishes his/her communication to be part of the public record, they send it to the city for forwarding to the councilor. If the citizen wishes the communication to be private, he/she sends the e-mail to the councilor's personal e-mail address and it is assumed NOT to be part of the public record.

    Ed Foster

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, March 01, 2008 8:45:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Friday, February 22, 2008

Post Election Marco Island

Maybe this one too will wind up in front of City Hall.

(click to enlarge)


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

No Change in a Real Island Paradise

By two o’clock this morning we were awaken. Cell phones rang incessantly, acting as awakening ruffians to the disturbed sleep we have grown so accustomed to. God forbid we dream of paradise lost. The arousing words: El Comamdante en Jefe will not accept the reelection as president of Cuba.

Pundits, national media, “newspapers” whose entire staff consist of “writers” and the intelligentsia sprung into action. Ah, the sound bites; “Finally an opportunity for change” or “Maybe this is the beginning of a return to paradise” or “Let’s be positive about the new leadership”. Some were pathetic to the point of being comical: “After fifty years [49 actually], now what? A change perhaps?”

Not so in Cuba or in any self-proclaimed paradise where governments are ruled by syndicates. The election (yes, contrary to popular belief there are elections in Cuba) irrespective of candidate would have merely put forth those who will perpetuate the syndicate’s existence – the benefit of the special interests. Hence the fact that the moribund in chief opted out of some internationally
enigmatic role means nothing. Shuffle the deck, deal and see what comes out. It’s the same deck – it the same syndicate. In that case, the brother will do just fine. In other decks, they all come from the same deck, the same purpose. The jokers will do just fine too.

Those of us accustomed to disenfranchisement at the hands of the syndicates react by simply not reacting. Here as well as there, denizens of the real island paradise exhibited a collective yawn via no celebration, no hope, no fun thing to say. At the capitol, the revolutionary plaza was empty not for the lone soldier whose loyalty is to the four pesos per day. At the heart of the capitol in exile there is no dancing, no horns blaring, nada. The airwaves continue the reminders of the transgressions of that syndicate lest no one think that the “new” head will be any less effective in perpetuating a scam.

And the syndicate rubs it in, knowing full well the change makes no real difference, promises of a better tomorrow never seems to come invariably because of some chimerical boogeyman (malcontents, the Miami Mafia, the Imperialists, etc…). And the “be positive” campaign was long ago relegated to the puerile semantics of the infirm. Don’t go away mad, just go away. Then we will marginalize your contributions to humanity as we pilferage your property and prostitute whatever rights you thought you had.

Relatively speaking, it seems to make no difference where these hijacked paradises exist.


  • Granma 19-Feb-2008

    Mensaje del Comandante en Jefe
    A mis entrañables compatriotas, que me hicieron el inmenso honor de elegirme en días recientes como miembro del Parlamento, en cuyo seno se deben adoptar acuerdos importantes para el destino de nuestra Revolución, les comunico que no aspiraré ni aceptaré- repito- no aspiraré ni aceptaré, el cargo de Presidente del Consejo de Estado y Comandante en Jefe

    By Anonymous Dr. Mario Sanchez, at Tuesday, February 19, 2008 12:50:00 PM  

  • Mensaje del Comandante en Jefe

    Queridos compatriotas:

    Les prometí el pasado viernes 15 de febrero que en la próxima reflexión abordaría un tema de interés para muchos compatriotas. La misma adquiere esta vez forma de mensaje.

    Fidel CastroHa llegado el momento de postular y elegir al Consejo de Estado, su Presidente, Vicepresidentes y Secretario.

    Desempeñé el honroso cargo de Presidente a lo largo de muchos años. El 15 de febrero de 1976 se aprobó la Constitución Socialista por voto libre, directo y secreto de más del 95% de los ciudadanos con derecho a votar. La primera Asamblea Nacional se constituyó el 2 de diciembre de ese año y eligió el Consejo de Estado y su Presidencia. Antes había ejercido el cargo de Primer Ministro durante casi 18 años. Siempre dispuse de las prerrogativas necesarias para llevar adelante la obra revolucionaria con el apoyo de la inmensa mayoría del pueblo.

    Conociendo mi estado crítico de salud, muchos en el exterior pensaban que la renuncia provisional al cargo de Presidente del Consejo de Estado el 31 de julio de 2006, que dejé en manos del Primer Vicepresidente, Raúl Castro Ruz, era definitiva. El propio Raúl, quien adicionalmente ocupa el cargo de Ministro de las F.A.R. por méritos personales, y los demás compañeros de la dirección del Partido y el Estado, fueron renuentes a considerarme apartado de mis cargos a pesar de mi estado precario de salud.

    Era incómoda mi posición frente a un adversario que hizo todo lo imaginable por deshacerse de mí y en nada me agradaba complacerlo.

    Más adelante pude alcanzar de nuevo el dominio total de mi mente, la posibilidad de leer y meditar mucho, obligado por el reposo. Me acompañaban las fuerzas físicas suficientes para escribir largas horas, las que compartía con la rehabilitación y los programas pertinentes de recuperación. Un elemental sentido común me indicaba que esa actividad estaba a mi alcance. Por otro lado me preocupó siempre, al hablar de mi salud, evitar ilusiones que en el caso de un desenlace adverso, traerían noticias traumáticas a nuestro pueblo en medio de la batalla. Prepararlo para mi ausencia, sicológica y políticamente, era mi primera obligación después de tantos años de lucha. Nunca dejé de señalar que se trataba de una recuperación "no exenta de riesgos".

    Mi deseo fue siempre cumplir el deber hasta el último aliento. Es lo que puedo ofrecer.

    A mis entrañables compatriotas, que me hicieron el inmenso honor de elegirme en días recientes como miembro del Parlamento, en cuyo seno se deben adoptar acuerdos importantes para el destino de nuestra Revolución, les comunico que no aspiraré ni aceptaré - repito- no aspiraré ni aceptaré, el cargo de Presidente del Consejo de Estado y Comandante en Jefe.

    En breves cartas dirigidas a Randy Alonso, Director del programa Mesa Redonda de la Televisión Nacional, que a solicitud mía fueron divulgadas, se incluían discretamente elementos de este mensaje que hoy escribo, y ni siquiera el destinatario de las misivas conocía mi propósito. Tenía confianza en Randy porque lo conocí bien cuando era estudiante universitario de Periodismo, y me reunía casi todas las semanas con los representantes principales de los estudiantes universitarios, de lo que ya era conocido como el interior del país, en la biblioteca de la amplia casa de Kohly, donde se albergaban. Hoy todo el país es una inmensa Universidad.

    Párrafos seleccionados de la carta enviada a Randy el 17 de diciembre de 2007:

    "Mi más profunda convicción es que las respuestas a los problemas actuales de la sociedad cubana, que posee un promedio educacional cercano a 12 grados, casi un millón de graduados universitarios y la posibilidad real de estudio para sus ciudadanos sin discriminación alguna, requieren más variantes de respuesta para cada problema concreto que las contenidas en un tablero de ajedrez. Ni un solo detalle se puede ignorar, y no se trata de un camino fácil, si es que la inteligencia del ser humano en una sociedad revolucionaria ha de prevalecer sobre sus instintos.

    "Mi deber elemental no es aferrarme a cargos, ni mucho menos obstruir el paso a personas más jóvenes, sino aportar experiencias e ideas cuyo modesto valor proviene de la época excepcional que me tocó vivir.

    "Pienso como Niemeyer que hay que ser consecuente hasta el final."

    Carta del 8 de enero de 2008:

    "...Soy decidido partidario del voto unido (un principio que preserva el mérito ignorado). Fue lo que nos permitió evitar las tendencias a copiar lo que venía de los países del antiguo campo socialista, entre ellas el retrato de un candidato único, tan solitario como a la vez tan solidario con Cuba. Respeto mucho aquel primer intento de construir el socialismo, gracias al cual pudimos continuar el camino escogido."

    "Tenía muy presente que toda la gloria del mundo cabe en un grano de maíz", reiteraba en aquella carta.

    Traicionaría por tanto mi conciencia ocupar una responsabilidad que requiere movilidad y entrega total que no estoy en condiciones físicas de ofrecer. Lo explico sin dramatismo.

    Afortunadamente nuestro proceso cuenta todavía con cuadros de la vieja guardia, junto a otros que eran muy jóvenes cuando se inició la primera etapa de la Revolución. Algunos casi niños se incorporaron a los combatientes de las montañas y después, con su heroísmo y sus misiones internacionalistas, llenaron de gloria al país. Cuentan con la autoridad y la experiencia para garantizar el reemplazo. Dispone igualmente nuestro proceso de la generación intermedia que aprendió junto a nosotros los elementos del complejo y casi inaccesible arte de organizar y dirigir una revolución.

    El camino siempre será difícil y requerirá el esfuerzo inteligente de todos. Desconfío de las sendas aparentemente fáciles de la apologética, o la autoflagelación como antítesis. Prepararse siempre para la peor de las variantes. Ser tan prudentes en el éxito como firmes en la adversidad es un principio que no puede olvidarse. El adversario a derrotar es sumamente fuerte, pero lo hemos mantenido a raya durante medio siglo.

    No me despido de ustedes. Deseo solo combatir como un soldado de las ideas. Seguiré escribiendo bajo el título "Reflexiones del compañero Fidel" . Será un arma más del arsenal con la cual se podrá contar. Tal vez mi voz se escuche. Seré cuidadoso.


    Fidel Castro Ruz

    18 de febrero de 2008

    5 y 30 p.m.

    By Blogger Dr. Mario, at Tuesday, February 19, 2008 2:41:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Thursday, February 14, 2008

From Precise Technology to the Legal Black Hole: How a Good Guy May Have Been Violated

(The pan-Technical Saga of Councilor Kiester)

The Basics
Those things that control our lives, no, not government bureaucrats but computers, know only the language of ones and zeros.

This binary code is what computers record on disks when they store things. When we save pictures or documents or music or even have email in our “In Box”, the computer magnetically records millions of these zeros and ones (or Bits) on the disk.

On the surface of most modern disks there is a microscopic layer of metal fibers – kind of like tiny hairs. These metal hairs become magnetized to represent the “ones” and become demagnetized to represent the “zeros”. The fibers are read and the ones and zeros are sent to the appropriate programs for interpretation.

Disk Organization
Now, this is the part that is essential to understand if we are to take a rational position on what just happened to the good Councilor.

Two things occur nearly simultaneously when things are recorded onto the disk: the series of bits are magnetically recorded on the disk as noted above and the operating system makes an entry about the thing we just saved in a directory of sorts with a lot of important information. The file name, where on the physically on the disk it is recorded and where you THINK the thing is recorded are some of the information the computer saves in this directory. (Note: there is much more information being placed in this directory of sort – but these are the salient ones for the purpose of this article).

Here’s the Inside Scoop
In a Windows operating system, when we “delete” a thing from disk, the operating system is really not deleting it – it is merely changing the entry in the directory. What it does in part is to change where you THINK the thing is recorded. The computer does NOT physically move the thing nor does it touch in any way the bits that make up the thing.

Again, a “delete” in Windows will change where you think the thing was (like “My Documents”) to a “new” place – called “Recycled Bin”.

So you see, by simply deleting the thing, it is not being removed from the disk!

But it Gets Better
When you “Empty the Recycle Bin” … guess what? Windows still does NOT delete the thing! What it does now (in simplistic terms) is to go back to that directory of sorts and remove the entry to that thing from the directory. So search as you will for that thing, the directory has no mention of it anywhere so it reports back that the thing does not exist. (It’s kind of like having a book in a giant library but the index card is missing). Hence, even after emptying the Recycle Bin, the thing is still on the disk! But …

Remember the tiny little fibers? Well, they are still magnetized or not magnetized in the exact same way when the thing was placed on the computer! And as you would have it, there are programs that can scan the disk and look for these areas that have no entry in the directory and covert the bits that are there to something we can understand . Then, viola! … the thing can be determined – the thing is back!

Almost …
This process does not always work. If Windows needs to write something new, it looks in the directory to determine where there are free areas. Since the directory does not have an entry for those items that were in the Recycle Bin, it can write something new in all or part of that area making the full recovery of the previous occupier of that space impossible.

An Aside …
Say you are being hunted by the CIA or Interpol because you are a
really, really, really bad person (you belong to al qaeda or Hamas or FARC or ETA or MS-13 or Hezbollah or you are not liked by the syndicate that runs Marco Island) and hence want to forever and assuredly delete something from your hard drive, use a “Wipe” program. These programs will not only update the directory but go to the physical space on the disk and physically change the little hairs to be all demagnetized – meaning all zeros – hence making simple recovery practically impossible. But … there is always a “but” … the FBI has systems that can actually determine how those little disk hairs WERE before they all were set to zeros. Therefore they can determine what was there before whatever is there now (even just zeros) got there. But … there are advanced Wipe programs that will change those hairs to random patterns trillions of times over thereby ascertaining what was there a trillion changes ago somewhat problematic (if not impossible). But then there are these Chinese scientists that … it just gets better and better but this is too far a field.

Technical Epilogue
This author’s experience is that users routinely “delete” files knowing that the files wind up in the “Recycle Bin” from which they can be recovered. This practice in essence makes the “Recycle Bin” a storage bin of sorts. Analogously, users of on-line email delete emails knowing that the emails wind up in the “Trash Bin” – from which the emails can be recovered.
This custom is shunned by experts but they accept the practice as a way common users go about using the computer. The original intent of the “Recycle Bin” was to prevent the unintentional permanent removal of files, but over the years its use is one of “out of sight, out of mind, and a place to look in case I need it” – like most garages in today’s homes.
Once a computer user opts to “Empty the Recycle Bin”, then they are in essence really deleting those files – irrespective of the above noted recovery methods.

Back to the Good Councilor
Without knowing the specifics of the technical issues of the case no analysis will be afforded on this regard. However, an offer is made for a gratis professional and technical analysis if such is desired in the event that an appeal is forthcoming.

So here are some things to consider:
  • If the claim by the policia is that the emails were deleted because the “delete” was used – but the emails wound up in a recycle/trash bin – this argument is vacuous at best. Common practice is to “delete” things knowing that they can be recovered. If Microsoft could ever figure out how to appropriately name things, the delete function would long ago have been called “Ignore”.
  • If a lay user has a spam program running on their computer, and that spam program determines that certain emails are spam and “deletes” them – irrespective of the mechanical implications of a “delete” as described above – is the user liable for how a spam program works?
  • Or is the user supposed to read all email, determine what is spam and what isn’t? Since the entire legal system is corrupt beyond imagination – especially our local good ol’ boy network – unintended consequences open the door to more political retributions.
  • If a councilor gets an email soliciting prostitution (invariably with the offer for Viagra from Canada) and determines it to be spam, but in fear of the Gestapo the councilor forwards it anyway to the city clerk, is the councilor guilty of promoting prostitution by forwarding the email to the city clerk? … a clerk that happens to be female and then can sue for sexual harassment under federal law, because after all that is how she and her lawyers are going to interpret the email, right?
  • Here is a better one: same scenario but the councilor deletes the email (or the spam program deletes it automatically) and hence does not send it to the city clerk, then later finds out that it was a genuine offer for sex from a constituent – is this councilor now criminally liable?
  • Or is the user supposed to merely forward all emails to the governmental body in charge of keeping all of those communications? If so, aren’t the pseudo intellectuals that run what used to be our government (i.e., the lawyers) aware that knowingly forwarding spam or knowingly forwarding any email where there is a mention of a crime (solicitation, child pornography, etc..) is a violation of federal laws? Or is there an exception to these federal laws as related to Marco Island – or better – does the “Sunshine” Law and the Collier inficio infeci infectum jurisprudence once again trump federal statutes?
  • And if the user does forward all those emails, what if there is illegal content in those emails – like child pornography – is the user then liable for promoting an illegal act?
So does the state now supplant our ability to reason and make decisions based on our intellectual wherewithal tempered by our affinity to moral principles and best case application of the mountain of contradictory laws that suffocate our existence? Oh, sorry, the answer to this one is of course YES.

In the world where high technology is not prostituted for political vendettas, these paradoxes, contradictions, infinite circuitous inductive reasoning exercises, and deductive dead ends don’t exist.

By the way, did the city have documented procedures in place on how to address these (and many more) questions before the incident? Any well managed organization established anytime in the last 20 years has specific well documented policies and procedures regarding email – did those exist before the alleged crime was committed?

If the PUBLIC justification for the verdict was that the councilor deleted the emails and then emptied the recycle bin of emails THAT HAD BEEN PERSONALLY READ by the councilor and that the emails contained content which was clearly meant for city business, then this author would need compelling information to find fault with the PUBLIC justification for the verdict.

Any other justification for the verdict, inclusive of all PRIVATE validations (a la the wink and nods from certain those in the gallery), is indicative of a gross injustice.

Hopefully this information is helpful for those remaining that are wrestling with yet another insult.


  • And my comment it the same to you, Dr. Mario. Stop trying to defend Mr. Keister and go after Tucker and DiSciullo. As long as good people continue to defend themselves the evil people have the upper hand. I say "go after the bastards." Let them squirm for a while.

    By Anonymous Humphrey Sarlo, at Thursday, February 14, 2008 11:34:00 AM  

  • actually, i was implying just that - beyond an offer to help if the councilor did pursue an appeal (though he already said no).

    by presenting the Kafkaesque and political nature of this selective prosecution i suggested that not only those that have admitted to committing the same crime (councilor MOM and the one that we make wretch when we speak to him) but basically anyone will be prosecuted. perhaps i did not do a good job at that.

    but let's be realistic - the local and state law enforcement is so corrupt that the likelihood that they will prosecute one of their own (i.e, the syndicate that runs marco) is ZERO.

    By Blogger Dr. Mario, at Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:48:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Wednesday, February 13, 2008

No Rights for Mr. Kiester?

By Ed Foster

"I do hope that Mr. Kiester has the financial wherewithal (or can raise it) to take this very important matter up the ladder. A county judge should not have the final say on the interpretation of a state law that has such far-reaching implications.

Backed by Mr. Arceri and Mr. Lazarus, Mr. Sciarrino accused Mr. Kiester of deleting e-mails from his personal computer. He did not bring the same charges against Mr. Tucker and Ms. DiSciullo who have publically admitted to committing the same "crime." It is clear that Mr. Sciarrino brought the charge against Mr. Kiester for political reasons and has admitted as much.
But that is beside the point.

My purpose in this posting is not to attack Messrs. Sciarrino, Arceri and Lazarus or to defend Mr. Kiester but to point out that, if this county judge's decision is allowed to stand, the people of Florida will have no way to communicate in private with their representatives. I cannot believe
that this was the intention of the state legislature in passing this law. The law forbids destruction of "public records" such as those on the city's server. It is only the Attorney General's "opinion" that the ban extends to a councilor's private computer.

If a private e-mail automatically becomes public simply because the person to whom it is sent is a councilor, does it not follow that a telephone conversation to that person must be recorded and made public too? Both are electronic means of communication. For that matter, mustn't each councilor carry a voice recorder and make a permanent record of every conversation he or she has on the street because it might have to do with "public business"? No one knows how a conversation will progress until it is over so all must be preserved for Big Brother.

This is the real problem I have with the county judge's decision. If allowed to stand, every citizen loses the right to privacy that is guaranteed by our constitution. I submit that no county judge has the authority to abrogate that right.

Perhaps this is a matter for the ACLU. Is the right to privacy not a "civil liberty" guaranteed to every American? Is privacy of communication not a right that distinguishes our society from that of totalitarian states like Germany under Hitler, the Soviet Union under Stalin, and Cuba under Castro?

Messrs. Arceri, Sciarrino and Lazarus raised an issue for local political ends. In doing so, they opened Pandora's Box and obtained a decision from a politically appointed county judge that has national implications. This is the first time that the Florida Attorney General's "opinion" has been tested in court. It is imperative that higher judicial authorities review this decision and let Americans know whether they do or do not have the right to privacy in communicating with their representatives.



    Mr. Foster's comment misses the point. He wants Mr. Keister (at his own expense) to fight this case all the way to the supreme court. Dumb idea. The surest way to get this decision overturned is to let Tucker and DiSciullo enter the fray with their money and their county connections. You will see how quickly the matter will be settled. Why are the good guys always on the defense. Someone with half the cojones of Sal Sciarino should report Tucker and DiSciullo to the authorities. I invite Mr. Foster to rethink his position. He should stop apologizing for Mr. Keister and with his pen and fancy words start a campaign to bring to account Tucker and DiSciullo.

    By Anonymous Humphrey Sarlo, at Thursday, February 14, 2008 8:55:00 AM  

  • Mr. Sarlo,

    I am not trying to defend Mr. Kiester or to suggest that he should use his own money to defend himself. The above posting was something I wrote in response to an Eagle editorial and distributed to my personal mailing list created when I was chairman of CARES. Dr. Sanchez is on that list and posted my purple prose on his blog. That's fine with me.

    My point in writing the piece was to suggest that everyone's right to privacy when communicating with his/her representative is endangered by the verdict this judge handed down and that this verdict must be appealed to protect everyone's civil liberty. I do not suggest that Mr. Kiester take this on himself ... or even that the citizens of Marco Island take it on themselves ... but it may be something the ACLU would be willing to handle because it does affect the rights guaranteed all of us by the Constitution of the United States.

    Now, if you'd prefer to handle this on a local level and wish to accuse Tucker and DiSciullo of the same violation, be my guest. You will be attacked as waging a vindictive ex post facto assault on other councilors but I've been accused of worse than that.

    Frankly, I don't think you'd get to first base with such an attack but what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. My concern is that such an attack trivializes the importance of this judge's thoughtless verdict. I doubt that there's a councilor anywhere who has not been guilty of deleting e-mails from his/her personal computer. We don't need to fine each of them 500 bucks; we need a clear judgment that what is sent to a representative's personal comptuer by a constituent remains the sole property of that constituent and is not a "public record" unless said constituent gives his/her permission to have it so.

    U.S. copyright law makes it clear that the author retains full rights to everything he/she creates until he/she grants that right to another. (I've won that case several times against publishers.) I submit the same applies to communications between a constituent and his/her representative. The communciations ... in this case an e-mail ... belongs to the constituent unless and until he/she releases that right to the public. The same does not apply to inter-councilor communications because of a separate law ... the so-called Sunshine Law.

    So, go after Tucker and DiSciullo if you wish; I'm confident e-mails I sent to Minozzi, Kelber, Arceri, et. al. will not be found on their computers either. We don't need a witch hunt; we need a rendering of Florida's Public Records law that protects our right to privacy.

    Ed Foster

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thursday, February 14, 2008 12:30:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Tuesday, February 12, 2008

Rental Problem

By Greg Salvi

On February 27, at 7:00 PM there will be a meeting open to the public at the Community Center at San Marco and Bald Eagle. It is for residents who want to have rules for rentals. The residents will be able to tell their rental abuse stories. Presently as many people as possible (10, 20, 30 or more) can occupy a rental for any period of time, including nightly and weekly rentals. We are trying to get the word out to Marco residents that this is a very important meeting.

It is my opinion that this rental committee, formed in good faith by Keister, is heavily weighted by realtors and businesses. This committee is going to vote on whether the city needs new ordinances for abusive rentals which are located in single family neighborhoods. The City Council will then make the final decision.

There needs to be media coverage (other than the Eagle) to publicize this meeting because the city representatives are confident that no one will show up to express their discontent with the rental abuse problem. The police chief spoke at the last meeting and quoted statistics that don't accurately reflect the extent of the problem in my opinion. (It should be noted that police refuse to make reports when called regarding noise complaints).

It is also legal to renovate a single family house to add more bedrooms, therefore, making it into a "hotel house". This was done to the abusive rental next to me with no building permit and no consequences. I believe that single family residential areas are in serious peril.

After the election, it is obvious that permanent residents are a minority vote-wise. However, minorities still have rights and we believe home owners have a right to live in their home in a peaceful manner.

Quality of life is the most basic right which Marco residents are entitled to.

Please spread the word.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Post Election - Everything is Great!

By Mike Sullivan

I have lived on Marco all my adult life and here at 453 South Heathwood since 1988. Before the city acquired the S, Heathwood Water Plant it was quiet and well maintained.

SSU demonstrated respect for the neighbors and even landscaped it back there so it was like an extension of Mackle Park.

Once the city took over things declined rapidly. They quit watering, let all the nice landscaping die and started using the area as a dump site for Public Works and contractors working on city projects.

As you are probably aware if you live within 300 feet of the South Heathwood Water Plant there will be a public hearing on 2/22/08 at 9:00 am in the Community Room of our Police Station.

Public Works Director, Rony Joel wants "a conditional use permit to allow for expansion of an essential service within an RSF-4, Residential Single Family Zoning District, as necessary to provide for staff offices and indoor and outdoor storage of equipment and parts within and adjacent to an existing facility.."

I find it rather disturbing that they have already constructed the office/trailers and have been storing equipment in the parking area they constructed last summer. Also the inclusion of " as necessary " which gives Joel pretty much free reign to do whatever he wants as long as he deems it necessary.

Our Director of Public Works has ignored our concerns and on the few rare occasions he has privileged us with a reply, he has lied and demonstrated his arrogance by stating " It is City property and I will do with it as I deem fit."

This is what has been going on behind the fence - http://resortphotographics.com/SWTP/Blog/Blog.html

Since we were promised all staging would stop last June, there have been at least 4 different contractors nosily using this area. Why is it City Hall will not adequately address these issues?

Please help to fight the injustices being forced on the families of those who have the misfortune of living near city property by attending this public hearing. If you can't attend please write a letter.

Written comments filed with the City of Marco Island Community Development Dept. prior to 2/22/08 will be considered at the public hearing.


  • Marco Island needs land for the Public Works Department.

    The Public Works Department is illegally operated out of Mackel Park.

    The Mackel Park deed restrictions prohibit use for anything other than a park.

    Ask almost anyone at City Hall where the Public Works Department is located and they’ll point to Mackel Park.

    Mr. Moss, Mr. Souza, and Mr. Minozzi have been confronted and informed but apparently choose to ignore the deed restrictions.

    Mr. Minozzi, your response to me was disgraceful.
    Mr. Souza, keep quiet and keep your job.
    Mr. Moss, farewell.
    Mr. Joel, procure land for your utility and leave my park.

    Ben Powell
    399 Heathwood Drag
    Marco Island

    How well do the city parks operate?

    Once was grass has turned to dirt where large trucks tend to drive while making deliveries etc. City utility and construction is laid within the park boundaries.

    Children play with this illegal dangerous garbage pile in Mackel Park.

    Teenagers play by night and toddlers during the day.

    Where is the Marco Island Public Works Department? Where is park director Dana Souza? Where is the city council?

    The deed restrictions specifically forbid this type of operation or use our Mackel Park.

    The Mackel Park deed restrictions prohibit use for anything other than a park.

    Ask City Hall to direct you to the Public Works Department located in Mackel Park.

    Mr. Moss, Mr. Souza, and Mr. Minozzi have been confronted and informed but apparently choose to ignore the deed restrictions.

    Mr. Minozzi, your response to me was disgraceful.
    Mr. Souza, keep quiet and keep your job.
    Mr. Moss, farewell.
    Mr. Joel, procure land for your utility and leave my park.

    Ben Powell
    399 Heathwood Drag
    Marco Island

    Mackel Park is the appropriate location for experts to display what not to do.
    Once was grass has turned to dirt where large trucks tend to drive while making deliveries etc. City utility and construction waste is laid within the park boundaries.
    Teenagers play by night while toddlers during the day in this waste pile as the City operates their Public Works department ignoring the restrictions set forth in the deed.
    Deed restrictions prohibit the use of a City utilty and it's garbage and taffic within Mackel Park.
    Mr. Minozzi, your response to me was disgraceful.
    Mr. Souza, keep quiet and keep your job.
    Mr. Moss, farewell.
    Mr. Joel, procure land for your utility and leave my park.
    Start with attending a seminar Friday, 2 p.m. to 4 p.m., at Mackle Park. You can learn from the experts what to do and not do as you landscape your property.
    Visit the South end of Mackel Park...
    Come and See
    Ben Powell
    399 Heathwood Drag
    Marco Island

    Wonderful Mackel Park is used as a City Dump Site

    Children play in an illegal dangerous garbage pile in Mackel Park.

    Teenagers play by night and toddlers during the day.

    The deed restrictions specifically forbid this type of operation or use our Mackel Park.

    View it here http://www.34145.com/Park/Deed1.jpg

    The City Hall will direct you to the Public Works Department located “in” Mackel Park.

    Mr. Moss, Mr. Souza, Mr. Minozzi and Mr Joel have been confronted and informed but apparently choose to ignore the deed restrictions.

    Mr. Joel, procure land for your utility and leave my park.

    Ben Powell

    Come and see for yourself.

    399 Heathwood Drag
    Marco Island

    Once was grass has turned to dirt where large trucks tend to drive while making deliveries etc. City utility and construction is laid within the park boundaries.

    My family is disturbed each morning at 5:AM as the Public Works starts up.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Wednesday, March 05, 2008 7:53:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Thursday, February 07, 2008

Don't Get Any Ideas

Some time ago, when one was operating under the mistaken belief that becoming involved in the governmental affairs of this city was noble and mattered – namely “BL” (Before the Landslide) – this author volunteered to be part of a focus group on the Jolley Bridge.

The focus group met today. The focus group was exceedingly well conducted by a very professional company hired to conduct a bridge study.

All of the focus group participants agreed that there is no basis for a new bridge now or anytime in the foreseeable future and that there is no factual evidence to the contrary. And that if a new bridge is mandated, putting a toll on either end would be a very serious mistake for a plethora of reasons. All agreed that if any work is done on the bridge, including building a new one, the cost should be borne entirely by the state – as in the State of Florida.

Anecdotal information put a toll anywhere from 50 cents to 5 dollars. The moderator noted that the bridge is in good condition with a rating of 81 (scale of 0 -100). That nothing needs be done to the bridge for another 10 years. That the Goodland bridge is actually much worse with a rating of 47.

No on seemed to know why replacing the bridge was even a matter for discussion, except to reach back to some arcane discussion by two councilpersons. When this author asked for ONE independent engineering report recommending that the bridge be replaced for ANY reason, the answer came back that there was but … ready for this? … we can’t see it because it’s classified as a national secret by the Department of Homeland Security. (Seriously, you have admit ... think about it, isn’t that just so funny?)

Having been down this road before (asking for ONE scientific report stating that the septic tanks on Marco have or will ever introduce one iota of anything into the waterways – at least in that case the answer came back as “there isn’t any such study”), and analyzing the focus of the discussion into one topic (more on “how bad will a toll really be” as opposed to “is a bridge really needed”) it became clear that a toll on a new and soon to come Jolley Bridge is a foregone conclusion. No vote, another decision made by God knows who impacting those who remain.

Merely to imitate two other seemingly lost causes – Jesus holding up the shekels from the money traders and Ghandi holding up the salt – this author held up the below sign to the cameras.



    So Mr. Keister was found guilty of destroying private emails. Now let us see what happens to Mr. Tucker after he has admitted, on the record, that he routinely deletes emails from citizens who disagree with him. It is apparent that the Collier County judicial system is in the tank for the powers that be.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Saturday, February 09, 2008 6:44:00 PM  

  • Mario,

    Could be I misremember (like an elephant, I never forget) but I seem to recall someone (could have been Butch Neylon) asking Rony Joel for information regarding the wastewater and water treatment plants and being told he couldn't have it because the Department of Homeland Security had classified it. Seems that's the excuse de jour!

    I do hope you're wrong about the bridge but I can understand your jaundiced view. Look what happened to Chuck Kiester! I'm beginning to believe the judicial system of the state of Florida is controlled by a handful of people. Kiester is "convicted." Tucker and DiSciullo who have publically admitted the same offense (and I suspect the rest of the magnificent seven are equally guilty) aren't charged. The "crime" itself is so ludicrous, it boggles the mind. If you can't expect privacy in a personal e-mail to another person because he or she happens to be a councilor, every telephone conversation and every conversation on the street with a councilor will have to be recorded and saved for posterity too! If this isn't "Big Brother," I don't know what is! If the Florida legislature truly meant to pass such a law, run for the hills; you right to privacy doesn't exist in this state.

    Ed Foster

    By Anonymous Ed Foster, at Sunday, February 10, 2008 9:47:00 AM  

  • seemingly everything now is clouded under the ruse of "homeland security". a real shame. and how pathetic. anything anyone needs to know about the bridge is readily available on-line. like the report is going to make any difference to some terrorists on how to destroy the bridge. insulting to say the least and the law of unintended consequences (some liberal quacks and aclu types think its intended consequences) kicked in - now citizens are forever in the dark about many decisions.

    i am more than jaundiced - i am a realist. look at all of the crimes of the last 3 years and think about who if any got prosecuted.

    collier county a la the good ol' boys network is prostituted and corrupt beyond belief.

    the bridge w/toll is coming thanks to the majority in the last election. its what they wanted from whom they elected - and those they elected are not the four that are going to be sworn in.

    welcome to marco island, america.

    By Anonymous Mario Sanchez, at Sunday, February 10, 2008 2:02:00 PM  


    Where are all the friends of Mr. Keister? He stuck his neck out for you and paid for it. Where are you now? Sal Sciarino did a hatchet job on Chuck. Who will step forward and bring to justice Tucker and DiSciullo? Their offense was much more in your face than was Mr. Keister's innocent act. Are we going to let the Scharino's of this city lord it over us? Heaven forbid.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at Tuesday, February 12, 2008 11:53:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home